text
stringlengths 4
2.78M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
---
abstract: |
Optical spectroscopy of the blue star [[KIC 10449976]{}]{} shows that it is an extremely helium-rich subdwarf with effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}=40\,000\pm300$K and surface gravity $\log
g=5.3\pm0.1$. Radial-velocity measurements over a five-day timescale show an upper variability limit of $\approx50\pm20$ km s$^{-1}$. [[*Kepler*]{}]{} photometry of [[KIC 10449976]{}]{} in both long and short cadence modes shows evidence for a periodic modulation on a timescale of $\approx3.9$ days. We have examined the possibility that this modulation is not astrophysical but conclude it is most likely real. We discuss whether the modulation could be caused by a low-mass companion, by stellar pulsations, or by spots. The identification of any one of these as cause has important consequences for understanding the origin of helium-rich subdwarfs.
author:
- 'C. S. Jeffery$^{1}$[^1], G. Ramsay$^{1}$, N. Naslim$^{1}$, R. Carrera$^{2,3}$, S. Greiss$^{4}$, T. Barclay$^{5,6}$,'
- |
R. Karjalainen$^{7}$, A. Brooks$^{1,8}$, P. Hakala$^{9}$\
$^{1}$Armagh Observatory, College Hill, Armagh, BT61 9DG\
$^{2}$Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, La Laguna E-3200, Tenerife, Spain\
$^{3}$Departamento de Astrofísica, Universidad de La Laguna, La Laguna E-38205, Tenerife, Spain\
$^{4}$Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL\
$^{5}$NASA Ames Research Center, M/S 244-40, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA\
$^{6}$Bay Area Environmental Research Institute, Inc., 560 Third St. West, Sonoma, CA 95476, USA\
$^{7}$Isaac Newton Group of Telescopes, Apartado de Correos 321, E-38700 Santa Cruz de la Palma, Canary Islands, Spain\
$^{8}$Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking, Surrey RH5 6NT\
$^{9}$Finnish Centre for Astronomy with ESO (FINCA) , University of Turku, Väisäl äntie 20, FI-21500 PIIKKIÖ, Finland\
bibliography:
- 'mnemonic.bib'
- 'ehe.bib'
date: 'Accepted 2012 December 6. Received 2012 December 6; in original form 2012 November 8'
title: 'KIC 10449976: discovery of an extreme-helium subdwarf in the [*Kepler*]{} field'
---
\[firstpage\]
stars: chemically peculiar (helium), stars: subdwarf, stars; abundances, stars: individual: KIC 10449976
Introduction
============
Prior to the launch of NASA’s [[*Kepler*]{}]{} satellite, an extensive programme to identify bright dwarf G and K stars with minimal stellar activity was carried out, which resulted in the [*Kepler Input Catalog*]{} (KIC) [@brown11]. Although a small number of photometric variability surveys were carried out pre-launch [@hartman04; @pigulski09; @feldmeier11] they were either not especially deep, did not have a wide sky coverage or did not have a cadence shorter than a few minutes. To identify short-period variable sources which would be interesting to be observed using [[*Kepler*]{}]{} in Short Cadence (SC) mode, the [*RATS-Kepler*]{} project commenced in the summer of 2011 (Brooks et al., in prep). As part of a follow-up programme to determine the nature of sources which showed short period variability and/or were blue, we obtained medium-resolution spectroscopy of a sample of objects using the Isaac Newton Telescope (INT) in La Palma. One of the targets, KIC 10449976 ($\alpha$=18h 47m 14.1s, $\delta$=+47$^{\circ}$ 41$^{'}$ 46.9$^{''}$: J2000, $g$=14.49), was observed because it was clearly blue ($g-r=-0.5$, KIC). The optical spectrum was notable because it showed a number of strong lines due to neutral helium and weak or absent hydrogen Balmer lines.
Early-type stars with absorption spectra dominated by neutral or ionized helium are extremely rare and fall into one of (roughly) two classes. Slightly better known are the extreme helium stars: low-gravity stars of spectral types B and A [@jeffery08.hdef3.a]. A few low-gravity helium stars of spectral-type O are also known. These are almost certainly related to the cooler RCoronae Borealis variables, and are currently considered to be the product of the merger of a helium white dwarf with a carbon-oxygen white dwarf [@jeffery11a]. Extremely helium-rich hot subdwarfs are found (naturally) at higher gravities with early-B or late-O type spectra [@naslim10]. Again, the merger of two helium white dwarfs is the strongest contender for their production [@zhang12a].
Many of the extreme helium stars are small-amplitude flux variables, most probably caused by opacity-driven radial or non-radial pulsations [@saio88b]. However, probably due to extreme non-adiabacity, the pulsations are relatively irregular and have proved difficult to study systematically with ground-based photometry [@kilkenny99c]. No extreme helium star has been discovered since 1986 [@drilling86].
The helium-rich subdwarfs may be subdivided into an extremely helium-rich class ($n_{\rm He}>80\%$) and an intermediate helium-rich class ($10\%<n_{\rm He}<80\%$) [@naslim12]. None of the extremely helium-rich group are known to pulsate or to be members of a binary system, with two exceptions. V652Her [@jeffery01b] and BXCir [@woolf01] are somewhat cooler than the remainder and lie in the Z-bump instability strip, and pulsate with a period of 0.1d [@landolt75; @kilkenny95]. Amongst the intermediate group, there is at least one binary: CPD$-20^{\circ}1123$ [@naslim12] and one pulsator: LSIV$-14^{\circ}116$ [@ahmad05]. The latter shows an extraordinary surface chemistry, with 4 dex overabundances of zirconium, strontium, and yttrium and a 3 dex overabundance of germanium. This chemistry is probably produced by radiation-dominated diffusion [@naslim11].
@ostensen10 describes a systematic survey for compact pulsators and identifies three He-sdOB stars in the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} field; (Galex) J19034+3841, (SDSS) J19352+4555 and J19380+4649. Surface properties have not been published. None pulsates, but J19352+4555 shows irregular low-fequency light variations [@ostensen10]. The maximum light variations in the other two He-sdOBs at low-frequencies (100 – 500 $\mu$Hz) are 117 parts per milllion (J19034+3481) and 29 parts per million (J19380+4649). An intermediate helium-rich blue-horizontal-branch star in the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} field (KIC1718290) has been identified as a non-radial g-mode pulsator [@ostensen12].
No previously known extreme-helium stars or helium-rich subdwarf lies in the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} field, so the discovery of new members of either group lying within the field offers an opportunity to explore the questions of duplicity (a close companion makes the white-dwarf merger model difficult to maintain) and pulsation stability.
In this paper we present an analysis of the spectrum of KIC 10449976 to measure its effective temperature, surface gravity and surface composition. We analyse six quarters of [[*Kepler*]{}]{} photometry, which appear to show some evidence of small-amplitude flux variability. We present a series of radial-velocity measurements obtained to establish whether it could be a binary. We discuss possible explanations for the variability.
(7,5) (-0.5,-0.5)
(6,5) (-1,+5)
----------- ---------- ------------ ----------- ------- ------------ ------ -------------- ---------------- ----------------
Telescope Date \# spectra Exp. time Grism Slit width FWHM Velocity $\delta V_1^1$ $\delta V_2^2$
(s) (”) (Å) (kms$^{-1}$)
INT 20120628 2 180 R400V 1.0 4.0 $-2.9$ 8.1 13.3
WHT 20120810 3$^3$ 900 R600R 1.2 2.0 $-16.1$ 10.5 12.1
INT 20120828 1 600 R300V 0.5 5.4 $-46.3$ 9.9 14.5
INT 20120829 2 600 R300V 0.5 3.9 $-24.0$ 6.4 12.3
$-25.8$ 9.6 14.2
INT 20120831 2 600 R632V 0.5 2.6 $-13.6$ 21.5 22.3
$-32.0$ 9.6 14.2
INT 20120901 1 600 R632V 0.5 1.7 $-37.0$ 18.9 20.9
INT 20120902 1 600 R632V 0.5 1.7 $-49.9$ 21.8 25.1
----------- ---------- ------------ ----------- ------- ------------ ------ -------------- ---------------- ----------------
\
Notes: 1: Formal error in the cross-correlation measurement,\
2: Total error including wavelength calibration and template velocity,\
3: All three spectra were combined for the velocity measurement.
\[t\_spec\]
Optical Spectroscopy
====================
KIC 10449976 was initially observed using the Intermediate Dispersion Spectrograph (IDS) on the Isaac Newton Telescope (INT) on the night of 2012 June 28 (see Table \[t\_spec\] for details). The spectra were reduced using standard procedures with the wavelength calibration being made using a CuNe+CuAr arc taken shortly after the object spectrum was taken. A flux standard was observed so that the spectra could be flux calibrated. The individual spectra were combined to give a mean spectrum which shows all the characteristics of a helium-rich star (Figure \[f\_spec\]), including all expected He[ i]{} lines, He[ii]{}4686Å and the He[ii]{} Pickering series. With He[ii]{}4541Å slightly weaker than the H$\gamma$+He[ ii]{}4340Å blend, the hydrogen abundance is evidently small, but not zero. By comparison with the classification spectra of @drilling12, we assign an approximate spectral class of sdB0VI:He35 (the discovery spectrum is at a lower resolution than the classification system: 2Å). Adopting the Drilling et al. calibration gives an effective temperature $T_{\rm
eff}\approx38\,000\pm2\,000\,{\rm K}$, surface gravity $\log
g\approx5.3\pm0.3$ and helium-to-hydrogen ratio $n_{\rm He}/n_{\rm H}
> 10$. This places KIC 10449976 firmly amongst the extremely helium-rich subdwarfs, rather than the extreme helium stars.
We obtained a further series of observations in 2012 August and September (Table \[t\_spec\]) to search for radial-velocity variations. We took arc lamps for calibration before and after the target; this provides an estimate of the uncertainties in the wavelength calibration. Radial velocities were obtained by the method of cross-correlation. The four INT spectra from the nights of 2012 August 31, September 1 and 2 were coadded to form a template. All of the spectra, including the template, were rectified, continuum-subtracted, and converted to log wavelength. The cross-correlation function (ccf) between each individual spectrum and the template was computed and converted to velocity units. The position of the peak of the ccf was measured by fitting a Gaussian. The radial velocity of the template was obtained by cross-correlation with the best-fit theoretical spectrum at rest wavelength (see below). Heliocentric corrections were applied. The results are shown in Fig. \[radial\] and Table \[t\_spec\]. The measurements are consistent with there being no variation in the radial velocity; they are also consistent with a variation of up to $50\pm20$kms$^{-1}$ over an interval of days.
Spectra were also obtained using the William Herschel Telescope (WHT) on 2012 August 10 (see Table \[t\_spec\] for details) using the Intermediate dispersion Spectrograph and Imaging System (ISIS). Spectra were reduced in a similar manner to those obtained using the INT, and the radial velocity measured in the same way.
(8,8) (-4.5,-0.5)
--------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -------------------- --
$T_{\rm eff}$ 40.0 $\pm 0.3$ kK
$\log g$ 5.33 $\pm 0.10$ (cgs)
$v_{\rm turb}$ 5 kms$^{-1}$ assumed
\[2mm\] $n_{\rm H}$ 0.06 $\pm 0.02$
$n_{\rm He}$ 0.94 $\pm 0.02$
Sun
$n_{\rm C}$ $< 4.6\times10^{-6}$ $9.5\times10^{-4}$
$n_{\rm N}$ $2.9\times10^{-4}$ $\pm1.2\times10^{-4}$ $8.3\times10^{-5}$
$n_{\rm Si}$ $9.6\times10^{-6}$ $\pm6.7\times10^{-6}$ $1.0\times10^{-4}$
$n_{\rm Ne}$ $9.6\times10^{-4}$ $\pm5.7\times10^{-4}$ $1.2\times10^{-4}$
--------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------- -------------------- --
: Atmospheric parameters of [[KIC 10449976]{}]{}. Solar abundances are from @grevesse98; note that fractional abundances by number are not conserved when hydrogen is converted to helium.
\[t\_params\]
Atmospheric Parameters
======================
Best-fit atmospheric parameters for KIC 10449976 were established by interpolation in a grid of synthetic spectra computed from a grid of line-blanketed model atmospheres computed in local thermodynamic, hydrostatic and radiative equilibrium. The grid covers a wide range in effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}$, surface gravity $g$, and helium abundance $n_{\rm He}$ for a number of distributions of elements heavier than helium, including solar, 1/10 solar and other custom-designed mixtures [@behara06]. For the optical spectrum of KIC 10449976 we sought solutions in the range $32\,000 < T_{\rm
eff} < 50\,000$K, $4.5 < \log g < 6.0$, and $0.90 < n_{\rm He} <
0.999$ over the wavelength interval $3750 - 5100$Å ($n$ is the fractional abundance by number). Solutions were obtained by $\chi^2$-minimisation to the continuum-rectified and normalised spectrum using the optimisation code SFIT [@jeffery01b]. With no indicators for microturbulent velocity at the spectral resolutions used we assumed a value 5kms$^{-1}$. The procedure was applied first to the June INT spectrum; this established KIC 10449976 to be, indeed, a helium-rich subdwarf. It was subsequently applied to the higher-resolution higher-signal WHT spectrum. A 1/10 solar mixture was chosen in preference to a solar mixture on the basis of the strengths of visible metal lines. Virtually identical results were obtained in both cases. The atmospheric parameters are shown in Table \[t\_params\].
The fit to the WHT spectrum (Figure \[f\_wht\]) showed that a number of significant strong absorption lines could be resolved, in addition to those due to hydrogen and helium. Notably, these included N[ iii]{} lines around 4095 and 4640Å, Ne[ii]{} 4290Å, and an absence of absorption around C[iii]{}4650Å. In addition to optimizing by interpolation within a grid of precomputed spectra, SFIT has an option to optimize abundances of individual species with respect to an observed spectrum for a given model atmosphere. Taking a model with $T_{\rm eff} = 40\,000$K, $\log g = 5.5$ and $n_{\rm He}
= 0.95$, abundances for carbon, nitrogen, silicon and neon were estimated (Table \[t\_params\]). If silicon can be taken as a proxy for metallicity, the star is relatively metal poor, as indicated by the optimisation described above. No carbon lines are identified, providing an upper abundance limit. The surface is strongly CNO-processed (low carbon, high nitrogen), with some evidence of $\alpha$-capture onto $^{14}{\rm N}$ to form an excess of $^{22}{\rm
Ne}$. Significant lines at $\lambda\lambda 3932, 4284$ and 4883Å are not reproduced in the model fit. $\lambda 3932$Å is likely to be due to Ca[ii]{} and of interstellar origin. $\lambda 4284$Åmay be due to S[III]{} but the stronger S[III]{}4254Å is not seen. $\lambda 4883$Å could be due to Fe[iii]{} but, again, other Fe[iii]{} lines are not positively identified. It is our practice not to accept line identifications without such confirmation.
[[*Kepler*]{}]{} Photometry
===========================
The detector on board [[*Kepler*]{}]{} is a shutterless photometer using 6 sec integrations and a 0.5 sec readout. There are two modes of observation: [*long cadence*]{} (LC), where 270 integrations are summed for an effective 28.4 min exposure, and [*short cadence*]{} (SC), where 9 integrations are summed for an effective 58.8 sec exposure. Gaps in the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} data streams result from, for example, 90$^\circ$ spacecraft rolls every 3 months (called quarters), and monthly data downloads using the high-gain antenna.
[[*Kepler*]{}]{} data are available in the form of FITS files which are distributed by the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescope (MAST)[^2]. For LC data each file contains one observing quarter worth of data whereas for SC data one file is created per month. After the raw data are corrected for bias, shutterless readout smear, and sky background, time series are extracted using simple aperture photometry (SAP). The start and end times of each quarter of [[*Kepler*]{}]{} data used in this study are shown in Table \[log\]. SC observations were made in Q3. (We note that when SC data are obtained, LC data are also produced).
In any wide-angle photometric variability survey, variations in temperature and, in ground based surveys, seeing and transparency, can cause correlated variations in the resulting photometric data. The data from [[*Kepler*]{}]{} is no exception. We show in Table \[log\] the mean and standard deviation of the counts of KIC 10449976 for each quarter of LC data; the latter are shown both before and after removal of the long-term trend caused by differential velocity aberration. To remove systematic trends in the data ([*e.g.*]{} @barclay12) we used the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} tool [kepcotrend]{} [@still12] which utilises the correlated global variability of sources in each quarter (this was done for both SC and LC data). We then filtered the data so that only points which were flagged [SAP\_QUALITY=0]{} were kept (this removed data points which were potentially compromised by events such as solar flares). We then normalised the data so that the mean count rate in each quarter was unity.
--------- ----------- ------------------- ----------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------
Quarter Mean Std Dev (I) Std Dev (II)
MJD UT MJD UT e$^{-}$ s$^{-1}$ e$^{-}$ s$^{-1}$ e$^{-}$ s$^{-1}$
Q3 (SC) 55092.722 2009 Sep 18 17:05 55181.996 2009 Dec 17 00:09 12963 111.9 7.1
Q5 (LC) 55275.991 2010 Mar 20 23:32 55370.660 2010 Jun 23 16:05 12055 190.6 8.5
Q6 (LC) 55371.947 2010 Jun 24 22:29 55461.793 2010 Sep 22 19:17 11940 96.8 6.3
Q7 (LC) 55462.672 2010 Sep 23 15:53 55552.049 2010 Dec 22 01:25 13379 107.8 6.8
Q8 (LC) 55567.864 2011 Jan 06 20:30 55634.846 2011 Mar 14 20:32 11078 12.5 6.3
Q9 (LC) 55641.016 2011 Mar 21 00:09 55738.423 2011 Jun 26 10:25 11958 171.4 5.5
--------- ----------- ------------------- ----------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------
(17,11) (0,0)
----------- -------- --------
Quarter Period FAP
(days)
Q3 (LC) 3.81 –7.5
Q3 (SC) 3.80 –11.9
Q5 (LC) -
Q6 (LC) 5.57 –2.63
Q7 (LC) 3.61 –3.96
Q8 (LC) 3.90 –68.97
3.65 –5.75
Q9 (LC) 7.27 –6.0
5.48 –4.5
Q3–9 (LC) 3.94 -16.8
3.64 -15.7
3.96 -14.1
3.84 -14.1
3.81 -11.5
3.91 -10.9
3.87 -9.7
3.74 -8.1
3.78 -4.2
3.09 -3.3
----------- -------- --------
: The period (in days) and the logarithm (base 10) of the False Alarm Probability (FAP) for periodogram peaks which are above the 3$\sigma$ confidence (FAP=–2.5), arranged by quarter.[]{data-label="power-prob"}
We initially searched for periods shorter than 0.5 days using SC data obtained in quarter 3 using the Lomb-Scargle periodogram in the package [VARTOOLS]{} [@hartman08b]. There were three peaks in the power spectra which were detected at a significance greater than 3$\sigma$ – 220.7, 196.2 and 252.2 sec. All of these periods are almost certainly due to spurious signals ([[*Kepler*]{}]{} Data Characteristics handbook). There is therefore no evidence for a light modulation of KIC 10449976 with a period less than 12 hrs.
(8,8) (0.5,-1)
We then searched for periodic signals in the range 0.5–10 days using the same procedure as before. We show the resulting power spectra in Fig. \[power\] for each individual quarter and also the power spectrum from the combined data from quarters 3–9. We list the period and False Alarm Probability of peaks which are significant at a level greater than 3$\sigma$ in Table \[power-prob\]. We detect significant peaks in the power spectra at periods between 3–4 days, the most significant being at 3.9 days. We folded the data from the different quarters on the most prominent peaks. We show the folded light curves from quarters 3 and 8 in Fig. \[fold\]. The quarter 3 data folded on the 3.9 day period result in a peak-to-peak modulation of less than 0.02 per cent; for quarter 8 this becomes 0.04 per cent (we note that the specific CCD on which [[KIC 10449976]{}]{} was recorded was different in quarters 3 and 8). These amplitudes are similar to that found in the sdB star BD +42$^{\circ}$3250 which has a period of 1.09 day [@ostensen10].
The [[*Kepler*]{}]{} CCDs have a pixel scale of 3.98$^{''}\times3.98^{''}$. We therefore analysed the data on the pixel level and find that the variability originates from a star which is on the same pixel as the flux center of KIC 10449976. Using our images taken using the Wide Field Camera on the INT, we find that the nearest star ($g$=19.7) to KIC 10449976 is 25.8$^{''}$ distant. We therefore do not believe that the variability which we detect is due to blending.
To investigate further the possibility of an instrumental origin, we obtained data from the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} archive of 16 stars which are within 10 arcmin and 0.5 mag and observed in the same quarters as [[KIC 10449976]{}]{}. Four of these stars (KIC 1044981, 10450110, 10515199 and 10580086) showed a clear modulation on a dominant period of 6–10 days in their [[*Kepler*]{}]{} light curve. None showed a modulation on a period close to 3.9 days. Several more stars showed evidence for less significant periods close to 8 days. The remaining stars showed no evidence for a period seen in every quarter or at a period of 3.9 days. Although we cannot rule out the possibility that the periods noted in Table \[power-prob\] are due to an instrumental effect, there are good grounds to conclude that they are astrophysical in origin.
(16,10) (0,-9)
Discussion
==========
With $n_{\rm He} > 0.90$ and its position on the $g - T_{\rm eff}$ diagram (Fig. \[f\_gteff\]), KIC 10449976 is well-established as an extreme helium-rich subdwarf (EHe-sd), and amongst the hottest of its class. @zhang12a argue that the hottest EHe-sds are also the most massive, having $M>0.70 {\rm
M_{\odot}}$, although they also point out that, unlike KIC 10449976, these are also predominantly carbon-rich.
A number of questions are posed by the [*Kepler*]{} photometry. Foremost is whether the variation is genuine and intrinsic to the star. We have examined whether the variation could be due to an instrumental effect and, while we cannot rule out this possibility, we believe it more likely to be astrophysical in origin and proceed on this basis. The second question concerns the cause of the variability. The folded light curve points to a sinusoidal variation which could originate either in pulsation, in reflection from a companion, or from the rotation of a non-spherical star (ellipsoidal variation). All three present difficulties.
Many hot subdwarfs do pulsate [@kilkenny97a; @green03; @jeffery05.india]. For a star with the dimensions of KIC 10449976, the fundamental radial mode would have a period of the order of 200s. Even high-order gravity modes are unlikely to have periods in excess of a few hours. The pulsating helium-rich subdwarf LS IV-14 116 shows up to six g-mode oscillations with periods between 1953 and 5084s [@ahmad05; @green11; @jeffery11.ibvs]. Pulsation periods more than 20 times this value would only be expected in stars where the radius is some 10 times larger, or the gravity was 1 dex lower, a possibility that is ruled out by the spectroscopy.
Hot subdwarfs in HWVir-type close binary systems show light variations due to reflection from an M-dwarf companion ([*e.g.*]{} @lee09). Reflection-effect light variations should be strictly periodic over the time interval covered by the [*Kepler*]{} observations. Supposing that observational errors account for the quarterly variation in apparent period, a simple test calculation involving only assumed masses for the helium star and its companion ([*e.g.*]{} $M_1=0.7 {\rm M_{\odot}}$ and $M_2=0.38 {\rm M_{\odot}}$), the albedo of the companion ([*e.g.*]{} $A=0.9$), the inclination ([*e.g.*]{} $i=45^{\circ}$) and the measured period (3.9d) can be used to estimate the amplitude of the orbital variation in both total light (0.016%) and projected helium-star radial velocity ($50\,{\rm
km\,s^{-1}}$). In order to simulate a system in which the projected velocity amplitude is less than 50 km s$^{-1}$ and the light amplitude is greater than 0.02 per cent, we require a high albedo ($A>0.8$), a low inclination ($i<50^{\circ}$) and, with $M_1 \geq 0.7\,{\rm M_{\odot}}$ for example, $0.20 \leq M_2/{\rm M_{\odot}} \leq 0.33 $. These are not unreasonable values; the principal remaining argument against a reflection-effect origin is the lack of stability in the apparent period.
Following a similar argument and making reasonable assumptions about masses and radii, the maximum contribution of any ellipsoidal contribution to the total light can be computed [@morris85] and is found to be negligible ($<10^{-4}\%$) in this case.
A further and quite realistic possibility is the existence of spots on the stellar photosphere, as found in certain helium-rich B stars on the main sequence; [*e.g.*]{} $\sigma$OriE [@greenstein58]. Such spots are usually associated with the poles of strong magnetic fields and surface chemical inhomogeneity; surface brightness variations are tied to the rotation of the star’s magnetic axis [@townsend05]. Moreover, spots are relatively short lived and have been observed to give a [[*Kepler*]{}]{} signature similar to that reported here (Balona 2013, in preparation). In this case, the constraint of constant period and amplitude would be less strong, but is still not negligible, since the spots are locked in position by the magnetic field.
Finally, intrinsic variability in an unresolved and fainter close companion cannot be ruled out, although any mechanism responsible would be subject to a similar commentary to that outlined above. There is no evidence for such a companion in the spectrum, but either an M dwarf or a white dwarf would not be detected spectroscopically.
It is emphasized that all of the above interpretations for the apparent light modulation in [[KIC 10449976]{}]{} are, at this stage, conjecture. The discovery of an extremely helium-rich subdwarf in a close binary would have profound consequences for a proposed white-dwarf merger origin [@zhang12a]. Further observations are necessary to investigate the long-term stability of the period, and to increase the precision of the radial-velocity measurements.
Conclusion
==========
[KIC 10449976]{} is a blue star in the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} input catalogue which shows small-amplitude light variations with a period of approximately 3.9d. Our spectroscopic classification identified it as a helium-rich subdwarf, a conclusion which is confirmed by higher-resolution spectroscopy. The latter shows the helium abundance to be greater than 90% by numbers, and that the star is silicon-poor, nitrogen-rich and neon-rich. Carbon was not detected. On the basis of effective temperature and surface gravity, [KIC 10449976]{} should have $M>0.7 {\rm M_{\odot}}$, but the high nitrogen/carbon ratio implies $M<0.7 {\rm M_{\odot}}$, suggesting a mass close to this boundary. An upper limit of $50\pm20$kms$^{-1}$ in radial-velocity amplitude places constraints on any putative binary companion. The absence of long-term stability in the light variation is also a challenge for a binary interpretation, although the amplitudes could be consistent with a reflection-effect solution. The period is far too long to be due to pulsation. Starspots remain a plausible interpretation. Further high-quality radial-velocity and photometric studies will be required to establish the authenticity and cause of the light variations.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The Armagh Observatory is supported by a grant from the Northern Ireland Dept. of Culture Arts and Leisure. The INT and WHT are 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. We thank the staff for their support. This paper includes data collected by the [[*Kepler*]{}]{} mission. Funding for the Kepler mission is provided by the NASA Science Mission Directorate. 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. Support for MAST for non-HST data is provided by the NASA Office of Space Science via grant NNX09AF08G and by other grants and contracts.
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'As we are moving towards the Internet of Things (IoT), the number of sensors deployed around the world is growing at a rapid pace. Market research has shown a significant growth of sensor deployments over the past decade and has predicted a significant increment of the growth rate in the future. These sensors continuously generate enormous amounts of data. However, in order to add value to raw sensor data we need to understand it. Collection, modelling, reasoning, and distribution of context in relation to sensor data plays critical role in this challenge. Context-aware computing has proven to be successful in understanding sensor data. In this paper, we survey context awareness from an IoT perspective. We present the necessary background by introducing the IoT paradigm and context-aware fundamentals at the beginning. Then we provide an in-depth analysis of context life cycle. We evaluate a subset of projects (50) which represent the majority of research and commercial solutions proposed in the field of context-aware computing conducted over the last decade (2001-2011) based on our own taxonomy. Finally, based on our evaluation, we highlight the lessons to be learnt from the past and some possible directions for future research. The survey addresses a broad range of techniques, methods, models, functionalities, systems, applications, and middleware solutions related to context awareness and IoT. Our goal is not only to analyse, compare and consolidate past research work but also to appreciate their findings and discuss their applicability towards the IoT.'
author:
- 'Charith Perera, Arkady Zaslavsky, Peter Christen, and Dimitrios Georgakopoulos, [^1][^2][^3]'
bibliography:
- 'IEEEabrv.bib'
- 'Bibliography.bib'
title: |
Context Aware Computing for\
The Internet of Things: A Survey
---
[Shell : Bare Demo of IEEEtran.cls for Journals]{}
Internet of things, context awareness, sensor networks, sensor data, context life cycle, context reasoning, context modelling, ubiquitous, pervasive, mobile, middleware.
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
awareness, as a core feature of ubiquitous and pervasive computing systems, has existed and been employed since the early 1990s. The focus on context-aware computing evolved from desktop applications, web applications, mobile computing, pervasive/ubiquitous computing to the Internet of Things (IoT) over the last decade. However, context-aware computing became more popular with the introduction of the term ‘*ubiquitous computing*’ by Mark Weiser [@P506] in his ground-breaking paper *The Computer for the 21st Century* in 1991. Then the term ‘*context-aware*’ was first used by Schilit and Theimer [@P173] in 1994.
Since then, research into context-awareness has been established as a well known research area in computer science. Many researchers have proposed definitions and explanations of different aspects of context-aware computing, as we will discuss briefly in Section \[chapter2:CAF\]. The definitions for *‘context*’ and ‘*context-awareness*’ that are widely accepted by the research community today were proposed by Abowd et al. [@P104] in 1999.
During the last two decades, researchers and engineers have developed a significant amount of prototypes, systems, and solutions using context-aware computing techniques. Even though the focus varied depending on each project, one aspect remained fairly unchanged: that is the number of data sources (e.g. software and hardware sources). For example, most of the proposed solutions collect data from a limited number of physical (hardware) and virtual (software) sensors. In these situations, collecting and analysing sensor data from all the sources is possible and feasible due to limited numbers. In contrast, IoT envisions an era where billions of sensors are connected to the Internet, which means it is not feasible to process all the data collected by those sensors. Therefore, context-awareness will play a critical role in deciding what data needs to be processed and much more.
Due to advances in sensor technology, sensors are getting more powerful, cheaper and smaller in size, which has stimulated large scale deployments. As a result, today we have a large number of sensors already deployed and it is predicted that the numbers will grow rapidly over the next decade [@P029]. Ultimately, these sensors will generate *big data* [@ZMP003]. The data we collect may not have any value unless we analyse, interpret, and understand it. Context-aware computing has played an important role in tackling this challenge in previous paradigms, such as mobile and pervasive, which lead us to believe that it would continue to be successful in the IoT paradigm as well. Context-aware computing allows us to store context[^4] information linked to sensor data so the interpretation can be done easily and more meaningfully. In addition, understanding context makes it easier to perform machine to machine communication as it is a core element in the IoT vision.
When large numbers of sensors are deployed, and start generating data, the traditional application based approach (i.e. connect sensors directly to applications individually and manually) becomes infeasible. In order to address this inefficiency, significant amounts of middleware solutions are introduced by researchers. Each middleware solution focuses on different aspects in the IoT, such as device management, interoperability, platform portability, context-awareness, security and privacy, and many more. Even though, some solutions address multiple aspects, an ideal middleware solution that addresses all the aspects required by the IoT is yet to be designed. In this survey, we consider identifying the context-aware computing related features and functionalities that are required by an ideal IoT middleware solution as a key task.
There have been several surveys conducted in relation to this field. We briefly introduce these surveys in chronological order. Chen and Kotz [@P431] (2000) have surveyed context awareness, focusing on applications, what context they use, and how contextual information is leveraged. In 2004, Strang and Linnhoff-Popien [@P184] compared the most popular context modelling techniques in the field. Middleware solutions for sensor networks are surveyed by Molla and Ahamed [@P417] in 2006. Two separate surveys were conducted by Kjaer [@P035] and Baldauf et al. [@P402] in 2007 on context-aware systems and middleware solutions using different taxonomies. Both surveys compared limited numbers, but different projects with very little overlap. c et al. [@P185] (2009) reviewed popular context representation and reasoning from a pervasive computing perspective. In 2010, Bettini et al. [@P216] also comprehensively surveyed context modelling and reasoning by focusing on techniques rather than projects. In the same year another survey was done by Saeed and Waheed [@P359] focusing on architectures in the context-aware middleware domain. Bandyopadhyay et al. [@P118] have conducted a survey on existing popular Internet of Things middleware solutions in 2011. The latest survey is done by Bellavista et al. [@P291] (2013) which is focused on context distribution for mobile ubiquitous systems.
Our survey differs from the previous literature surveys mentioned above in many ways. Most of the surveys evaluated a limited number of projects. In contrast, we selected a large number of projects (50) covering a decade, based on the unique criteria that will be explained at the end of this section. We took a much broader viewpoint compared to some of the previous surveys, as they have focused on specific elements such as modelling, reasoning, etc. Finally and most importantly, our taxonomy formation and organisation is completely different. Rather than building a theoretical taxonomy and then trying to classify existing research projects, prototypes and systems according to it, we use a practical approach. We built our taxonomy based on past research projects by identifying the features, models, techniques, functionalities and approaches they employed at higher levels (e.g. we do not consider implementation/code level differences between different solutions). We consolidated this information and analysed the capabilities of each solution or the project. We believe this approach allows us to highlight the areas where researchers have mostly (priorities) and rarely (non-priorities) focused their attention and the reasons behind. Further, we have also used a non-taxonomical project based evaluation, where we highlight how the different combinations of components are designed, developed and used in each project. This allows to discuss their applicability from an IoT perspective.
Our objectives in revisiting the literature are threefold: 1) to learn how context-aware computing techniques have helped to develop solutions in the past, 2) how can we apply those techniques to solve problems in the future in different paradigms such as the IoT, and 3) to highlight open challenges and to discuss future research directions.
This paper is organised into sections as follows: Section \[chapter2:IoTP\] provides an introduction to the IoT. In this section, we briefly describe the history and evolution of the Internet. Then we explain what the IoT is, followed by a list of application domains and statistics that show the significance of the IoT. We also describe the relationship between sensor networks and the IoT. Comparisons of popular IoT middleware solutions are presented at the end of the section in order to highlight existing research gaps. In Section \[chapter2:CAF\], we present context awareness fundamentals such as context-aware related definitions, context types and categorisation schemes, features and characteristics, and context awareness management design principles. In Section \[chapter2:CDLC\], we conduct our main discussion based on context life cycle where we identify four stages: acquisition, modelling, reasoning, and distribution. Section \[chapter2:PRE\] briefly discusses the highlights of each project, which we use for the comparison later. Finally, Section \[chapter2:LL\] discusses the lessons learn from the literature and Section \[chapter2:LLFRD\] identifies future research directions and challenges. Conclusion remarks are presented in Section \[chapter2:Conclusions\].
For this literature review, we analyse, compare, classify a subset of both small scale and large scale projects (50) which represent the majority of research and commercial solutions proposed in the field of context-aware computing based on our own taxonomy. We selected the existing solutions to be reviewed based on different criteria. Mainly, we selected projects that were conducted over the last decade (2001-2011). We also considered main focus, techniques used, popularity, comprehensiveness, information availability, and the year of publication, in order to make sure that our review provides a balanced view on context-aware computing research.
The Internet of Things Paradigm {#chapter2:IoTP}
===============================
In this section, we briefly introduce the IoT paradigm. Our intention is not to survey the IoT, but to present some fundamental information (e.g. how Internet evolved, what is the IoT, statistics related to IoT, underline technologies, characteristics, and research gaps in IoT paradigm) that will help with understanding the historic movements and the direction into which technology is moving today. The IoT paradigm has its own concepts and characteristics. It also shares significant amounts of concepts with other computer fields. The IoT bundles different technologies (e.g. sensor hardware/firmware, semantic, cloud, data modelling, storing, reasoning, processing, communication technologies) together to build its vision. We apply the existing technologies in different ways based on the characteristics and demands of the IoT. The IoT does not revolutionise our lives or the field of computing. It is another step in the evolution of the Internet we already have.
Evolution of Internet {#chapter2:IoTP:Evolution of Internet}
---------------------
Before we investigate the IoT in depth, it is worthwhile to look at the evolution of the Internet. In the late 1960s, communication between two computers was made possible through a computer network [@P260]. In the early 1980s the TCP/IP stack was introduced. Then, commercial use of the Internet started in the late 1980s. Later, the World Wide Web (WWW) became available in 1991 which made the Internet more popular and stimulate the rapid growth. Web of Things (WoT) [@P575], which based on WWW, is a part of IoT.
Later, mobile devices connected to the Internet and formed the mobile-Internet [@P018]. With the emergence of social networking, users started to become connected together over the Internet. The next step in the IoT is where objects around us will be able to connect to each other (e.g. machine to machine) and communicate via the Internet [@P006]. Figure \[Fig:Evolution\_of\_The\_Internet\] illustrates the five phases in the evolution of the Internet.
What is the Internet of Things? {#chapter2:IoTP:What is Internet of Things?}
-------------------------------
![Definition of the Internet of Things: The Internet of Things allows people and things to be connected anytime, anyplace, with anything and anyone, ideally using any path/network and any service [@P019].[]{data-label="Fig:Definition_of_IoT"}](./Figures/34-IoT_Definition.pdf)
During the past decade, the IoT has gained significant attention in academia as well as industry. The main reasons behind this interest are the capabilities that the IoT [@P007; @P003] will offer. It promises to create a world where all the objects (also called smart objects [@P041]) around us are connected to the Internet and communicate with each other with minimum human intervention [@P026]. The ultimate goal is to create ‘a better world for human beings’, where objects around us know what we like, what we want, and what we need and act accordingly without explicit instructions [@P040].
The term ‘Internet of Things’ was firstly coined by Kevin Ashton [@P065] in a presentation in 1998. He has mentioned *“The Internet of Things has the potential to change the world, just as the Internet did. Maybe even more so”*. Then, the MIT Auto-ID centre presented their IoT vision in 2001 [@P361]. Later, IoT was formally introduced by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) by the *ITU Internet report* in 2005 [@P020].
The IoT encompasses a significant amount of technologies that drive its vision. In the document, *Vision and challenges for realising the Internet of Things*, by CERP-IoT [@P029], a comprehensive set of technologies was listed. IoT is a very broad vision. The research into the IoT is still in its infancy. Therefore, there aren’t any standard definitions for IoT. The following definitions were provided by different researchers.
Definition by [@P002]: *“Things have identities and virtual personalities operating in smart spaces using intelligent interfaces to connect and communicate within social, environment, and user contexts.”*
Definition by [@P006]:*“The semantic origin of the expression is composed by two words and concepts: Internet and Thing, where Internet can be defined as the world-wide network of interconnected computer networks, based on a standard communication protocol, the Internet suite (TCP/IP), while Thing is an object not precisely identifiable Therefore, semantically, Internet of Things means a world-wide network of interconnected objects uniquely addressable, based on standard communication protocols.”*
Definition by [@P019]: *“The Internet of Things allows people and things[^5] to be connected Anytime, Anyplace, with Anything and Anyone, ideally using Any path/network and Any service.”*
We accept the last definition provided by [@P019] for our research work, because we believe, this definition encapsulates the broader vision of IoT. Figure \[Fig:Definition\_of\_IoT\] illustrates the definition more clearly. The broadness of IoT can be identified by evaluating the application domains presented in Section \[chapter2:IoTP:IoT Application Domains\].
IoT Application Domains {#chapter2:IoTP:IoT Application Domains}
-----------------------
The IoT, interconnection and communication between everyday objects, enables many applications in many domains. The application domain can be mainly divided in to three categories based on their focus [@P003; @P029]: industry, environment, and society. The magnitude of the applications can be seen in the statistics presented in Section \[chapter2:IoTP:IoT Related Statistics\].
Supply chain management [@P017], transportation and logistics [@P005], aerospace, aviation, and automotive are some of the industry focused applications of IoT. Telecommunication, medical technology [@P362], healthcare, smart building, home [@P363] and office, media, entertainment, and ticketing are some of the society focused applications of IoT. Agriculture and breeding [@P244; @P013], recycling, disaster alerting, environmental monitoring are some of the environment focused applications.
Asin and Gascon [@P416] listed 54 application domains under twelve categories: smart cities, smart environment, smart water, smart metering, security and emergencies, retail, logistics, industrial control, smart agriculture, smart animal farming, domestic and home automation, and eHealth.
IoT Related Statistics {#chapter2:IoTP:IoT Related Statistics}
----------------------
The vision of the IoT is heavily energised by statistics and predictions. We present the statistics to justify our focus on the IoT and to show the magnitude of the challenges. It is estimated that there about 1.5 billion Internet-enabled PCs and over 1 billion Internet-enabled mobile phones today. These two categories will be joined with Internet-enabled devices (smart objects [@P041])) in the future. By 2020, there will be 50 to 100 billion devices connected to the Internet [@P029].
According to BCC Research [@P255], the global market for sensors was around \$56.3 billion in 2010. In 2011, it was around \$62.8 billion. Global market for sensors is expected to increase to \$91.5 billion by 2016, at a compound annual growth rate of 7.8%.
The Essential Component of IoT: Sensor Networks {#chapter2:IoT:The Backbone of IoT: Sensor Networks}
-----------------------------------------------
We provide a brief introduction to sensor networks in this section as it is the most essential component of the IoT. A sensor network comprises one or more sensor nodes, which communicate between themselves using wired and wireless technologies. In sensor networks, sensors can be homogeneous or heterogeneous. Multiple sensor networks can be connected together through different technologies and protocols. One such approach is through the Internet. The components and the layered structure of a typical sensor network are discussed in Section \[chapter2:IoT:Layers in Sensor Networks\].
We discuss how sensor networks and the IoT work together in Section \[chapter2:IoT:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT\]. However, there are other technologies that can complement the sensing and communication infrastructure in IoT paradigm such as traditional ad-hoc networks. These are clearly a different technology from sensor networks and have many weaknesses. The differences are comprehensively discussed in [@P009].
There are three main architectures in sensor networks: flat architecture (data transfers from static sensor nodes to the sink node using a multi-hop fashion), two-layer architecture (more static and mobile sink nodes are deployed to collect data from sensor nodes), and three-layer architecture (multiple sensor networks are connected together over the Internet). Therefore, IoT follows a three-layer architecture.
Most of the sensors deployed today are wireless. There are several major wireless technologies used to build wireless sensor networks: wireless personal area network (WPAN) (e.g. Bluetooth), wireless local area network (WLAN) (e.g. Wi-Fi), wireless metropolitan area network (WMAN) (e.g. WiMAX), wireless wide area network (WWAN) (e.g. 2G and 3G networks), and satellite network (e.g. GPS). Sensor networks also use two types of protocols for communication: non-IP based (e.g: Zigbee and Sensor-Net) and IP-based protocols (NanoStack, PhyNet, and IPv6).
The sensor network is not a concept that emerged with the IoT. The concept of a sensor network and related research existed a long time before the IoT was introduced. However, sensor networks were used in limited domains to achieve specific purposes, such as environment monitoring [@P193], agriculture [@P244], medical care [@P158], event detection [@P113], structural health monitoring [@P067], etc. Further, there are three categories of sensor networks that comprise the IoT [@P266]: body sensor networks (BSN), object sensor networks (OSN), and environment sensor networks (ESN).
Molla and Ahamed [@P417] identified ten challenges that need to be considered when developing sensor network middleware solutions: abstraction support, data fusion, resource constraints, dynamic topology, application knowledge, programming paradigm, adaptability, scalability, security, and QoS support. A comparison of different sensor network middleware solutions is also provided based on the above parameters. Several selected projects are also discussed in brief in order to discover the approaches they take to address various challenges associated with sensor networks.
Some of the major sensor network middleware approaches are IrisNet, JWebDust, Hourglass, HiFi, Cougar, Impala, SINA, Mate, TinyDB, Smart Object, Agilla, TinyCubus, TinyLime, EnviroTrack, Mires, Hood, and Smart Messages. A survey on web based wireless sensor architectures and applications is presented in [@P475].
Layers in Sensor Networks {#chapter2:IoT:Layers in Sensor Networks}
-------------------------
We have presented a typical structure of a sensor network in Figure \[Fig:Layered Structure on a Sensor Network\]. It comprises the most common components in a sensor network. As we have shown, with the orange coloured arrows, data flows from right to left. Data is generated by the low-end sensor nodes and high-end sensor nodes. Then, data is collected by mobile and static sink nodes. The sink nodes send the data to low-end computational devices. These devices perform a certain amount of processing on the sensor data. Then, the data is sent to high-end computational devices to be processed further. Finally, data reaches the cloud where it will be shared, stored, and processed significantly.
![Layered structure of a sensor network: These layers are identified based on the capabilities posed by the devices. In IoT, this layered architecture may have additional number of sub layers as it is expected to comprises large verity of in sensing capabilities.[]{data-label="Fig:Layered Structure on a Sensor Network"}](./Figures/37-Sensor_Networks.pdf)
Based on the capabilities of the devices involved in a sensor network, we have identified six layers. Information can be processed in any layer. Capability means the processing, memory, communication, and energy capacity. Capabilities increase from layer one to layer six. Based on our identification of layers, it is evident that an ideal system should understand the capability differences, and perform data management accordingly. It is all about efficiency and effectiveness. For example, perform processing in the first few layers could reduce data communication. However, devices in the first few layers do not have a sufficient amount of energy and processing power to do comprehensive data processing [@P318]. find more efficient and effective ways of data management, such as collecting, modelling, reasoning, distributing.
Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT {#chapter2:IoT:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT}
--------------------------------------------
In earlier sections we introduced both IoT and sensor network concepts. In this section we explain the relationship between the two concepts. Previously, we argued that sensor networks are the most essential components of the IoT. Figure \[Fig:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT\] illustrates the big picture. The IoT comprises sensors and actuators. The data is collected using sensors. Then, it is processed and decisions are made. Finally, actuators perform the decided actions. This process is further discussed in Section \[chapter2:CDLC\]. Further, integration between wireless sensor networks and the IoT are comprehensively discussed in [@P351]. The difference between sensor networks (SN) and the IoT is largely unexplored and blurred. We can elaborate some of the characteristics of both SN and IoT to identify the differences.
SN comprises of the sensor hardware (sensors and actuators), firmware and a thin layer of software. The IoT comprises everything that SN comprises and further it comprises a thick layer of software such as middleware systems, frameworks, APIs and many more software components. The software layer is installed across computational devices (both low and high-end) and the cloud.
From their origin, SNs were designed, developed, and used for specific application purposes, for example, detecting bush fire [@P266]. In the early days, sensor networks were largely used for monitoring purposes and not for actuation [@P277]. In contrast, IoT is not focused on specific applications. The IoT can be explained as a general purpose sensor network [@P285]. Therefore, the IoT should support many kinds of applications. During the stage of deploying sensors, the IoT would not be targeted to collect specific types of sensor data, rather it would deploy sensors where they can be used for various application domains. For example, company may deploy sensors, such as pressure sensors, on a newly built bridge to track its structural health. However, these sensors may be reused and connect with many other sensors in order to track traffic at a later stage. Therefore, middleware solutions, frameworks, and APIs are designed to provide generic services and functionalities such as intelligence, semantic interoperability, context-awareness, etc. that are required to perform communication between sensors and actuators effectively.
Sensor networks can exist without the IoT. However, the IoT cannot exist without SN, because SN provides the majority of hardware (e.g. sensing and communicating) infrastructure support, through providing access to sensors and actuators. There are several other technologies that can provide access to sensor hardware, such as wireless ad-hoc networks. However, they are not scalable and cannot accommodate the needs of the IoT individually [@P009], though they can complement the IoT infrastructure. As is clearly depicted in Figure \[Fig:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT\], SN are a part of the IoT. However, the IoT is not a part of SN.
![Relationship between sensor networks and IoT.[]{data-label="Fig:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT"}](./Figures/40-Relationship_Between_IoT_and_SN2.pdf)
Characteristics of the IoT {#chapter2:IoT:Characteristics of IoT}
--------------------------
In Section \[chapter2:IoT:Relationship Between Sensor Networks and IoT\], we highlighted the differences between sensor networks and the IoT. Further, we briefly explore the characteristics of the IoT from a research perspective. Based on previous research efforts in the IoT [@P029]: *intelligence*, *architecture*, *complex system*, *size considerations*, *time considerations*, *space considerations*, and *everything-as-a-service*. These characteristics need to be considered when developing IoT solutions throughout all the phases from design, development, implement and evaluation.
**Intelligence:** This means the application of knowledge. First the knowledge needs to be generated by collecting data and reasoning it. Transforming the collected raw data into knowledge (high-level information) can be done by collecting, modelling, and reasoning the context. Context can be used to fuse sensor data together to infer new knowledge. Once we have knowledge, it can be applied towards more intelligent interaction and communication.
**Architecture:** IoT should be facilitated by a hybrid architecture which comprises many different architectures. Primarily there would be two architectures: event driven [@P038] and time driven. Some sensors produce data when an event occurs (e.g. door sensor); the rest produce data continuously, based on specified time frames (e.g. temperature sensor). Mostly, the IoT and SN are event driven [@P275]. Event-Condition-Action (ECA) rules are commonly used in such systems.
**Complex system:** The IoT comprises a large number of objects (sensors and actuators) that interact autonomously. New objects will start communicating and existing ones will disappear. Currently, there are millions of sensors deployed around the world [@P069]. Interactions may differ significantly depending on the objects capabilities. Some objects may have very few capabilities, and as such store very limited information and do no processing at all. In contrast, some objects may have larger memory, processing, and reasoning capabilities, which make them more intelligent.
**Size considerations:** It is predicted that there will be 50-100 billion devices connected to the Internet by 2020 [@P029]. The IoT needs to facilitate the interaction among these objects. The numbers will grow continuously and will never decrease. Similar to the number of objects, number of interactions may also increase significantly.
**Time considerations:** The IoT could handle billions of parallel and simultaneous events, due to the massive number of interactions. Real-time data processing is essential.
**Space considerations:** The precise geographic location of a object will be critical [@P083] as location plays a significant role in context-aware computing. When the number of objects get larger, tracking becomes a key requirement. Interactions are highly dependent on their locations, their surroundings, and presence of other entities (e.g. objects and people).
**Everything-as-a-service:** Due to the popularity of cloud computing [@P498], consuming resources as a service [@P502] such as Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS), Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), has become main stream. Everything-as-a-service [@P533] model is highly efficient, scalable, and easy to use. IoT demands significant amounts of infrastructure to be put in place in order to make its vision a reality, where it would follow a community or crowd based approach. Therefore, sharing would be essential, where an everything-as-a-service model would suit mostly sensing-as-a-service [@ZMP003].
Middleware Support for IoT {#chapter2:IoT:Middleware Support for IoT}
--------------------------
As we mentioned at the beginning, the IoT needs to be supported by middleware solutions. *“Middleware is a software layer that stands between the networked operating system and the application and provides well known reusable solutions to frequently encountered problems like heterogeneity, interoperability, security, dependability [@P064].”* The functionalities required by IoT middleware solutions are explained in detail in [@P029; @P018; @P006; @P019; @P020]. In addition, challenges in developing middleware solutions for the IoT are discussed in [@P028]. We present the summary of a survey conducted by Bandyopadhyay et al. [@P118]. They have selected the leading middleware solutions and analyse them based on their functionalities, each one offers, *device management*, *interoperation*, *platform portability*, *context-awareness*, and *security and privacy*. Table \[Tbl:IoT Middleware Comparison\] shows the survey results. By the time we were preparing this survey, some of the middleware solutions listed (i.e. GSN and ASPIRE) were in the processing of extending towards next generation solutions (i.e. EU FP7 project OpenIoT (2012-2014) [@P377]) by combining each other’s strengths.
[l m[0.85cm]{} m[0.85cm]{} m[0.85cm]{} m[0.85cm]{} m[0.85cm]{}]{}
Middleware & DM & I &PP &CA &SP\
Hydra [@P105] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$\
ISMB [@P375] &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\times$\
ASPIRE [@P366] &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\times$\
UBIWARE [@P146] &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$\
UBISOAP [@P367] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\times$\
UBIROAD [@P119] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$\
GSN [@P050] &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$\
SMEPP [@P371] &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$\
SOCRADES [@P373] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$\
SIRENA [@P368] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\checkmark$\
WHEREX [@P370] &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\checkmark$ &$\times$ &$\times$\
\[Tbl:IoT Middleware Comparison\]
Research Gaps {#chapter2:IoT:Research Gaps to Improve}
-------------
According to Table \[Tbl:IoT Middleware Comparison\], it can be seen that the majority of the IoT middleware solutions do not provide context-awareness functionality. In contrast, almost all the solutions are highly focused on device management, which involves connecting sensors to the IoT middleware. In the early days, context-awareness was strongly bound to pervasive and ubiquitous computing. Even though there were some middleware solutions that provided an amount of context-aware functionality, they did not satisfy the requirements that the IoT demands. We discuss the issues and drawbacks with existing solutions, in detail, in Section \[chapter2:PRE\]. We discuss some of the research directions in Section \[chapter2:LLFRD\].
In this section, we introduced the IoT paradigm and highlighted the importance of context-awareness for the IoT. We also learnt that context-awareness has not been addressed in existing IoT focused solutions, which motivates us to survey the solutions in other paradigms to evaluate the applicability of context-aware computing techniques toward IoT. In the next section we discuss context-aware fundamentals that helps us understand the in-depth discussions in the later sections.
Context Awareness Fundamentals {#chapter2:CAF}
==============================
This section discusses definitions of context and context awareness, context-aware features, types of context and categorisation schemes, different levels and characteristics of context-awareness, and finally, context management design principles in the IoT paradigm.
Context-awareness Related Definitions {#chapter2:CAF:Context-awareness Related Definitions}
-------------------------------------
### Definition of Context {#chapter2:CAF:CARD:Definition of Context}
The term context has been defined by many researchers. Dey et al. [@P143] evaluated and highlighted the weaknesses of these definitions. Dey claimed that the definition provided by Schilit and Theimer [@P173] was based on examples and cannot be used to identify new context. Further, Dey claimed that definitions provided by Brown [@P175], Franklin and Flachsbart [@P178], Rodden et al. [@P181], Hull et al. [@P179], and Ward et al. [@P183] used synonyms to refer to context, such as environment and situation. Therefore, these definitions also cannot be used to identify new context. Abowd and Mynatt [@P115] identified the five W’s (Who, What, Where, When, Why) as the minimum information that is necessary to understand context. Schilit et al. [@P116] and Pascoe [@P180] have also defined the term context. Dey claimed that these definitions were too specific and cannot be used to identify context in a broader sense and provided a definition for context as follows:
*“Context is any information that can be used to characterise the situation of an entity. An entity is a person, place, or object that is considered relevant to the interaction between a user and an application, including the user and applications themselves [@P104].”*
We accept the definition of context provided by Abowd et al. [@P104] to be used in this research work, because this definition can be used to identify context from data in general. If we consider a data element, by using this definition, we can easily identify whether the data element is context or not. A number of dictionaries have also defined and explained the word context:
Synonyms [@P437]: *“Circumstance, situation, phase, position, posture, attitude, place, point; terms; regime; footing, standing, status, occasion, surroundings, environment, location, dependence.”*
Definition by FOLDOC [@P438]: *“That which surrounds, and gives meaning to, something else.”*
Definition by WordNet [@P439]: *“Discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to determine its interpretation”*
Definition by Longman [@P440]: *“The situation, events, or information that are related to something and that help you to understand it”*
In addition, Sanchez et al. [@P344] explained the distinction between raw data and context information as follows:
**Raw (sensor) data:** Is unprocessed and retrieved directly from the data source, such as sensors.
**Context information:** Is generated by processing raw sensor data. Further, it is checked for consistency and meta data is added.
For example, the sensor readings produced by GPS sensors can be considered as raw sensor data. Once we put the GPS sensor readings in such a way that it represents a geographical location, we call it context information. Therefore in general, the raw data values produced by sensors can be considered as data. If this data can be used to generate context information, we identify these data as context. Therefore, mostly what we capture from sensors are data not the context information.
Ahn and Kim [@P278] define context (also called compound events) as a set of interrelated events with logical and timing relations among them. They also define an event as an occurrence that triggers a condition in a target area. There are two categories of events: discrete events and continuous events. If the sampling rate is *p*:
**Discrete events:** An event that occurs at time t and t + *p*, there are considered to have been two separate event instances. (e.g. a door open, lights on, etc.)
**Continuous events:** An event instance lasting for at least time *p*, where an event occurring at time t and t + *p*, cannot be considered as two separate events. (e.g. raining, having a shower, driving a car, etc.)
### Definition of Context-awareness {#chapter2:CAF:CARD:Definition of Context-awareness}
The term context awareness, also called sentient, was first introduced by Schilit and Theimer [@P173] in 1994. Later, it was defined by Ryan et al. [@P182]. In both cases, the focus was on computer applications and systems. As stated by Abowd et al. [@P104], those definitions are too specific and cannot be used to identify whether a given system is a context-aware system or not. Therefore, Dey has defined the term context-awareness as follows:
*“A system is context-aware if it uses context to provide relevant information and/or services to the user, where relevancy depends on the user’s task. [@P104]”*
We accept the above definition on context-awareness to be used in our research work, because we can use this definition to identify context-aware systems from the rest. If we consider a system, by using this definition we can easily identify whether this system is a context-aware system or not. Context awareness frameworks typically should support acquisition, representation, delivery, and reaction [@P143]. In addition, there are three main approaches that we can follow to build context-aware applications [@P339].
**No application-level context model:** Applications perform all the actions, such as context acquisition, pre-processing, storing, and reasoning within the application boundaries.
**Implicit context model:** Applications uses libraries, frameworks, and toolkits to perform context acquisition, pre-processing, storing, and reasoning tasks. It provides a standard design to follow that makes it easier to build the applications quickly. However, still the context is hard bound to the application.
**Explicit context model:** Applications uses a context management infrastructure or middleware solution. Therefore, actions such as context acquisition, pre-processing, storing, and reasoning lie outside the application boundaries. Context management and application are clearly separated and can be developed and extend independently.
### Definition of Context Model and Context Attribute {#chapter2:CAF:CARD:Definition_of_Context_Model_and_Context_Attribute}
We adopt the following interpretations of context model and context attributes provided by Henricksen [@P389] based on Abowd et al. [@P104] in our research work.
*“A context model identifies a concrete subset of the context that is realistically attainable from sensors, applications and users and able to be exploited in the execution of the task. The context model that is employed by a given context-aware application is usually explicitly specified by the application developer, but may evolve over time [@P389].”*
*“A context attribute is an element of the context model describing the context. A context attribute has an identifier, a type and a value, and optionally a collection of properties describing specific characteristics [@P389].”*
### Definition of Quality of Context {#chapter2:CAF:CARD:Definition of Quality of Context}
There are number of definitions and parameters that have been proposed in the literature regarding quality of context (QoC). A survey on QoC is presented in [@P291]. QoC is defined using a set of parameters that expresses the quality of requirements and properties of the context data. After evaluating a number of different parameter proposals in the literature, [@P291] has defined QoC based on three parameters: context data validity, context data precision, and context data up-to-dateness. QoC are being used to resolve context data conflicts. Further, they claim that QoC is depend on quality of the physical sensor, quality of the context data, and quality of the delivery process.
Context-aware Features {#chapter2:CAF:Context-aware Features}
----------------------
After analysing and comparing the two previous efforts conducted by Schilit et al. [@P116] and Pascoe [@P180], three features that a context-aware application can support: presentation, execution, and tagging. Even though, the IoT vision was not known at the time these features are identified, they are highly applicable to the IoT paradigm as well. We elaborate these features from an IoT perspective.
**Presentation:** Context can be used to decide what information and services need to be presented to the user. Let us consider a smart [@P007] environment scenario. When a user enters a supermarket and takes their smart phone out, what they want to see is their shopping list. Context-aware mobile applications need to connect to kitchen appliances such as a smart refrigerator [@P352] in the home to retrieve the shopping list and present it to the user. This provides the idea of presenting information based on context such as location, time, etc. By definition, IoT promises to provide any service anytime, anyplace, with anything and anyone, ideally using any path/network.
**Execution:** Automatic execution of services is also a critical feature in the IoT paradigm. Let us consider a smart home [@P007] environment. When a user starts driving home from their office, the IoT application employed in the house should switch on the air condition system and switch on the coffee machine to be ready to use by the time the user steps into their house. These actions need to be taken automatically based on the context. Machine-to-machine communication is a significant part of the IoT.
**Tagging:** In the IoT paradigm, there will be a large number of sensors attached to everyday objects. These objects will produce large volumes of sensor data that has to be collected, analysed, fused and interpreted [@P109]. Sensor data produced by a single sensor will not provide the necessary information that can be used to fully understand the situation. Therefore, sensor data collected through multiple sensors needs to be fused together. In order to accomplish the sensor data fusion task, context needs to be collected. Context needs to be tagged together with the sensor data to be processed and understood later. Context annotation plays a significant role in context-aware computing research. We also call this *tagging* operation as *annotation* as well.
Context Types and Categorisation Schemes {#chapter2:CAF:context Types}
----------------------------------------
Different researchers have identified context types differently based of different perspectives. Abowd et al. [@P104] introduced one of the leading mechanisms of defining context types. They identified location, identity, time, and activity as the primary context types. Further, they defined secondary context as the context that can be found using primary context. For example, given primary context such as a person’s identity, we can acquire many pieces of related information such as phone numbers, addresses, email addresses, etc.
However, using this definition we are unable to identify the type of a given context. Let us consider two GPS sensors located in two different locations. We can retrieve to identify the position of each sensor. However, we can only find the distance between the two sensors by performing calculations based on the raw values generated by the two sensor. The question is, ‘what is the category that *distance* belongs to?’ ‘is it primary or secondary?’ The *distance* is not just a value that we sensed. We computed the *distance* by fusing two pieces of context. The above definition does not represent this accurately.
Thus, we define a context categorisation scheme (i.e. primary and secondary) that can be used to classify a given data value (e.g. single data item such as current time) of context in terms of an operational perspective (i.e. how the data was acquired). However, the same data value can be considered as primary context in one scenario and secondary context in another. For example, if we collect the blood pressure level of a patient directly from a sensor attached to the patient, it could be identified as primary context. However, if we derive the same information from a patient’s health record by connecting to the hospital database, we call it secondary context. Therefore, the same information can be acquired using different techniques. It is important to understand that the quality, validity, accuracy, cost and effort of acquisition, etc. may varied significantly based on the techniques used. This would be more challenging in the IoT paradigm, because there would be a large amount of data sources that can be used to retrieve the same data value. To decide which source and technique to use would be a difficult task. We will revisit this challenge in Section VI. In addition, a similar type of context information can be classified as both primary and secondary. For example, location can be raw GPS data values or the name of the location (e.g. city, road, restaurant). Therefore, identifying a location as primary context without examining how the data has been collected is fairly inaccurate. Figure \[Fig:Context Types and Categories of Context\] depicts how the context can be identified using our context type definitions.
[>l@ p[0.35cm]{} p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{} c p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{}p[0.40cm]{} c p[0.38cm]{}p[0.38cm]{} c]{} Context Types
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
\
User & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$\
Computing (System) & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & & $\checkmark$\
Physical (Environment) & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ &\
Historical & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & &\
Social & & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & &\
Networking & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ &\
Things & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$\
Sensor & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & &\
Who (Identity) & $\checkmark$ & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & & & & &\
Where (Location) & $\checkmark$ & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & & & & &\
When (Time) & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & & & &\
What (Activity) & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & & & & &\
Why & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & & & & &\
Sensed & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & &\
Static & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & & &\
Profiled & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & &\
Derived & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & &\
Operational & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & &\
Conceptual & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & &\
Objective & & & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & &\
Cognitive & & & & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & &\
External (Physical) & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & &\
Internal (Logical) & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & & & & & &\
Low-level (Observable) & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & $\checkmark$ & &\
High-level (Non-Observable) & & & & & & & & & & $\checkmark$ & & & & $\checkmark$ & &\
\[Tbl:Different\_Context\_Categorization\_Schemes\]
**Primary context:** Any information retrieved without using existing context and without performing any kind of sensor data fusion operations (e.g. GPS sensor readings as location information).
**Secondary context:** Any information that can be computed using primary context. The secondary context can be computed by using sensor data fusion operations or data retrieval operations such as web service calls (e.g. identify the distance between two sensors by applying sensor data fusion operations on two raw GPS sensor values). Further, retrieved context such as phone numbers, addresses, email addresses, birthdays, list of friends from a contact information provider based on a personal identity as the primary context can also be identified as secondary context.
![Context categorisation in two different perspectives: conceptual and operational. It shows why both operational and conceptual categorisation schemes are important in IoT paradigm as the capture different perspectives.[]{data-label="Fig:Context Types and Categories of Context"}](./Figures/44-Context_Types.pdf)
[>m[4cm]{}@ p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} p[0.07cm]{} c]{}
&
User
&
Computing (System)
&
Physical (Environment)
&
Historical
&
Social
&
Networking
&
Things
&
Sensor
&
Who (Identity)
&
Where (Location)
&
When (Time)
&
What (Activity)
&
Why
&
Sensed
&
Static
&
Profiled
&
Derived
&
Operational
&
Conceptual
&
Objective
&
Cognitive
&
External (Physical)
&
Internal (Logical)
&
Low-level (Observable)
&
High-level (Non-Observable)
\
User &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Computing (System) & 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Physical (Environment) & 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Historical & 3& 2& 2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Social & 3& 2& 2&2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Networking & 3& 2& 3&2& 2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Things & 3& 2& 2&2& 2& 2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Sensor & 3& 2& 1&2& 2& 2& 2& &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Who (Identity) & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Where (Location) & 3& 3& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
When (Time) & 3& 3& 3&2& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
What (Activity) & 3& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Why & 3& 3& 3&2& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Sensed & 1& 1& 1&2& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1&&&&&&&&&&&&\
Static & 2& 3& 3&2& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&&\
Profiled & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&&\
Derived & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 3& 3&&&&&&&&&\
Operational & 3& 3& 3&2& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 2& 2& 2& 2&&&&&&&&\
Conceptual & 1& 1& 1&2& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2&&&&&&&\
Objective & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 1& 1& 1& 1& 1& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 2&&&&&&\
Cognitive & 1& 3& 3&2& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 3& 1& 3& 2& 1& 1& 3& 2& 3&&&&&\
External (Physical) & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 1& 2& 3& 3& 2& 2& 2& 3&&&&\
Internal (Logical) & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 2& 1& 1& 2& 2& 2& 1& 3&&&\
Low-level (Observable) & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 1& 2& 3& 3& 2& 2& 2& 3& 1& 3&&\
High-level (Non-Observable) & 2& 2& 2&2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 2& 3& 2& 1& 1& 2& 2& 2& 1& & 1& 3&\
\[Tbl:Relationship\_Between\_Different\_Context\_Categories\]
We acknowledge location, identity, time, and activity as important context information. The IoT paradigm needs to consider more comprehensive categorisation schemes in a hierarchical manner, such as major categories, sub categories and so on. Operational categorisation schemes allow us to understand the issues and challenges in data acquisition techniques, as well as quality and cost factors related to context. In contrast, conceptual categorisation allows an understanding of the conceptual relationships between context. We have to integrate perspective in order to model context precisely. We compare different context categorisation schemes in Table \[Tbl:Comparison of Context Categorization Schemes\]. In addition to the two categorisation schemes we discussed earlier there are several other schemes introduced by different researchers focusing on different perspectives. Further, we highlight relationships between different context categories (also called context types) in different perspectives in Table \[Tbl:Different\_Context\_Categorization\_Schemes\] and in Table \[Tbl:Relationship\_Between\_Different\_Context\_Categories\]. These context categories are not completely different from each other. Each category shares common characteristics with the others. The similarities and difference among categories are clearly presented in Table \[Tbl:Relationship\_Between\_Different\_Context\_Categories\]. Further, we have listed and briefly explained three major context categorisation schemes and their categories proposed by previous researchers. In Table \[Tbl:Different\_Context\_Categorization\_Schemes\], we present each categorisation effort in chronological order from left to right.
Schilit et al. [@P116] (1994): They categorised context into three categories using a conceptual categorisation based technique on three common questions that can be used to determine the context.
1. Where you are: This includes all location related information such as GPS coordinates, common names (e.g. coffee shop, university, police), specific names (e.g. Canberra city police), specific addresses, user preferences (e.g. user’s favourite coffee shop).
2. Who you are with: The information about the people present around the user.
3. What resources are nearby: This includes information about resources available in the area where the user is located, such as machinery, smart objects, and utilities.
[ |p[0.2cm]{}| p[2.9cm]{} p[6.7cm]{} p[6cm]{}| ]{}
&
Categorisation Schemes
&
Pros
&
Cons
\
&
Where, when, who, what, objective
&
Provide a broader guide that helps to identify the related context
Less comprehensive
&
Do not provide information about operational aspects such as cost, time, complexity, techniques, and effort of data acquisition
Do not provide information about frequency of update required
\
&
User, computing, physical, environmental, time, social, networking, things, sensors contexts
&
More clear and structured method to organise context
More extensible and flexible
More comprehensive
&
Do not provide information about operational aspects such as cost, time, complexity, techniques, and effort of data acquisition
Do not provide information about frequency of update required
\
&
Why, cognitive
&
Allow to model mental reasoning behind context
&
Do not provide information about core context, relationships between context or operational aspects such as cost, time, complexity, techniques, and effort of data acquisition
\
&
Sensed, static, profiled, derived
&
Provide information about programming and coding level
Provide information about context source and computational complexity
Allow to track information such as frequency of update required, validation, quality, etc.
Provide information about cost and effort of data acquisition
&
Weak in representing the relationship among context
Difficult to classify context information due to ambiguity. Same piece of data can belong to different categories depending to the situation (e.g. location can be derived as well as sensed)
\
&
Internal (physical), internal (logical), low-level (observable), high-level (non-observable)
&
Provide information about context sources and the process of accessing data (e.g. whether more reasoning is required or not)
Provide information about cost and effort of data acquisition
Provide information about computational complexity
&
Weak in representing the relationship among context
Difficult to classify context information due to ambiguity. Same piece of data can belong to different categories depending to the situation (e.g. temperature can be physical or virtual sensor)
\
\[Tbl:Comparison of Context Categorization Schemes\]
Henricksen [@P389] (2003): Categorised context into four categories based on an operational categorisation technique.
1. Sensed: Sensor data directly sensed from the sensors, such as temperature measured by a temperature sensor. Values will be changed over time with a high frequency.
2. Static: Static information which will not change over time, such as manufacturer of the sensor, capabilities of the sensor, range of the sensor measurements.
3. Profiled: Information that changes over time with a low frequency, such as once per month (e.g. location of sensor, sensor ID).
4. Derived: The information computed using primary context such as distance of two sensors calculated using two GPS sensors.
Van Bunningen et al. [@P304] (2005): Instead of categorising context, they classified the context categorisation schemes into two broader categories: operational and conceptual.
1. Operational categorisation: Categorise context based on how they were acquired, modelled, and treated.
2. Conceptual categorisation: Categorise context based on the meaning and conceptual relationships between the context.
Based on the evaluation of context categorisation, it is evident that no single categorisation scheme can accommodate all the demands in the IoT paradigm. We presented a comparison between conceptual and operational categorisation schemes in Table \[Tbl:Comparison of Context Categorization Schemes\]. To build an ideal context-aware middleware solution for the IoT, different categorisation schemes need to be combined together in order to complement their strengths and mitigate their weaknesses.
Levels of Context Awareness and characteristics {#chapter2:CAF:Levels of Context Awareness}
-----------------------------------------------
Context awareness can be identified in three levels based on the user interaction [@P430].
**Personalisation**: It allows the users to set their preferences, likes, and expectation to the system manually. For example, users may set the preferred temperature in a smart home environment where the heating system of the home can maintain the specified temperature across all rooms.
**Passive context-awareness**: The system constantly monitors the environment and offers the appropriate options to the users so they can take actions. For example, when a user enters a super market, the mobile phone alerts the user with a list of discounted products to be considered.
**Active context-awareness**: The system continuously and autonomously monitors the situation and acts autonomously. For example, if the smoke detectors and temperature sensors detect a fire in a room in a smart home environment, the system will automatically notify the fire brigade as well as the owner of the house via appropriate methods such as phone calls.
In addition, Van Bunningen et al. [@P304] has identified comprehensively, and discussed, eight characteristics of context: context 1) is sensed though sensors or sensor networks, 2) is sensed by small and constrained devices, 3) originates from distributed sources, 4) is continuously changing, 5) comes from mobile objects 6) has a temporal character 7) has a spatial character, 8) is imperfect and uncertain.
Context Awareness Management Design Principles {#chapter2:CAF:Context Awareness Management Design Principles}
----------------------------------------------
Martin et al. [@P294] have identified and comprehensively discussed six design principles related to context-aware management frameworks (middleware). Further, Ramparany et al. [@P340] and Bernardos et al. [@P302] have also identified several design requirements. We summarise the findings below with brief explanations. This list is not intended to be exhaustive. Only the most important design aspects are considered.
**Architecture layers and components**: The functionalities need to be divided into layers and components in a meaningful manner. Each component should perform a very limited amount of the task and should be able to perform independently up to a large extent.
**Scalability and extensibility**: The component should be able to added or removed dynamically. For example. new functionalities (i.e. components) should be able to be add without altering the existing components (e.g. Open Services Gateway initiative). The component needs to be developed according to standards across the solutions, which improves scalability and extensibility (e.g. plug-in architectures).
**Application programming interface (API)**: All the functionalities should be available to be accessed via a comprehensive easy to learn and easy to use API. This allows the incorporation of different solutions very easily. Further, API can be used to bind context management frameworks to applications. Interoperability among different IoT solutions heavily depends on API and their usability.
**Debugging mechanisms and tools**: Debugging is a critical task in any software development process. In the IoT paradigm, debugging would be difficult due to the exponential number of possible alternative interactions. In order to win the trust of the consumers, the IoT should prove its trustworthiness. Integrated debug mechanisms inbuilt into the framework will help to achieve this challenge. For example, the justifications behind the results produced by the reasoners should be available to be evaluated to find possible inaccuracies so further development can be carried out. Some initial work in this area is presented in the Intelligibility Toolkit [@P384].
**Automatic context life cycle management**: Context-aware frameworks should be able to be understand by the available context sources (i.e. physical and virtual sensors), their data structure, and automatically built internal data models to facilitate them. Further, raw context needs to be retrieved and transformed into appropriate context representation models correctly with minimum human intervention.
**context model in-dependency**: Context needs to be modelled and stored separately from context-aware framework related code and data structures, which allows both parts to be altered independently.
**Extended, rich, and comprehensive modelling**: Context models should be able to extend easily. The IoT will need to deal with enormous amount of devices, and will be required to handle vast amounts of domain specific context. It also needs to support complex relationships, constrains, etc. In an ideal context-aware framework for the IoT, multiple different context representation models should be incorporated together to improve their efficiency and effectiveness.
**Multi-model reasoning**: No single reasoning model can accommodate the demands of the IoT. We will discuss reasoning in Section \[chapter2:CAF:Context Reasoning Decision Models\]. Each reasoning model has its own strengths and weaknesses. An ideal framework should incorporate multiple reasoning models together to complement each others’ strengths and mitigate their weaknesses.
**Mobility support**: In the IoT, most devices would be mobile, where each one has a different set of hardware and software capabilities. Therefore, context-aware frameworks should be developed in multiple flavours (i.e. versions), which can run on different hardware and software configurations (e.g. more capabilities for server level software and less capabilities for mobile phones).
**Share information (real-time and historic)**: In the IoT, there is no single point of control. The architecture would be distributed. Therefore, context sharing should happen at different levels: framework-to-framework and framework-to-application. Context model in-dependency has been discussed earlier and is crucial in sharing.
**Resource optimisation**: Due to the scale (e.g. 50 billion devices), a small improvement in data structures or processing can make a huge impact in storage and energy consumption. This stays true for any type of resource used in the IoT.
**Monitoring and detect event**: Events play a significant role in the IoT, which is complement by monitoring. Detecting an event triggers an action autonomously in the IoT paradigm. This is how the IoT will help humans carry out their day-to-day work easily and efficiently. Detecting events in real time is a major challenge for context-aware frameworks in the IoT paradigm.
Context Life Cycle {#chapter2:CDLC}
==================
A data life cycle shows how data moves from phase to phase in software systems (e.g. application, middleware). Specifically, it explains where the data is generated and where the data is consumed. In this section we consider movement of context in context-aware systems. Context-awareness is no longer limited to desktop, web, or mobile applications. It has already become a service: Context-as-a-Service (CXaaS) [@P024]. In other terms, context management has become an essential functionality in software systems. This trend will grow in the IoT paradigm.
There are web-based context management services (WCXMS) that provide context information management throughout the context’s life cycle. Hynes et al. [@P024] have classified data life cycles into two categories: Enterprise Lifecycle Approaches (ELA) and Context Lifecycle Approaches (CLA).
ELA are focused on context. However, these life cycles are robust and well-established, based on industry standard strategies for data management in general. In contrast, CLA are specialised in context management. However, they are not tested or standardised strategies as much as ELA. We have selected ten popular data life cycles to analyse in this survey. In the following list, 1-5 belong to ELA category and 6-10 belong to CLA category. Three dots (...) denotes reconnecting to the first phase by completing the cycle. The right arrow ($\rightarrow$) denotes data transfer form one phase to another.
1. *Information Lifecycle Management (ILM)* [@P516]: creation and receipt $\rightarrow$ distribution $\rightarrow$ use $\rightarrow$ maintenance $\rightarrow$ disposition $\rightarrow$ ...
2. *Enterprise Content Management (ECM)* [@P517]: capture $\rightarrow$ manage $\rightarrow$ store $\rightarrow$ preserve $\rightarrow$ deliver $\rightarrow$ ...
3. *Hayden’s Data Lifecycle* [@P515]: collection $\rightarrow$ relevance $\rightarrow$ classification $\rightarrow$ handling and storage $\rightarrow$ transmission and transportation $\rightarrow$ manipulate, conversion and alteration $\rightarrow$ release $\rightarrow$ backup $\rightarrow$ retention destruction $\rightarrow$ ...
4. *Intelligence Cycle* [@P170]: collection $\rightarrow$ processing $\rightarrow$ analysis$\rightarrow$ publication $\rightarrow$ feedback $\rightarrow$ ...
5. *Boyd Control Loop* (also called OODA loop) [@P171]: observe $\rightarrow$ orient $\rightarrow$ decide $\rightarrow$ act $\rightarrow$ ...
6. *Chantzara and Anagnostou Lifecycle* [@P114]: sense (context provider) $\rightarrow$ process (context broker) $\rightarrow$ disseminate (context broker) $\rightarrow$ use (service provider) $\rightarrow$ ...
7. *Ferscha et al. Lifecycle* [@P518]: sensing $\rightarrow$ transformation $\rightarrow$ representation $\rightarrow$ rule base $\rightarrow$ actuation $\rightarrow$ ...
8. *MOSQUITO* [@P519]: context information discovery $\rightarrow$ context information acquisition $\rightarrow$ context information reasoning $\rightarrow$ ...
9. *WCXMS Lifecycle* [@P024]: (context sensing $\rightarrow$ context transmission $\rightarrow$ context acquisition $\rightarrow$ ... ) $\rightarrow$ context classification $\rightarrow$ context handling $\rightarrow$ (context dissemination $\rightarrow$ context usage $\rightarrow$ context deletion $\rightarrow$ context request $\rightarrow$... ) $\rightarrow$ context maintenance $\rightarrow$ context disposition $\rightarrow$...
10. *Baldauf et al.* [@P402]: sensors $\rightarrow$ raw data retrieval $\rightarrow$ reprocessing $\rightarrow$ storage $\rightarrow$ application.
In addition to the life cycles, Bernardos et al. [@P302] identified three phases in a typical context management system: context acquisition, information processing, and reasoning and decision. After reviewing the above life cycles, we derived an appropriate (i.e. minimum number of phases but includes all essential) context life cycle as depicted in Figure \[Fig:Context\_Data\_Life\_Cycle\].
![This is the simplest form of a context life cycle. These four steps are essential in context management systems and middleware solutions. All the other functions that may offer by systems are value added services.[]{data-label="Fig:Context_Data_Life_Cycle"}](./Figures/09-Context_Data_Life_Cycle.pdf)
This context life cycle consists of four phases. First, context needs to be acquired from various sources. The sources could be physical sensors or virtual sensors (context acquisition). Second, the collected data needs to be modelled and represent according to a meaningful manner (context modelling). Third, modelled data needs to be processed to derive high-level context information from low-level raw sensor data (context reasoning). Finally, both high-level and low-level context needs to be distributed to the consumers who are interested in context (context dissemination). The following discussion is based on these four phases.
[ p[1.5cm]{} p[7.6cm]{} p[7.4cm]{} ]{}
Criteria
&
Push
&
Pull
\
Pros
&
Sensor hardware make the major decisions on sensing and communication
Can be both instant or interval sensing and communication
&
Software of the sensor data consumer makes the major decisions on sensing and communication
Decision on when to collect data is based on reasoning significant amount of data in software level
Can be both instant or interval sensing and communication
\
Cons
&
Decision on when to send data based on reasoning less amount of data
Sensors are required to program when the requirements are changed
&
More communication bandwidth is required where software level has to send data requests to the sensors all the time
\
Applicability
& Can be used when sensors know about when to send the data and have enough processing power and knowledge to reason locally. (e.g. event detection where one or small number of sensors can reason and evaluate the conditions by their own without software level complex data processing and reasoning.)
& Can be used when sensors do not have knowledge on when to send the data to the consumer. (e.g. event detection where large amount of data need to be collected, processed, and reasoned in order to recognize the event.)\
\[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Responsibility\]
[ p[1.5cm]{} p[7.5cm]{} p[7.5cm]{} ]{}
Criteria
&
Instant
&
Interval
\
Pros
&
Save energy due to no redundant network communications are involved
More accurate data can be gather as the network transmission would be triggered as soon as the conditions are met
&
Either sensors can be configured to sense and communicate with data consumers in a predefined frequency or the sensor data consumers can retrieve data explicitly from the sensors in a predefined frequency
Sensors do not need to be intelligent/knowledge or have significant processing and reasoning capabilities
Allows to understand the trends or behaviour by collecting sensor data over time
\
Cons
&
More knowledge is required to identify the conditions and the satisfaction of the conditions
Hardware level (i.e. sensor) or software level should know exactly what to look for
Difficult to detect events which require different types of data from number of different sensors
Comparatively consume more energy for data processing
&
May waste energy due to redundant data communication
Less accurate as the sensor readings can be change over the interval between two data communications
Reasoning need to be done in software level by the data consumer which will miss some occurrence of events due to above inaccuracy
\
Applicability
& Can be used to detect frost events or heat events in agricultural domain. In smart home domain, this method can be used to detect some one entering to a room via door sensors. Ideally, applicable for the situations where expected outcome is well-known by either hardware level (i.e. sensors) or software level & Can be used to collect data from temperature sensors for controlling air condition or measure air pollution where actions are not event oriented but monitoring oriented. Ideally, applicable for the situations where expected outcome is not known by either hardware level (i.e. sensors) or software level
\
\[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Frequency\]
[ p[1.5cm]{} p[5cm]{} p[5cm]{} p[5cm]{} ]{}
Criteria
&
Direct Sensor Access
&
Through Middleware
&
Through Context Server
\
Pros
&
Efficient as it allows direct communication with the sensors
Have more control over sensor configuration and data retrieval process
&
Easy to manage and retrieve context as most of the management tasks are facilitated by the middleware.
Can retrieve data faster with less effort and technical knowledge
&
Less resources required
Can retrieve data faster with less effort and technical knowledge
\
Cons
&
Significant technical knowledge is required including hardware level embedded device programming and configuring
Significant amount of time, effort, cost involved
Updating is very difficult due to tight bound between sensor hardware and consumer application
&
Require more resources (e.g. processing, memory, storage) as middleware solutions need to be employed
Less control over sensor configuration
Moderately efficient as data need to be retrieve through middleware
&
No control over sensor configuration
Less efficient as the context need to be pulled from server over the network
\
Applicability
& Can be used for small scale scientific experiments. Can also be used for situation where limited number of sensors are involved & IoT application will use this methods in most cases. Can be used in situations where large number of heterogeneous sensors are involved & Can be used in situations where significant amount of context are required but have only limited resources (i.e. cannot employ context middleware solutions due to resource limitations) that allows run the consumer application\
\[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Source\]
[ p[1.5cm]{} p[5cm]{} p[5cm]{} p[5cm]{} ]{}
Criteria
&
Physical Sensors
&
Virtual Sensors
&
Logical Sensors
\
Pros
&
Error detection is possible and relatively easy
Missing value identification is also relatively easy
Have access to low-level sensor configuration therefore can be more efficient
&
Provide moderately meaningful data
Provide high-level context information
Provided data are less processed
Do not need to deal with hardware level tasks
&
Provide highly meaningful data
Provide high-level context information
Usually more accurate
Do not need to deal with hardware level tasks
\
Cons
&
Hardware deployment and maintenance is costly
Have to deal with sensor and hardware level programming, design, development, test, debug
Provide less meaningful and low-level raw sensor data
&
Difficult to find errors in data
Filling missing values is not easy as they are mostly non-numerical and unpredictable
&
Difficult to find error in data
Filling missing values is not easy as they are mostly non-numerical
Do not have control over data production process
License fees and other restrictions may apply
\
Applicability
&
Can be used to collect physically observable phenomenon such as light, temperature, humidity, gas, etc.
&
Can be used to collect information that cannot be measure physically such as calendar details, email, chat, maps, contact details, social networking related data, user preferences, user behaviour, etc.
&
Can be used to collect information that are costly and impossible to collect directly through single physical sensor where advance processing and fusing data from multiple sensors are required (e.g. weather information, activity recognition, location recognition, etc.).
\
\[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Sensor\_Types\]
Context Acquisition {#chapter2:CDLC:Context Acquisition}
-------------------
In this section we discuss five factors that need to be considered when developing context-aware middleware solutions in the IoT paradigm. The techniques used to acquire context can be varied based on responsibility, frequency, context source, sensor type, and acquisition process.
### Based on Responsibility
Context (e.g. sensor data) acquisition can be primarily accomplished using two methods [@P334]: push and pull. A comparison is presented in Table \[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Responsibility\].
Pull: The software component which is responsible for acquiring sensor data from sensors make a request (e.g. query) from the sensor hardware periodically (i.e. after certain intervals) or instantly to acquire data.
Push: The physical or virtual sensor pushes data to the software component which is responsible to acquiring sensor data periodically or instantly. Periodical or instant pushing can be employed to facilitate a publish and subscribe model.
### Based on Frequency
Further, in the IoT paradigm, context can be generated based on two different event types: instant events and interval events \[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Frequency\].
Instant (also known as threshold violation): These events occur instantly. The events do not span across certain amounts of time. Open a door, switch on a light, or animal enters experimental crop field are some types of instant events. In order to detect this type of event, sensor data needs to be acquired when the event occurs. Both push and pull methods can be employed.
Interval (also known as periodically): These events span a certain period of time. Raining, animal eating a plant, or winter are some interval events. In order to detect this type of event, sensor data needs to be acquired periodically (e.g. sense and send data to the software every 20 seconds). Both push and pull methods can be employed.
### Based on Source
In addition, context acquisition methods can be categorised into three categories [@P419] based on where the context came from. A comparison is presented in Table \[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Source\].
Acquire directly from sensor hardware: In this method, context is directly acquired from the sensor by communicating with the sensor hardware and related APIs. Software drivers and libraries need to be installed locally. This method is typically used to retrieve data from sensors attached locally. Most devices and sensors today require some amount of driver support and can be connected via USB, COM, or serial ports. However, wireless technologies are becoming popular in the sensor community, which allows data transmission without driver installations. In the IoT paradigm most objects will communicate with each other via a wireless means.
Acquire through a middleware infrastructure: In this method, sensor (context) data is acquired by middleware solutions such as GSN. The applications can retrieve sensor data from the middleware and not from the sensor hardware directly. For example, some GSN instances will directly access sensor hardware and rest of the GSN instances will communicate with other GSN instances to retrieve data.
Acquire from context servers: In this method, context is acquired from several other context storages (e.g. databases, RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds, web services) via different mechanisms such as web service calls. This mechanism is useful when the hosting device of the context-aware application has limited computing resources. Resource-rich context servers can be used to acquire and process context.
### Based on Sensor Types {#chapter2:CDLC:CA:Based_on_Sensor_Types}
There are different types of sensors that can be employed to acquire context. In general usage, the term ‘sensor’ is used to refer to tangible sensor hardware devices. However, among the technical community, sensors are refer to as any data source that provides relevant context. Therefore, sensors can be divided into three categories [@P543]: physical, virtual, and logical. A comparison is presented in Table \[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Acquisition\_Methods\_based\_on\_Sensor\_Types\].
Physical sensors: These are the most commonly used type of sensors and they are tangible. These sensors generate sensor data by themselves. Most of the devices we use today are equipped with a variety of sensor (e.g. temperature, humidity, microphone, touch). A discussion on commonly used sensor data types and sensors is presented in [@P544]. The data retrieved from physical sensors is called low-level context. They are less meaningful, trivial, and vulnerable to small changes. IoT solutions needs to understand the physical world using imperfect, conflicting and imprecise data.
Virtual sensors: These sensors do not necessarily generate sensor data by themselves. Virtual sensors retrieve data from many sources and publish it as sensor data (e.g. calendar, contact number directory, twitter statuses, email and chat applications). These sensors do not have a physical presence. They commonly use web services technology to send and receive data.
Logical sensors (also called software sensors): They combine physical sensors and virtual sensors in order to produce more meaningful information. A web service dedicated to providing weather information can be called a logical sensor. Weather stations use thousands of physical sensors to collect weather information. They also collect information from virtual sensors such as maps, calendars, and historic data. Finally, weather information is produced by combing both physical and virtual sensors. In addition, the android mobile operating system consists of a number of software sensors such as gravity, linear accelerometer, rotation vector, and orientation sensors.
### Based on Acquisition Process
There are three ways to acquire context: sense, derive, and manually provided.
Sense: The data is sensed through sensors, including the sensed data stored in databases (e.g. retrieve temperature from a sensor, retrieve appointments details from a calendar).
Derive: The information is generated by performing computational operations on sensor data. These operations could be as simple as web service calls or as complex as mathematical functions run over sensed data (e.g. calculate distance between two sensors using GPS coordinates). The necessary data should be available to apply any numerical or logical reasoning technique.
Manually provided: Users provide context information manually via predefined settings options such as preferences (e.g. understand that user doesn’t like to receive event notifications between 10pm to 6.00am). This method can be use to retrieve any type of information.
Context Modelling {#chapter2:CAF:Context Modelling}
-----------------
We discuss the basic definition of context modelling in Section \[chapter2:CAF:CARD:Definition\_of\_Context\_Model\_and\_Context\_Attribute\]. Context modelling is also widely refereed to as context representation. There are several popular context modelling in context-aware computing. Before we present the discussion on context modelling techniques, let’s briefly introduce context modelling fundamentals. Context models can be static or dynamic. Static models have a predefined set of context information that will be collected and stored [@P271]. The requirements that need to be taken into consideration when modelling context information are identified and explained in [@P216] as heterogeneity and mobility, relationships and dependencies, timeliness (also called freshness), imperfection, reasoning, usability of modelling formalisms, and efficient context provisioning. Typically, there are two steps in representing context according to a model:
Context modelling process: In the first step, new context information needs to be defined in terms of attributes, characteristics, relationships with previously specified context, quality-of context attributes and the queries for synchronous context requests.
Organize context according to the model: In the second step, the result of the context modelling step needs to be validated. Then the new context information needs to be merged and added to the existing context information repository. Finally, the new context information is made available to be used when required.
The first step performs the actual modelling of context. However, the factors and parameters that are considered for the modelling context are very subjective. It varies from one solution to another. We use two examples to demonstrate the variance. Currently, there is no standard to specify what type of information needs to be considered in context modelling. We discussed context categories proposed by the researcher in Section \[chapter2:CAF:context Types\]. Even though these categories provide high-level guidelines towards choosing relevant context, choosing specific context attributes is a subjective decision.
*Example 1:* MoCA [@P277] has used an object oriented approach to model context using XML. There are three sections in the proposed context model: structural information (e.g. attributes and dependencies among context types), behavioural information (e.g. whether the context attribute has a constant or variable value), and context-specific abstractions (e.g. contextual events and queries).
*Example 2:* W4 Diary [@P287] uses a W4 (who, what, where, when) based context model to structure data in order to extract high-level information from location data. For example, W4 represents context as tuples (e.g. Who: John, What: walking:4km/h, Where: ANU, Canberra, When: 2013-01-05:9.30am).
In the IoT paradigm, context information has six states [@P335]: ready, running, suspended, resumed, expired, and terminated. These states are also similar to the process states in an operating system. They align context to an event. An example scenario from the smart agriculture domain can be used to explain the state transition of context.
Ready: Every context is in the ready state at the initial stage (e.g. possible event can be ‘an animal eating crop’).
Suspended: When the context seems to be invalid temporally (e.g. sensors detect that animal stops eating crop temporarily).
Resumed: When the context becomes valid from being suspended (e.g. sensors detect animal starts to eat crop again).
Expired: When the context has expired and further information is not available (e.g. sensor data has not been received by the system for the last 60 seconds where all sensor data is considered to be expired (based on policy) within 20 seconds from the time it is collected).
Terminated: When the context is no longer valid (i.e. inferred something else) and further information is not available (e.g. sensors detects that animal moves away from the crops).
[ m[0.05cm]{} m[6.5cm]{} m[10cm]{} ]{}
&
RDF(S)
&
OWL(2)
\
Pros
&
Provide basic elements to describe and organize knowledge. Further, OWL is build on top of RDFS
Relatively simple
Faster processing and reasoning
&
Improved version of RDFS. Therefore adaptability from RDF(S) to OWL is high
Increasing number of tools are supported
More expressive (e.g. larger vocabulary/constraints, rules, more meaningful)
Higher machine interoperability (e.g. strong syntax)
W3C approved standard for semantics (since 2004)
Comes in three versions (i.e. OWL light, OWL DL, OWL Full) where each one has more expressive and reasoning power that previous
\
Cons
&
Lack of inconsistency checking and reasoning
Limited expressiveness (e.g. no cardinality support)
&
Relatively Complex
Low performance (e.g. require more computation power and time)
\
\[Tbl:Comparison of Semantic Technologies\]
The most popular context modelling techniques are surveyed in [@P431; @P184]. These surveys discuss a number of systems that have been developed based on the following techniques. Each of the following techniques has its own strengths and weaknesses. We discuss context modelling techniques at a high-level. The actual implementations of these techniques can vary widely depending on application domain (e.g. implementation details may differ from embedded environments to mobile environments to cloud based environments). Therefore, our focus is on conceptual perspective of each modelling technique no on specific implementation. Our discussion is based on the six most popular context modelling techniques: *key-value, markup schemes, graphical, object based, logic based,* and *ontology based modelling*. A comparison of these models is presented in Table \[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Modelling\_and\_Representation\_Techniques\].
### Key-Value Modelling
It models context information as key-value pairs in different formats such as text files and binary files. This is the simplest form of context representation among all the other techniques. They are easy to manage when they have smaller amounts of data. However, key-value modelling is not scalable and not suitable to store complex data structures. Further, hierarchical structures or relationships cannot be modelled using key-value pairs. Therefore, lack of data structuring capability makes it difficult to retrieve modelled information efficiently. Further, attaching meta information is not possible. The key-value technique is an application oriented and application bounded technique that suits the purpose of temporary storage such as less complex application configurations and user preferences.
### Markup Scheme Modelling (Tagged Encoding)
It models data using tags. Therefore, context is stored within tags. This technique is an improvement over the key-value modelling technique. The advantage of using markup tags is that it allows efficient data retrieval. Further, validation is supported through schema definitions. Sophisticated validation tools are available for popular markup techniques such as XML. Range checking is also possible up to some degree for numerical values. Markup schemas such as XML are widely used in almost all application domains to store data temporarily, transfer data among applications, and transfer data among application components. In contrast, markup languages do not provide advanced expressive capabilities which allow reasoning. Further, due to lack of design specifications, context modelling, retrieval, interoperability, and re-usability over different markup schemes can be difficult. A common application of markup based modelling is modelling profiles. Profiles are commonly developed using languages such as XML. However, the concept of markup languages are not restricted only to XML. Any language or mechanism (e.g. JSON) that supports tag based storage allows markup scheme modelling. An example of popular markup scheme modelling is Composite Capabilities/Preference Profiles (CC/PP) [@P529]. There are a significant number of similar emerging applications such as ContextML [@P423] in context-aware computing. Tuples are also used to model context [@P271].
### Graphical Modelling
It models context with relationships. Some examples of this modelling technique are Unified Modelling Language (UML) [@P530] and Object Role Modelling (ORM) [@P531]. In terms of expressive richness, graphical modelling is better than markup and key-value modelling as it allows relationships to be captured into the context model. Actual low-level representation of the graphical modelling technique could be varied. For example, it could be a SQL database, noSQL database, XML, etc. Many other extensions have also been proposed and implemented using this technique [@P389]. Further, as we are familiar with databases, graphical modelling is a well known, easy to learn, and easy to use technique. Databases can hold massive amounts of data and provide simple data retrieval operations, which can be performed relatively quickly. In contrast, the number of different implementations (i.e. different databases and other solutions) makes it difficult with regards to interoperability. Further, there are limitations on data retrieval mechanisms such as SQL. In addition, sophisticated context retrieval requirements may demand very complex SQL queries to be employed. The queries can be difficult to create, use, and manage even with the sophisticated tools that exist today. Adding context information and changing the data structure is also difficult in later stages. However, some of the recent trends and solutions in the noSQL [@P556] movement allows these structure alteration issues to be overcome. Therefore, graphical modelling techniques can be used as persistent storage of context.
### Object Based Modelling
Object based (or object oriented) concepts are used to model data using class hierarchies and relationships. Object oriented paradigm promotes encapsulation and re-usability. As most of the high-level programming languages support object oriented concepts, modelling can integrated into context-aware systems easily. Therefore, object based modelling is suitable to be used as an internal, non-shared, code based, run-time context modelling, manipulation, and storage mechanism. However, it does not provide inbuilt reasoning capabilities. Validation of object oriented designs is also difficult due to the lack of standards and specifications.
### Logic Based Modelling
Facts, expressions, and rules are used to represent information about the context. Rules are used by other modelling techniques, such as ontologies, as well. Rules are primarily used to express policies, constraints, and preferences. It provides much more expressive richness compared to the other models discussed previously. Therefore, reasoning is possible up to a certain level. The specific structures and languages that can be used to model context using rules are varied. However, lack of standardisation reduces the re-usability and applicability. Furthermore, highly sophisticated and interactive graphical techniques can be employed to develop logic based or rule based representations. As a result, even non-technical users can add rules and logic to the systems during run time. Logic based modelling allows new high-level context information to be extracted using low-level context. Therefore, it has the capability to enhance other context modelling techniques by acting as a supplement.
### Ontology Based Modelling
The context is organised into ontologies using semantic technologies. A number of different standards (RDF, RDFS, OWL) and reasoning capabilities are available to be used depending on the requirement. A wide range of development tools and reasoning engines are also available. However, context retrieval can be computationally intensive and time consuming when the amount of data is increased. According to many surveys, in context-aware computing and sensor data management, ontologies are the preferred mechanism of managing and modelling context despite its weaknesses. Due to its popularity and wider adaptation during the last five years in both academia and industry we present a brief discussion on semantic modelling and reasoning. However, our intention is not to survey semantic technologies but to highlight the applicability of semantics in a context-aware domain from an IoT perspective. Comprehensive and extensive amounts of information on semantic technology are available in [@P557; @P558; @P378].
\[chapter2:CAF:CM:Ontology\_Based\_Modelling\]
[ m[1.2cm]{} m[4.8cm]{} m[4.8cm]{} m[5.5cm]{} ]{}
Techniques
&
Pros
&
Cons
&
Applicability
\
Key-Value
&
Simple
Flexible
Easy to manage when small in size
&
Strongly coupled with applications
Not scalable
No structure or schema
Hard to retrieve information
No way to represent relationships
No validation support
No standard processing tools are available
& Can be used to model limited amount of data such as user preferences and application configurations. Mostly independent and non-related pieces of information. This is also suitable for limited data transferring and any other less complex temporary modelling requirements.
\
Markup Scheme Tagged Encoding (e.g. xml)
&
Flexible
More structured
Validation possible through schemas
Processing tools are available
&
Application depended as there are no standards for structures
Can be complex when many levels of information are involved
Moderately difficult to retrieve information
& Can be used as intermediate data organisation format as well as mode of data transfer over network. Can be used to decouple data structures used by two components in a system. (e.g. SensorML [@P256] for store sensor descriptions, JSON as a format to data transfer over network)\
Graphical (e.g. databases)
&
relationships modelling
Information retrieval is moderately easier
Different standards and implementations are available.
Validation possible through constraints
&
Querying can be complex
Configuration may be required
Interoperability among different implementation is difficult
No standards but governed by design principles
& Can be used for long term and large volume of permanent data archival. Historic context can be store in databases.\
Object Based
&
relationships modelling
Can be well integrated using programming languages
Processing tools are available
&
Hard to retrieve information
No standards but govern by design principles
Lack of validation
& Can be used to represent context in programming code level. context runtime manipulation. Very short term, temporary, and mostly stored in computer memory. Also support data transfer over network.\
Logic Based
&
to generate high-level context using low-level context
Simple to model and use
support logical reasoning
Processing tools are available
&
No standards
Lack of validation
Strongly coupled with applications
& Can be used to generate high-level context using low-level context (i.e. generate new knowledge), model events and actions (i.e. event detection), and define constrains and restrictions.
\
Ontology Based
&
Support semantic reasoning
more expressive representation of context
Strong validation
Application independent and sharing
Strong support by standardisations
Fairly sophisticated tools available
&
Representation can be complex
Information retrieval can be complex and resource intensive
& Can be used to model domain knowledge and structure context based on the relationships defined by the ontology. Rather than storing data on ontologies, data can be stored in appropriate data sources (i.e. databases) while structure is provided by ontologies.\
\[Tbl:Comparison\_of\_Context\_Modelling\_and\_Representation\_Techniques\]
Khoo [@P057] has explained the evolution of the web in four stages: basic Internet as Web 1.0, social media and user generated content as web 2.0, semantic web as web 3.0 and IoT as web 4.0. In this identification, semantic web has been given a separate phase to show its importance and the significant changes that semantic technologies can bring to the web in general.
Ontology is the main component in semantic technology that allows it to model data. Based on the previous approaches and survey [@P184], one of the most appropriate formats to manage context is ontologies. Ontologies offer an expressive language to represent the relationships and context. IT also provides comprehensive reasoning mechanisms as well. Ontologies also allow knowledge sharing and they decouple the knowledge from the application and program codes [@P419].
There are several reasons to develop and use ontologies in contrast to other modelling techniques. The most common reasons are to [@P191; @P447] share a common understanding of the structure of information among people or software agents, analyse domain knowledge, separate domain knowledge from operational knowledge, enable reuse of domain knowledge, high-level knowledge inferring, and make domain assumptions explicit. Due to the dynamic nature, the IoT middleware solutions should support applications which are not even known at the middleware design-time. Ontologies allow the integration of knowledge on different domains into applications when necessary.
Studer et al. [@P546] defined the concept of ontology as follows. *“An ontology is a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualisation. A conceptualisation refers to an abstract model of some phenomenon in the world by having identified the relevant concepts of that phenomenon. Explicit means that the type of concepts used, and the constraints on their use are explicitly defined. For example, in medical domains, the concepts are diseases and symptoms, the relations between them are causal and a constraint is that a disease cannot cause itself. Formal refers to the fact that the ontology should be machine readable, which excludes natural language. Shared reflects the notion that an ontology captures consensual knowledge, that is, it is not private to some individual, but accepted by a group.”* Another acceptable definition has been presented by Noy and McGuinness [@P447]. Further ontologies are discussed extensively as principles, methods, and applications in perspective [@P445].
Some of the requirements and objectives behind designing an ontology are simplicity, flexibility and extensibility, generality, and expressiveness [@P545]. In addition, some of the general requirements in context modelling and representation are unique identification, validation, reuse, handling uncertainty, and incomplete information [@P185]. A further eight principles for developing ontologies are identified by Korpipaa and Mantyjarvi [@P034] as: domain, simplicity, practical access, flexibility and expandability, facilitate inference, genericity, efficiency, and expressiveness.
Ontologies consists of several common key components [@P197; @P332] such as individuals, classes, attributes, relations, function terms, restrictions, rules, axioms, and events. Furthermore, there are two steps in developing ontologies. First, the domain and scope need to be clearly defined. Then existing ontologies need to be reviewed to find the possibilities of leverage existing in ontologies. One of the main goals of ontologies is the reusability of shared knowledge. By the time this survey was prepared, there were several popular domains that design, develop, and use ontologies. Sensor domain is one of them. A survey of the semantic specification of sensors is presented in [@P103]. They have evaluated and compared a number of ontologies and their capabilities.
There are several popular semantic web ontology languages that can be used to develop ontologies: RDF [@P252], RDFS [@P559], OWL [@P148]. The current recommendation is OWL 2 which is an extended version of OWL. A significant amount of OWL usage has been noticed in the context modelling ad reasoning domain [@P185]. It further emphasises the requirement of having the modelling language, reasoning engines, and mechanism to define rules as a bundle, rather than choosing different available options arbitrarily, to get the real power of semantic technologies. SWRL is one of the available solutions to add rules in OWL [@P216]. SWRL is not a hybrid approach as it is fully integrated into ontological reasoning. In contrast, when the amount of data becomes larger and structure becomes complex, ontologies can becomes exceedingly complex causing the reasoning process to be resource intensive and slow. However, some of the main reasons to choose OWL as the context modelling mechanism are [@P419; @P332].
W3C strongly supports the standardisation of OWL. Therefore, a variety of development tools are available for integrating and managing OWL ontologies, which makes it easier to develop and share.
OWL allows interoperability among other context-aware systems. These features, such as classes, properties and constraints, and individuals are important for supporting ontology reuse, mapping and interoperability.
OWL supports a high-level of inference / reasoning support.
OWL is more expressive. For example, it provides cardinality constraints, which enables imposing additional restrictions on the classes.
We compare the two most popular web ontology languages, RDF(S) and OWL(2) in Table \[Tbl:Comparison of Semantic Technologies\], to highlight the fundamental differences.
After evaluating several context modelling techniques, it was revealed that incorporating multiple modelling techniques is the best way to produce efficient and effective results, which will mitigate each other’s weaknesses. Therefore, no single modelling technique is ideal to be used in a standalone fashion. There is a strong relationship between context modelling and reasoning. For example, some reasoning techniques prefer some modelling techniques. However, it should not limit the employability of different context reasoning and modelling techniques together. In the next section we discuss reasoning context-aware computing.
Context Reasoning Decision Models {#chapter2:CAF:Context Reasoning Decision Models}
---------------------------------
Context reasoning can be defined as a method of deducing new knowledge, and understanding better, based on the available also be explained as a process of giving high-level context deductions from a set of contexts [@P331]. The requirement of reasoning also emerged due to two characteristics of raw context: imperfection (i.e. unknown, ambiguous, imprecise, or erroneous) and uncertainty. Reasoning performance can be measured using efficiency, soundness, completeness, and interoperability [@P185]. Reasoning is also called inferencing. Contest reasoning comprises several steps. Broadly we can divide them into three phases [@P214].
Context pre-processing: This phase cleans the collected sensor data. Due to inefficiencies in sensor hardware and network communication, collected data may be not accurate or missing. Therefore, data needs to be cleaned by filling missing values, removing outliers, validating context via multiple sources, and many more. These tasks have been extensively researched by database, data mining, and sensor network research communities over many years.
Sensor data fusion: It is a method of combining sensor data from multiple sensors to produce more accurate, more complete, and more dependable information that could not be achieve through a single sensor [@P248]. In the IoT, fusion is extremely important, because there will be billions of sensors available. As a result, a large number of alternative sources will exist to provide the same information.
Context inference: Generation of high-level context information using lower-level context. The inferencing can be done in a single interaction or in multiple interactions. Revisiting an example from a different perspective, W4 Diary [@P287] represented context as tuples John, What: walking:4km/h, Where: ANU,Canberra, When: 2013-01-05:9.30am). This low-level context can be inferred through a number of reasoning mechanisms to generate the final results. For example, in the first iteration, longitude and latitude values of a GPS sensor may be inferred as *PurplePickle cafe in canberra*. In the next iteration *PurplePickle cafe in canberra* may be inferred as *John’s favourite cafe*. Each iteration gives more accurate and meaningful information.
There are a large number of different context reasoning decision models, such as decision tree, naive Bayes, hidden Markov models, support vector machines, k-nearest neighbour, artificial neural networks, Dempster-Shafer, ontology-based, rule-based, fuzzy reasoning and many more. Most of the models originated and are employed in the fields of artificial intelligence and machine learning. Therefore, these models are not specific to context-reasoning but commonly used across many different fields in computing and engineering.
We present the results of a survey conducted by Lim and Dey [@P384] in Figure \[Fig:Survey\_on\_Context\_Reasoning\_Techniques\]. They have investigated the popularity of context reasoning decision models. The survey is based on literature from three major conferences over five years: Computer-Human Interaction (CHI) 2003-2009, Ubiquitous Computing (Ubicomp) 2004-2009, and Pervasive 2004-2009.
In the IoT paradigm, there are many sensors that sense and produce context information. The amount of information that will be collected by over 50 billion sensors is enormous. Therefore, using all this context for reasoning in not feasible for many reasons, such as processing time, power, storage, etc. Furthermore, Guan et al. [@P331] has proved that using more context will not necessarily improve the accuracy of the inference in a considerable manner. They have used two reasoning models in their research: back-propagation neural networks and k-nearest neighbours. According to the results, 93% accuracy has been achieved by using ten raw context. Adding 30 more raw context to the reasoning model has increased the accuracy by only 1.63%. Therefore, selecting the appropriate raw context for reasoning is critical to infer high-level context with high accuracy.
Context reasoning has been researched over many years. The most popular context reasoning techniques (also called decision models) are surveyed in [@P185; @P216; @P215]. Our intention in this paper is not to survey context reasoning techniques but to briefly introduce them so it will help to understand and appreciate the role of context reasoning in the IoT paradigm. We classify context reasoning techniques broadly into six categories: *supervised learning, unsupervised learning, rules, fuzzy logic, ontological reasoning* and *probabilistic reasoning*. A comparison of these techniques is presented in Table \[Tbl:Context\_Reasoning\_Decision\_Models\]
[ m[2.1cm]{} m[4.8cm]{} m[4.5cm]{} m[5cm]{} ]{}
Techniques
&
Pros
&
Cons
&
Applicability
\
Supervised Learning (Artificial neural network, Bayesian Networks, Case-based reasoning, Decision tree learning, Support vector machines)
&
Fairly accurate
Number of alternative models are available
Have mathematical and statistical foundation
&
Require significant amount of data
Every data element need to be converted in to numerical values
Selecting feature set could be challenging
Can be more resource intensive (processing, storage, time)
less semantic so less meaningful
Training data required
Models can be complex
Difficult to capture existing knowledge
& For situation where the feature set is easily identifiable, possible out comes are known, and large data sets (for training as well) are available in numerical terms. (For example: activity recognition, missing value identification)
\
Unsupervised Learning (Clustering, k-Nearest Neighbour)
&
No training data required
No need to know the possible outcome
&
Models can be complex
Less semantic so less meaningful
Difficult to validate
Outcome is not predictable
Can be more resource intensive (processing, storage, time)
& For situations where possible out comes are not known (For example: unusual behaviour detection, analysing agricultural fields to identify appropriate location to plant a specific type of crop)
\
Rules
&
Simple to define
Easy to extend
Less resource (e.g. processing, storage) intensive
&
Should define manually
Can be error prone due to manual work
No validation or quality checking
& For situations where raw data elements need to be converted in to high level context information. Suitable to be used to define events.\
Fuzzy Logic
&
Allow more natural representation
Simple to define
Easy to extend
Less resource (e.g. processing, storage) intensive
Can handle uncertainty
&
Should define manually
Can be error prone due to manual work
No validation or quality checking
May reduce the quality (e.g. precision) of the results due to natural representation
& For situation where low-level context need to be converted in to high-level more natural context information. This type of simplification will make it easy to process further. For example, control automated irrigation system where water will be released when the system detect the soil is ‘dry’\
Ontology based (First-Order Predicate Logic)
&
Allow complex reasoning
Allow complex representation
More meaningful results
Validation and quality checking is possible
Can reason both numerical and textual data
&
Data need to be modelled in a compatible format (e.g. OWL, RDF)
Limited numerical reasoning
Low performance (e.g. require more computation power and time)
& For situations where knowledge is critical. For example, store and reason domain knowledge about agricultural domain. It allows the context information to be store according to the ontology structure and automatically reason later when required\
Probabilistic logic (Dempster-Shafer, hidden Markov Models, naive Bayes)
&
Allows to combine evidence
Can handle unseen situations
Alternative models are available
Can handle uncertainty
provide moderately meaningful results
&
Should know the probabilities
Reason numerical values only
& For situations where probabilities are known and combing evidence from different sources are essential. For example, evidence produced from a camera, infra-red sensors, acoustics sensor, and motion detector can be combined to detect a wind animal infiltrate to a agricultural field\
\[Tbl:Context\_Reasoning\_Decision\_Models\]
### Supervised learning
In this category of techniques, we first collect training examples. Then we label them according to the results we expect. Then we derive a function that can generate the expected results using the training data. This technique is widely used in mobile phone sensing [@P217] and activity recognition [@P187]. *Decision tree* is a supervised learning technique where it builds a tree from a dataset that can be used to classify data. This technique has been used to develop a student assessment system in [@P561]. *Bayesian Networks* is a technique based on probabilistic reasoning concepts. It uses directed acyclic graphs to represent events and relationships among them. It is a widely used technique in statistical reasoning. Example applications are presented in [@P197; @P289]. Bayesian networks are commonly used in combining uncertain information from a large number of sources and deducing higher-level contexts. *Artificial neural networks* is a technique that attempts to mimic the biological neuron system. They are typically used to model complex relationships between inputs and outputs or to find patterns in data. Body sensor networks domain has employed this technique for pervasive healthcare monitoring in [@P267]. *Support vector machines* are widely used for pattern recognition in context-aware computing. It has been used to detect activity recognition of patients in the healthcare domain [@P562] and to learn situations in a smart home environment [@P209].
### Unsupervised learning
This category of techniques can find hidden structures in unlabelled data. Due to the use of no training data, there is no error or reward signal to evaluate a potential solution. Clustering techniques such as *K-Nearest Neighbour* is popularly used in context-aware reasoning. Specifically, clustering is used in low-level (sensor hardware level) sensor network operations such as routing and high level tasks such as indoor and outdoor positioning and location [@P565]. Unsupervised neural network techniques such as Kohonen Self-Organizing Map (KSOM) are used to classify incoming sensor data in a real-time fashion [@P566]. Noise detection and outlier detection are other applications in context-aware computing. Applications of unsupervised learning techniques in relation to body sensor networks are surveyed in [@P267]. The unsupervised clustering method has been employed to capturing user contexts by dynamic profiling in [@P268].
### Rules
This is the simplest and most straightforward methods of reasoning out of all of them. Rules are usually structure in an IF-THEN-ELSE format. This is the most popular method of reasoning according to Figure \[Fig:Survey\_on\_Context\_Reasoning\_Techniques\]. It allows the generation of high level context information using low level context. Recently, rules have been heavily used when combined with ontological reasoning [@P243; @P420; @P421]. MiRE [@P298] is a minimal rule engine for context-aware mobile devices. Most of the user preferences are encoded using rules. Rules are also used in event detection [@P136; @P128]. Rules are expected to play a significant role in the IoT, where they are the easiest and simplest way to model human thinking and reasoning in machines. PRIAMOS [@P139] has used semantic rules to annotate sensor data with context information. Application of rule based reasoning is clearly explained in relation to context-aware I/O control in [@P567].
### Fuzzy logic
This allows approximate reasoning instead of fixed and crisp reasoning. Fuzzy logic is similar to probabilistic reasoning but confidence values represent degrees of membership rather than probability [@P444]. In traditional logic theory, acceptable truth values are 0 or 1. In fuzzy logic partial truth values are acceptable. It allows real world scenarios to be represented more naturally; as most real world facts are not crisp. It further allows the use of natural language (e.g. temperature: slightly warm, fairly cold) definitions rather than exact numerical values (e.g. temperature: 10 degrees Celsius). In other words it allows imprecise notions such as tall, short, dark, trustworthy and confidence to be captured, which is critical in context information processing. In most cases, fuzzy reasoning cannot be used as a standalone reasoning technique. It is usually used to complement another techniques such as rules based, probabilistic or ontological reasoning. Gaia [@P568] has used fuzzy logic in context providers to handle uncertainty. Several examples of applying fuzzy logic to represent context information are presented in [@P547; @P548].
### Ontology based
: It is based on description logic, which is a family of logic based knowledge representations of formalisms. Ontological reasoning is mainly supported by two common representations of semantic web languages: RDF(S) [@P252] and OWL(2) [@P148]. We discussed ontology based modelling in Section \[chapter2:CAF:CM:Ontology\_Based\_Modelling\]. Semantic web languages are also complemented by several semantic query languages: RDQL, RQL, TRIPLE and number of reasoning engines: FACT [@P253], RACER, Pellet [@P150]. Rules such as SWRL [@P243] are increasingly popular in ontological reasoning. The advantage of ontological reasoning is that it integrates well with ontology modelling. In contrast, a disadvantage is that ontological reasoning is not capable of finding missing values or ambiguous information where statistical reasoning techniques are good at that. Rules can be used to minimise this weakness by generating new context information based on low-level context. Missing values can also be tackled by having rules that enable missing values to be replaced with suitable predefined values. However, these mechanism will not perform accurately in highly dynamic and uncertain domains. Ontological reasoning is heavily used in a wide range of applications, such as activity recognition [@P187], hybrid reasoning [@P187], and event detection [@P128]. A survey on semantic based reasoning is presented in [@P215]. It also compares a number of context aware frameworks based on modelling technique, reasoning techniques, and architectures used in their systems. Comprehensive and extensive amounts of information on semantic technology are available in [@P557; @P558; @P378]. In addition, a semantic based architecture for sensor data fusion is presented in [@P072; @P073; @P071].
### Probabilistic logic
This category of techniques allows decisions to be made based on probabilities attached to the facts related to the problem. It can be used to combine sensor data from two different sources. Further, it can be used to identify resolutions to conflicts among context. Most often these techniques are used to understand occurrence of events. Probabilistic logic has been used in [@P444] to encode access control policies. *Dempster-Shafer*, which is based on probabilistic logic, allows different evidence to be combined to calculate the probability of an event. Dempster-Shafer is commonly used in sensor data fusion for activity recognition. In [@P548; @P238], it has been used to understand whether there is a meeting in the room. Other example applications are presented in [@P236; @P235]. *hidden Markov Models [@P553]* are also a probabilistic technique that allows state to be represented using observable evidence without directly reading the state. For example, it provides a method to bridge the gap between raw GPS sensor measurements and high level information such as a user destination, mode of transportation, calendar based observable evidence such as user calendar, weather, etc. hidden Markov Models are commonly used in activity recognition in context-aware domains. For example, it has been used to learn situation models in a smart home [@P209].
Up to now, we have presented and discussed a number of context modelling and reasoning techniques. However, it is clear that each technique has its own strengths and weakness. No single technique can be used to accomplish perfect results. Therefore, the best method to tackle the problem of context awareness it to combine multiple models in such a way that, as a whole, they reduce weaknesses by complementing each other. For example, Alternative Context Construction Trees (ACCT) [@P326] is an approach that enables the concurrent evaluation and consolidation of different reasoning models such as logic rules, Bayesian networks and CoCoGraphs [@P560]. There are two reasons that context information can become uncertain, as discussed in \[chapter2:CDLC:ESRF:QCRV\]. Therefore, employing or incorporating strategies that can reason under uncertainty such as Bayesian networks, Dempster-Shafer or fuzzy logic is essential in such situations. The process of how the multiple techniques can be combined together is presented in [@P216; @P463]. We briefly explain the hybrid context modelling and reasoning approach as follows.
At the lowest level, statistical techniques can be used to fuse sensor data. Then, fuzzy logic can be employed to convert fixed data in to more natural terms. In the future, Dempster-Shafer can be used to combine sensor data from different sources. In addition, machine learning techniques, such as support vector machines and artificial neural networks, can be used for further reasoning. After completing statistical reasoning, the high level data can be modelled using semantic technologies such as ontologies. Ontological reasoning can be applied to infer additional context information using domain knowledge at the higher level. A similar process is explained in detail in [@P463].
Context Distribution {#chapter2:CAF:Context Distribution}
--------------------
Context distribution is a fairly straightforward task. It provides methods to deliver context to the consumers. From the consumer perspective this task can be called context acquisition, where the discussion we presented in Section \[chapter2:CDLC:Context Acquisition\] is completely applicable. Therefore all the factors we discussed under context acquisition need to be considered for context distribution as well. Other than that there are two other methods to that are used commonly in context distribution:
Query: Context consumer makes a request in terms of a query, so the context management system can use that query to produce results.
Subscription (also called publish / subscribe): Context consumer can be allowed to subscribe with a context management system by describing the requirements. The system will then return the results periodically or when an event occurs (threshold violation). In other terms, consumers can subscribe for a specific sensor or to an event. However, in underline implementations, queries may also use to define subscriptions. Further, this method is typically use in real time processing.
Existing Research Prototypes and Systems {#chapter2:PRE}
========================================
In this section, first we present our evaluation framework and then we briefly discuss some of the most significant projects and highlight their significance. Later, we identify the lessons we can learn from them towards context-aware development in the IoT paradigm in Section \[chapter2:LL\]. The projects are discussed in the same order as in Table \[Tbl:Evaluation\_of\_Previous\_Research\_Efforts\]. Our taxonomy is summarized in Table \[Tbl:Summarized taxonmy\].
Evaluation Framework {#chapter2:CDLC:Evaluation of Surveyed Research Efforts}
--------------------
We used abbreviations as much as possible to make sure that the structure allowed all 50 projects to be presented in a single page, which enables the readers to analyse and identify positive and negative patterns that we have not explicitly discussed. In Table \[Tbl:Evaluation\_of\_Previous\_Research\_Efforts\], we use a dash ([–]{}) symbol across all columns to denote that the functionality is either missing or not mentioned in related publications that are available. In order to increase the readability, we have numbered the columns of the Table \[Tbl:Evaluation\_of\_Previous\_Research\_Efforts\] corresponding to the taxonomy numbered below. Our taxonomy and several other features that will provide additional value in IoT solutions are visually illustrated in Figure \[Fig:Taxonomy\_and\_Conceptual\_Framework\].
### **Project Name**
This is the name given to the project by the authors of the related publications. Most of the project names are abbreviations that are used to refer to the project. However, some project do not have an explicit project name, here we used a dash ([–]{}) symbol.
### **Citation**
We provide only one citation due to space limitations. Other citations are listed under each project’s descriptions and highlights in Section \[chapter2:PRE\].
### **Year**
Table \[Tbl:Evaluation\_of\_Previous\_Research\_Efforts\] is ordered according to chronological order (i.e. from oldest to newest) based on the year of publication.
### **Project Focus**
Based on our evaluation, each project has its own focus on whether to build a system, a toolkit, or a middleware solution. The following abbreviations are used to denote the focus: system (S), toolkit (T), and middleware (M). Systems focus on developing an end-to-end solution where it involves hardware, software and application layer. Systems cannot be used as middleware. It is designed to provide one or a few tasks. Building different functionalities on top of the system is not an option. Systems are designed and developed for a use by the end users. Toolkits are not designed to be used by the end users. They are employed by system, application, and middleware developers. They provide very specific functionalities. Toolkits are usually designed according to well-known design principles and standards and always released with proper documentation that shows how to use them at programming code level. Middleware [@P064] can be explained as a software layer that lies between the hardware and application layers. It provides reusable functionalities that are required by the application to meet complex customer requirements. They are usually built to address common issues in application development such as heterogeneity, interoperability, security, and dependability. A goal of middleware is to provide a set of programming abstractions to help software development where heterogeneous components need to be connected and communicate together. Middleware is designed to be used by application developers, where the middleware solution handles most of the common functionalities leaving more time and effort for the application developers to deal with application functionalities.
### **Modelling**
This has been discussed in detail in Section \[chapter2:CAF:Context Modelling\]. We use the following abbreviations to denote the context modelling techniques employed by the project: key-value modelling (K), markup Schemes (M), graphical modelling (G), object oriented modelling (Ob), logic-based modelling (L), and ontology-based modelling (On).
### **Reasoning**
This has been discussed in detail in Section \[chapter2:CAF:Context Reasoning Decision Models\]. We use the following abbreviations to denote the context reasoning techniques employed by the project: supervised learning (S), un-supervised learning (U), rules (R), fuzzy logic (F), ontology-based (O), and probabilistic reasoning (P). The symbol ($\checkmark$) is used where reasoning functionality is provided but the specific technique is not mentioned.
### **Distribution**
This has been discussed in detail in Section \[chapter2:CAF:Context Distribution\]. We use the following abbreviations to denote the context distribution techniques employed by the project: publish/subscribe (P) and query (Q).
### **Architecture**
This varied widely from one solution to another. Architecture can be classified into different categories based on different perspectives. Therefore, there is no common classification scheme that can be used for all situations. We consider the most significant architectural characteristics to classify the solution. Different architectural styles are numbered as follows. (1) Component based architecture where the entire solution is based on loosely coupled major components, which interact each other. For example, Context Toolkit [@P143] has three major components which perform the most critical functionalities of the system. (2) Distributed architecture enables peer-to-peer interaction in a distributed fashion, such as in Solar [@P569]. (3) Service based architecture where the entire solution consists of several services working together. However, individual access to each service may not be provided in solutions such as Gaia [@P444]. (4) Node based architecture allows to deployment of pieces of software with similar or different capabilities, which communicate and collectively process data in sensor networks [@P344]. (5) Centralised architecture which acts as a complete stack (e.g. middleware) and provides applications to be developed on top of that, but provides no communication between different instances of the solution. (6) Client-server architecture separates sensing and processing from each other, such as in CaSP [@P317].
### **History and Storage**
Storing context history is critical [@P290] in both traditional context-aware computing and the IoT. Historic data allows sensor data to be better understood. Even though most of the IoT solutions and applications are focused on real time interaction, historic data has its own role to play. Specifically, it allows user behaviours, preferences, patterns, trends, needs, and many more to be understood. In contrast, due to the scale of the IoT, storing all the context for the long term may not feasible. However, storage devices are getting more and more powerful and cheap. Therefore, it would be a tradeoff between cost and understanding. The symbol ($\checkmark$) is used denote that context history functionality is facilitated and employed by the project.
### **Knowledge Management**
This functionality is broader than any others. Most of the tasks that are performed by IoT middleware solutions require knowledge in different perspectives, such as knowledge on sensors, domains, users, activities, and many more. One of the most popular techniques to represent knowledge in context-aware computing is using ontologies. However, several other techniques are also available such as rules. Knowledge can be used for tasks such as automated configuration of sensors to IoT middleware, automatic sensor data annotation, reasoning, and event detection. The symbol ($\checkmark$) is used to denote that knowledge management functionality is facilitated and employed by the project in some perspective.
### **Event Detection** {#chapter2:CDLC:ESRF:Event_Detection}
This is one of the most important functionalities in IoT solutions. IoT envisions machine-to-machine (M2M) and machine-to-person communication. Most of these interactions are likely to occur based on an event. Events can referred to many things, such as an observable occurrence, phenomenon, or an extraordinary occurrence. We define one or more conditions and identify it as an occurrence of an event once all the defined conditions are satisfied. In the IoT, sensors collect data and compare it with conditions to decide whether the data satisfies the conditions. An occurrence event is also called a *event trigger*. Once an event has been triggered, a notification or action may be executed. For example, detecting current activity of a person or detecting a meeting status in a room, can be considered as events. Mostly, event detection needs to be done in real-time. However, events such as trends may be detected using historic data. The symbol ($\checkmark$) is used to denote that event detection functionality is facilitated and employed by the project in some perspective.
### **Context Discovery and Annotation**
We use the following abbreviations to denote context discovery and annotation facilitated and employed by the project: context discovery (D) and context annotation (A). Context annotation allows context related information and raw sensors data to be attached, modelled, and stored. Some of the most common and basic information that needs to be captured in relation to context are context type, context value, time stamp, source, and confidence. Context-aware geographical information retrieval approach [@P421] has proposed a mechanism to map raw sensor data to semantic ontologies using SWRL. This is critical in all types of systems. Even though, statistical reasoning systems can use raw sensor data directly, semantic mapping before the reasoning allows more information to be extracted. Context information only becomes meaningful when it is interpreted with respect to the user. This can be achieved by knowledge base integration and reasoning using ontologies. Another application is discussed in [@P420]. Ontologies and other context modelling techniques allow structure data to be more meaningful which express relationships among data.
End-users in the IoT paradigm are more interested in high-level information compared to low-level raw sensor data [@P285]. The following examples explain the difference between high-level information and low-level raw sensor data. It is raining (high-level information) can be derived from humidity is 80% (low-level sensor data). Further, high-level sensor data can be explained as semantic information as it provides more meaning to the end users. Challenges of semantic sensor webs are identified and discussed in [@P031]. This is the most common form of discovery.
### **Level of Context Awareness**
Context-awareness can be employed at two levels: low (hardware) level and high (software) level. At the hardware level, context-awareness is used to facilitate tasks such as efficient routing, modelling, reasoning, storage and event detection (considering energy consumption and availability) [@P288]. At the hardware level, data and knowledge available for decision making is less. Further, sensors are resource constraint devices, so complex processing cannot be performed at the hardware level. However, applying context-aware technologies in the hardware level allows resources to be saved, such as network communication costs by preliminary filtering. The software level has access to a broader range of data and knowledge as well as more resources, which enables more complex reasoning to be performed. We use the following abbreviations to denote the level of context awareness facilitated and employed by the project: high level (H) and low level (L).
### **Security and Privacy**
This is a major concern in context-aware computing in all paradigms. However, the IoT paradigm will intensify the challenges in security and privacy. In the IoT, sensors are expected to collect more information about users (i.e. people) in all aspects. This includes both physical and conceptual data, such as location, preferences, calendar data, and medical information to name a few. As a result, utmost care needs to be taken when collecting, modelling, reasoning, and with persistent storage. Security and privacy need to be handled at different levels in the IoT. At the lowest level, the hardware layer should ensure security and privacy during collecting and temporary storage within the device. Secure protocols need to ensure communication is well protected. Once the data is received, application level protection needs to be in placed to monitor and control who can see or use context and so on. Different projects use different techniques such as policies, rules, and profiles to provide security and privacy. The symbol ($\checkmark$) denoted the presence of security and privacy related functionality in the project, in some form.
### **Data Source Support**
There are different sources that are capable of providing context. Broadly we call them *sensors*. We discussed different types of sensors in Section \[chapter2:CAF\]. Based on the popularity of the data sources supported by each solution, we selected the following classification. (P) denotes that the solution supports only physical sensors. Software sensors (S) denotes that the solution supports either virtual sensors, logical sensors or both. (A) denotes that the solution supports all kinds of data sources (i.e. physical, virtual, and logical). (M) denotes that the solution supports mobile devices.
### **Quality of Context** {#chapter2:CDLC:ESRF:QCRV}
We denote the presence of conflict resolution functionality using (C) and context validation functionality using (V). Conflict resolution is critical in the context management domain [@P310]. There has to be a consistency in collecting , aggregating, modelling, and reasoning. In the IoT paradigm, context may not be accurate. There are two reasons for context information not to be certain. First is that the sensor technology is not capable of producing 100% accurate sensor data due to various technical and environmental challenges. Secondly, even with sensors that produce 100% accurate sensor data, reasoning models are not 100% accurate. In summary, problems in sensor technology and problems in reasoning techniques contribute to context conflicts. There are two types of context conflicts that can occurred and they are defined in [@P310]:
Internal context conflict: Fusing two or more context elements that characterises the situation from different dimensions of the same observed entity in a given moment may lead to internal context conflict. (e.g. motion sensor detects that a user is in the kitchen and calendar shows that the user is supposed to be in a meeting. Therefore, it is unable to correctly deduce the current location by fusing two data sources: calendar and motion sensor.)
External context conflicts: The context conflict/inconsistency that may occur between two or more bits of context that describe the situation of an observed entity from the same point of view. (e.g. two motion sensors located in the same area provide two completely different readings, where one sensor detects a person and other sensor detects three people.)
Context validation ensures that collected data is correct and meaningful. Possible validations are checks for range, limit, logic, data type, cross-system consistency, uniqueness, cardinality, consistency, data source quality, security, and privacy.
[ c l m[11cm]{} ]{} & Taxonomy & Description\
5 & Modelling & Key-value modelling (K), Markup schemes (M), Graphical modelling (G), Object oriented modelling (Ob), Logic-based modelling (L), and Ontology-based modelling (On)\
6 & Reasoning & Supervised learning (S), Un-supervised learning (U), rules (R), Fuzzy logic (F), Ontology-based (O), and Probabilistic reasoning (P)\
7 & Distribution & Publish/subscribe (P) and Query (Q)\
8 & Architecture & Component based architecture (1) , Distributed architecture (2), Service based architecture (3), Node based architecture (4) , Centralised architecture (5), Client-server architecture (6)\
9 & History and Storage & Available ($\checkmark$)\
10 & Knowledge Management & Available ($\checkmark$)\
11 & Event Detection & Available ($\checkmark$)\
12 & Context Discovery and Annotation & context Discovery (D) and context Annotation (A)\
13 & Level of Context Awareness & High level (H) and Low level (L).\
14 & Security and Privacy & Available ($\checkmark$)\
15 & Data Source Support & Physical sensors (P), Software sensors (S), Mobile devices (M), Any type of sensor (A)\
16 & Quality of Context & Conflict resolution (C), context Validation (V)\
17 & Data Processing & Aggregate (A), Filter (F)\
18 & Dynamic Composition & Available ($\checkmark$)\
19 & Real Time Processing & Available ($\checkmark$)\
20 & Registry Maintenance & Available ($\checkmark$)\
\[Tbl:Summarized taxonmy\]
### **Data Processing**
We denote the presence of context aggregation functionality using (A) and context filter functionality using (F). Aggregation can be explained in different ways; for example, Context Toolkit [@P143] has a dedicated component called context aggregator to collect data related to a specific entity (e.g. person) from different context sources and act as a proxy to context applications. They do not perform any complex operations; just collect similar information together. This is one of the simplest forms of aggregation of context.
Context filter functionality makes sure the reasoning engine processes only important data. Specially in IoT, processing all the data collected by all the sensors is not possible due to scale. Therefore, IoT solutions should process only selected amounts of data that allows it to understand context accurately. Filtering functionality can be presented in different solutions in different forms: filter data, filter context sources, or filter events. Filtering helps both at the low (hardware) level and software level. At the hardware level, it helps to reduce the network communication cost by transmitting only important data. At the high-level, filtering can save process energy by only processing important data.
Context processing can be classified into three categories (also called layers) [@P185]. Typical methods and techniques used in each layer are also presented as follows:
*Activity and context recognition layer*: Feature extraction, classification, clustering, fuzzy rules
*Context and representation layer*: Conceptual models, logic programming, ontology based representation and reasoning, databases and query languages, rule based representation and reasoning, cased based representation and reasoning, representing uncertainty, procedural programming
*Application and adaptation layer*: Rules, query languages, procedural programming
Data fusion, which is also considered a data processing technique, is critical in understanding sensor data. In order to lay a solid foundation to our discussion, we adopt the definition provided by Hall and Llinas [@P248] on sensor data fusion. *“Sensor data fusion is a method of combining sensor data from multiple sensors to produce more accurate, more complete, and more dependable information that could not be possible to achieve through a single sensor [@P248].”* For example, in positioning, GPS does not work indoors. In contrast, there are a variety of other indoor positioning schemes that can be used. Therefore, in order to continuously track the positioning regardless of indoor or outdoor, sensor data fusion is essential [@P115]. Data fusion methods, models, and classification techniques in the wireless sensor networks domain are comprehensively surveyed in [@P130].
In order to identify context, it is possible to combine data from different data sources. For example, consider a situation where we want to identify the location of a user. The possible sources that can be used to collect evidence regarding the location are GPS sensors, motion sensor, calendar, email, social networking services, chat clients, ambient sound (sound level, pattern), users nearby, camera sensors, etc. This long list shows the possible alternatives. It is always a tradeoff between required resource (e.g. processing power, response time) and accuracy. Processing and combining all the above sensor readings would produce a more accurate result; however, it would require more resources and time. There is a significant gap between low-level sensor readings and high-level ‘situation-awareness’ [@P287]. Collecting low-level sensor data is becoming significantly easier and cheaper than ever due to advances in sensing technology. As a result, enormous amounts of sensor data (e.g. big data [@ZMP003]) is available. In order to understand big data, a variety of different reasoning techniques need to employed as we discussed in Section \[chapter2:CAF:Context Reasoning Decision Models\].
### **Dynamic Composition**
As explained in Solar [@P569], IoT solutions must have a programming model that allows dynamic composition without requiring the developer or user to identify specific sensors and devices. Dynamic organising is critical in environments like the IoT, because it is impossible to identify or plan possible interaction at the development stage. Software solutions should be able to understand the requirements and demands on each situation, then organise and structure its internal components according to them. Components such as reasoning models, data fusion operators, knowledge bases, and context discovery components can be dynamically composed according to the needs. The symbol ($\checkmark$) denoted the presence of dynamic composition functionality in the project in some form. \[chapter2:CDLC:ESRE:Dynamic\_Composition\]
\[t!\]
[ m[1.9cm]{} c m[0.25cm]{} c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c ]{}
Project Name &
Citations
& Year &
Project Focus
&
Modelling
&
Reasoning
&
Distribution
&
Architecture
&
History and Storage
&
Knowledge Management
&
Event Detection
&
Context Discovery and Annotation
&
Level of Context Awareness
&
Security and Privacy
&
Data Source Support
&
Quality of Context
&
Data Processing
&
Dynamic Composition
&
Real Time Processing
&
Registry Maintenance
\
\(1) & (2) & (3) & (4) &(5) & (6)& (7)& (8)& (9) & (10) & (11) & (12) & (13) & (14) & (15) & (16) & (17) & (18) & (19) & (20)\
\
Context Toolkit & [@P143] & 2001 & T & K & $\checkmark$ & Q & 1,5 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
Solar & [@P569] & 2002 & M & K,M,Ob & R & P & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & $\checkmark$ & P & $\checkmark$ & A & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}\
Aura & [@P555] & 2002 & M & M & R & P & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
\
CoOL & [@P190] & 2003 & T & On & R,O & Q & 1 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& S & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
CARISMA & [@P386] & 2003 & M & M & R & Q & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& H & [–]{}& M & C & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
CoBrA & [@P419] & 2004 & M & On & R,O & Q & 1 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & $\checkmark$ & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
Gaia & [@P444] & 2004 & M & F,On & S,P, F & Q & 2,3 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D & H & $\checkmark$ & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
SOCAM & [@P570] & 2004 & M & On & R,O & Q,P & 3 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
\
CARS & [@P311] & 2005 & S & K & U & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & A & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
CASN & [@P288] & 2005 & M & F,On & F,O & P & 2 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& D & L & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
SCK & [@P332] & 2005 & M & M,On & R,O & Q & 1 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & A,D & H & [–]{}& A & V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
TRAILBLAZER & [@P305] & 2005 & S & K & R & Q & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& D & L & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
BIONETS & [@P316] & 2006 & M & On & R,O & Q & 1 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& A & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
PROCON & [@P278] & 2006 & S & K & R & Q & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & L & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& A,F & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
CMF (MAGNET) & [@P344] & 2006 & M & M & R & P,Q & 2,4 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}& D & H & [–]{}& A & C & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}\
e-SENSE & [@P266] & 2006 & M & [–]{}& R & Q & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& D & H & $\checkmark$ & P & [–]{}& F & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
HCoM & [@P336] & 2007 & M & G,On & R,O & Q & 5 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& D & H & [–]{}& S & V & F & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
CMS & [@P340] & 2007 & M & On & O & P,Q & [1,2]{} & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & S & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
MoCA & [@P338] & 2007 & M & M,Ob & O & P,Q & [4,5]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & $\checkmark$ & A & V & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$\
CaSP & [@P317] & 2007 & M & M,On & O & P,Q & 6 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}& D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
SIM & [@P349] & 2007 & M & K,G & R & [–]{}& 2 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& H & [–]{}& P & C & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
— & [@P335] & 2007 & M & On & O & Q & [ ]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& P & V & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
COSMOS & [@P403] & 2008 & M & Ob & R & Q & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& A & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
DMS-CA & [@P308] & 2008 & S & M & R & Q & 5 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
CDMS & [@P293] & 2008 & M & K,M & R & Q & 2 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A,F & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
— & [@P197] & 2008 & M & On & O,P & Q & 5 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& D & H & [–]{}& [–]{}& V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
— & [@P333] & 2008 & M & On & R,O & P,Q & 5 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
AcoMS & [@P339] & 2008 & M & M,G,On & R,O & P & 5 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & A & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
CROCO & [@P334] & 2008 & M & On & R,O & Q & [ ]{} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& D & H & $\checkmark$ & A & C,V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
EmoCASN & [@P274] & 2008 & S & K & R & Q & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& D & L & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
\
Hydra & [@P105] & 2009 & M & K,On,Ob & R,O & Q & 3 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & $\checkmark$ & P & V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
UPnP & [@P300] & 2009 & M & K,M & R & Q & 4 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & $\checkmark$ & A & [–]{}& A & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
COSAR & [@P187] & 2009 & M & On & S,O & Q & 5 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & A & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
SPBCA & [@P420] & 2009 & M & On & R,O & Q & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & A & H & $\checkmark$ & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
C-CAST & [@P280] & 2009 & M & M & R & P,Q & 5 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
— & [@P312] & 2009 & M & On & O & P & 5 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
CDA & [@P341] & 2009 & M & Ob & [–]{}& Q & [4,6]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& H & [–]{}& V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
SALES & [@P314] & 2009 & M & M & R & Q & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & L & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& F & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
MidSen & [@P275] & 2009 & M & K & R & P,Q & 5 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
\
SCONSTREAM & [@P309] & 2010 & S & G & R & Q & 5 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}\
— & [@P328] & 2010 & M & M & P & Q & [2,4]{} & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& F & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}\
Feel@Home & [@P346] & 2010 & M & G,On & O & P,Q & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & $\checkmark$ & A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
CoMiHoC & [@P347] & 2010 & M & Ob & R,P & Q & 5 & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
Intelligibility & [@P384] & 2010 & T & [–]{}& R,S,P & Q & [1,5]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & V & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}\
ezContext & [@P294] & 2010 & M & K,Ob & R & Q & 5 & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
UbiQuSE & [@P322] & 2010 & M & M & R & Q & 5 & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D,A & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & [–]{}\
COPAL & [@P571] & 2010 & M & M & R & P,Q & [1,5]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & $\checkmark$ & & V & A,F & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$\
\
Octopus & [@P285] & 2011 & S & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & P & [2,4]{} & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & D & H & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& A & $\checkmark$ & [–]{}& [–]{}\
— & [@P327] & 2011 & M & [–]{}& $\checkmark$ & P & 2 & [–]{}& [–]{}& [–]{}& D & H & [–]{}& P & [–]{}& A & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
— & [@P289] & 2011 & S & K,Ob & S,P & & [2,4]{} & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & D,A & H & [–]{}& M & V & A,F & [–]{}& [–]{}& $\checkmark$\
### **Real Time Processing**
Most of the interactions are expected to be processed in real time in the IoT. This functionality has been rarely addressed by the research community in the context-aware computing domain. The most important real time processing task is event detection as we explained in Section \[chapter2:CDLC:ESRF:Event\_Detection\]. However, context reasoning, and query processing can also be considered as essential real time processing tasks. Real time processing solutions are focused on processing faster than traditional methods, which allows sensor stream data processing [@P309]. The symbol ($\checkmark$) denoted the presence of real time processing functionality in some form.
### **Registry Maintenance and Lookup Services**
We use the ($\checkmark$) symbol to denote the presence of registry maintenance and lookup services functionality in the project. This functionality allows different components such as context sources, data fusion operators, knowledge bases, and context consumers to be registered. This functionality is also closely related to dynamic composition where it needs to select relevant and matching components to be composed together. Registries need to be updated to reflect (dis)appearing components.
Evaluation of Research Efforts {#chapter2:CDLC:Evaluation of Surveyed Research Efforts2 }
------------------------------
**Context Toolkit** [@P143] aims to facilitating development and deployment of context-aware applications. This is one of the earliest efforts of providing framework support for context-aware application development. Context Toolkit contains a combination of features and abstractions to support context-aware application developers. It introduces three main abstractions: context widget (to retrieve data from sensors), context interpreter (to reason sensor data using different reasoning techniques), and context aggregator. The research around Context Toolkit is still active and a number of extensions have been developed to enhance its context-aware capabilities. Enactor [@P393] provides a context decision modelling facility to the Context Toolkit. Further, the Intelligibility Toolkit [@P384] extends the Enactor framework by supporting more decision models for context reasoning. Context Toolkit identifies the common features required by context-aware applications as capture and access of context, storage, distribution, and independent execution from applications.
**Aura** [@P555] is a task oriented system based on distributed architecture which focuses on different computational devices used by human users every day. The objective is to run a set of applications called *personal aura* in all devices in order to manage user tasks in a context-aware fashion across all the devices smoothly. Aura addresses two major challenges. First, aura allows a user to preserve continuity in his/her work when moving between different environments. Second, it is capable of adapting to the on-going computation of a particular environment in the presence of dynamic resource variability. Aura consists of four major components: context observer (collects context and send it to task and environment managers), task manager (also called prism, four different kinds of changes: user moves to another environment, environment, task, and context), environment manager (handles context suppliers and related service), and context suppliers (provides context information). XML based markup schemes are used to describe services. .
**CARISMA** [@P386] (Context-Aware Reflective middleware System for Mobile Applications) is focused on mobile systems where they are extremely dynamic. Adaptation (also called reflection) is the main focus of CARISMA. context is stored as application profiles (XML based), which allows each application to maintain meta-data under two categories: passive and active. The passive category defines actions that middleware would take when specific events occur using rules, such as shutting down if battery is low. However, conflicts could arise when two profiles defines rules that conflict each other. The active category allows relationships to be maintained between services used by the application, the policies, and context configurations. This information tells how to behave under different environmental and user conditions. A conflict resolution mechanism is also introduced in CARISMA based on macroeconomic techniques. An auction protocol is used to handle the resolution as they support greater degrees of heterogeneity over other alternatives. In simple terms, rules are used in auctions with different constraints imposed on the bidding by different agents (also called applications). Final decisions are made in order to maximise the social welfare among the agents.
**CoBrA** [@P419] (Context Broker Architecture) is a broker-centric agent architecture that provides knowledge sharing and context reasoning for smart spaces. It is specially focused on smart meeting places. CoBrA addresses two major issues: supporting resource-limited mobile computing devices and addressing concerns over user privacy. Context information is modelled using OWL ontologies. Context brokers are the main elements of CoBrA. A context broker comprises the following four functional components: context knowledge base (provides persistent storage for context information), context reasoning engine (performs reasoning over context information stored in storage), context acquisition module (retrieve context from context sources), and policy management module (manages policies, such as who has access to what data). Even though the architecture is centralised, several brokers can work together through a broker federation. Context knowledge is represented in Resource Description Framework (RDF) triples using Jena.
**Gaia** [@P444] is a distributed context infrastructure uncertainty based reasoning. Ontologies are used to represented context information. Gaia has employed a Prolog based probabilistic reasoning framework. The architecture of Gaia consists of six key components: context provider (data acquisition from sensors or other data sources), context consumer (different parties who are interest in context), context synthesiser (generate high-level context information using raw low-level context), context provider lookup service (maintains a detailed registry of context providers so the appropriate context providers can be found based on their capabilities when required), context history service (stores history of context), and ontology server (maintains different ontologies).
**SOCAM** [@P570] (Service Oriented Context-Aware Middleware) is an ontology based context-aware middleware. It separates the ontologies into two levels: upper level ontology for general concepts and lower level ontologies domain specific descriptions. SOCAM architecture comprises several key components: context provider (acquires data from sensors and other internal and external data sources and converts the context in to OWL representation), context interpreter (performs reasoning using reasoning engine and stores the processed context information in the knowledge base), context-aware services (context consumers), and services locating service (context providers and interpreter are allowed to register so other components can search for appropriates providers and interpreters based on their capabilities).
**e-SENSE** [@P266] enables ambient intelligence using wireless multi-sensor networks for making context-rich information available to applications and services. e-SENSE combines body sensor networks (BSN), object sensor networks (OSN), and environment sensor networks (ESN) to capture context in the IoT paradigm. The features required by context-aware IoT middleware solutions are identified as sensor data capturing, data pre-filtering, context abstraction data source integration, context extraction, rule engine, and adaptation.
**HCoM** [@P336] (Hybrid Context Management) is a hybrid approach which combines semantic ontology and relational schemas. This approach claims that standard database management systems alone cannot be used to manage context. In contrast, semantic ontologies may not perform well in terms of efficiency and query processing with large volumes of data. So the hybrid approach is required. HCoM architecture consists of five layers: acquisition layer, pre-processing layer, data modelling and storage layer, management modelling layer, and utilising layer. HCoM has identified several key requirements that a context management solution should have that are encapsulated in several components: context manager (aggregates the results and sends the data to reasoning engine), collaboration manager (if context selector decides the existing context information is not sufficient to perform reasoning, the collaboration manager attempts to gather more data from other possible context sources), context filter (once the context is received, it validates and decide whether it needs to be stored in RCDB), context selector (based on the user request, it decides what context should be used in reasoning processing based on the accuracy, time, and required computational resources), context-onto (manages the ontologies and acts as a repository), rules and policy (users are allowed to add rules to the system), RCDB (stores the captured context in a standard database management system), rule-mining (a data base that consists of rules that tell what actions to perform when), and interfaces (provides interface to the context consumers).
**MoCA** [@P338] is a service based distributed middleware that employs ontologies to model and manage context. The primary conceptual component is context domain. The context management node (CMN) is infrastructure that is responsible for managing the context domain. Similar to most of the other context management solutions, the three key components in MoCA are: context providers (responsible for generating or retrieving context from other sources available to be used by the context management system), context consumers (consume the context gathered and processed by the system), and context service (responsible for receiving, storing, and disseminating context information). MoCA uses an object oriented model for context handling, instead of an ontology-based model due to the weaknesses posed by ontologies in terms of scalability and performance. XML is used to model context. The XML files are fed into the context tool in order to check validation. Then the program codes are generated automatically to acquire data. These program codes will acquire context and insert the data into context repositories.
**CaSP** [@P317] (Context-aware Service Platform) is a context gathering framework for mobile solutions based on middleware architecture. The platform provides six different functionalities: context sensing, context modelling, context association, context storage, and retrieval. The paper also provides a comprehensive evaluation of existing context sensing solutions. CaSP consists of typical context management components which handle the mentioned functionalities.
**SIM** [@P349] (Sensor Information Management) is focused on the smart home domain which addresses location tracking. SIM uses an agent based architecture according to the standard specifications provided in Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents. Its emphasis is on collecting sensor data from multiple sources and aggregating them together to analyse and derive more accurate information. SIM collects two types of information: node level and attribute level. In node level, node ID, location, and priority are collected. Attributes are stored in attribute information base comprising attribute and the corresponding measurement. A location tracking algorithm has been introduced using a mobile positioning device. A position manager handles tracking. SIM has the capability to resolve conflicts in sensor information based on sensor priority. Conflict resolution is handled by a context manager with the help of aggregation, classification, and decision components. Even though SIM is not focused on hardware level context management, the approach is closer to low-level instead of high-level compared to other projects.
**COSMOS** [@P403] is middleware that enables the processing of context information in ubiquitous environments. COSMOS consists of three layers: context collector (collects information from the sensors), context processing (derives high level information from raw sensor data), and context adaptation (provides access to the processed context for the applications). In contrast to the other context solutions, the components of COSMOS are context nodes. In COSMOS, each piece of context information is defined as a context node. COSMOS can support any number of context nodes which are organised into hierarchies. Context node is an independently operated module that consists of its own activity manager, context processor, context reasoner, context configurator, and message managers. Therefore, COSMOS follows distributed architecture which increases the scalability of the middleware.
**DMS-CA** [@P308] (Data Management System-Context Architecture) is based on smart building domain. XML is used to define rules, contexts, and services. Further, an event driven rule checking technique is used to reason context. Rules can be configured by mobile devices and push them to the server to be used by the rule checking engine. Providing a mobile interface to build rules and queries is important in a dynamic and mobile environment such as the IoT.
**ACoMS** [@P339] (Autonomic Context Management System) can dynamically configure and reconfigure its context information acquisition and pre-processing functionality to perform fault tolerant provisioning of context information. ACoMS architecture comprises application context subscription manager stores (manages context information requests from the applications using a subscribe mechanism), context source manager (performs actions such as low-level communication with context sources, context source discovery, registration, and configuration), and reconfiguration manager (performs monitoring tasks such as mapping context sources to context information).
**CROCO** [@P334] (CROss application COntext management) is an ontology based context modelling and management service. CROCO identifies several requirements to be a cross application, such as application plug-in capability. CROCO has three responsibilities where they are distributed among three separate layers: data management (perform operations such as storing inferred data for historic use, develop and maintain fact database), consistency checking and reasoning (consistency manager is responsible for checking the consistency, such as data types, and cardinality when sensor data arrives before it is feed in to reasoning or storage; reasoning manager performs reasoning based on the facts stored in the fact data base), and context update and provision (allows context consumers to register themselves, retrieve context from context sources, and provide query interface to the consumers).
**EMoCASN** [@P274] (Environment Monitoring Oriented Context Aware Sensor Networks) proposes a context-aware model for sensor networks (CASN). This modelling approach is narrowly focused on managing sensor networks using low level context such as node context, task context, and data context. For example, CASN uses low level context such as remaining energy of a node, location of the sensor, and orientation of the sensor to decide energy efficient routing.
**Hydra**[^6] [@P105] is an IoT middleware that aims to integrate wireless devices and sensors into ambient intelligence systems. Hydra comprises a Context Aware Framework (CAF). CAF provides the capabilities of both high-level, powerful reasoning, based on the use of ontologies and lower-level semantic processing based on object-oriented/key-value approach. CAF consists of two main components: Data Acquisition Component (DAqC) and the Context Manager (CM). DAqC is responsible for connecting and retrieving data from sensors. CM is responsible for context management, context awareness, and context interpretation. A rule engine called Drools platform [@P395] has been employed as the core context reasoning mechanism. CAF models three distinct types of context: device contexts (e.g. data source), semantic contexts (e.g. location, environment, and entity), and application contexts (e.g. domain specific). Hydra identifies context reasoning rule engine, context storage, context querying, and event/action management as the key components of a context-aware framework.
**C-Cast** [@P280] is middleware that integrates WSN into context-aware systems by addressing context acquisition, dissemination, representation, recognising, and reasoning about context and situations. C-Cast lays its architecture on four layers: sensor, context detection, context acquisition, and application. In C-Cast, context providers (CP) are the main components. Each context provider handles one task. For example, WeatherCP collects weather information and Address-bookCP collects related addresses. Any amount of CPs can be added to the system to extend the system wide functionality. Each context provider independently handles data acquisition, context processing (e.g. filter and aggregate context), context provider management (e.g. handles subscriptions), and context access and dissemination (e.g. handles queries). C-Cast claims that complex reasoning and intuitive reasoning can only be achieved by using rich representation models. In contrast, C-CAST avoids using ontologies to model context claiming ontologies are too resource intensive.
**SALES** [@P314] (Scalable context-Aware middleware for mobiLe EnviromentS) is a context-aware middleware that achieves scalability in context dissemination. The main components of this middleware are nodes. These nodes are not sensor nodes but servers, computers, laptops, PDAs, and mobile phones. SALES consists of four types of nodes. XML schemes are used to store and transfer context.
**MidSen** [@P275] is context-aware middleware for WSN. The system is based on Event-Condition-Action (ECA) rules. It highlights the importance of efficient event detection by processing two algorithms: event detection algorithm (EDA) and context-aware service discovery algorithm (CASDA). MidSen has proposed a complete architecture to enable context awareness in WSN. It consists of the following key components: knowledge manager, application notifiers, knowledge base, inference engine, working memory, application interface, and network interface.
**Feel@Home** [@P346] is a context management framework that supports interaction between different domains. The proposed approach is demonstrated using three domains: smart home, smart office, and mobile. The context information is stored using OWL [@P148]. Feel@Home supports two different interactions: intra-domain and cross domain. The cross domain interaction is essential in the IoT paradigm. Further, this is one of the major differences between sensor networks and the IoT. Sensor networks usually only deal with one domain. However, IoT demands the capability of dealing with multiple domains. In addition, context management frameworks should not be limited to a specific number of domains. Feel@Home consists of three parts: user queries, global administration server (GAS), and domain context manager (DCM). User queries are first received by GAS. It decides what the relevant domain needs to be contacted to answer the user query. Then, GAS redirects the user query to the relevant domain context managers. Two components reside in GAS, context entry manager (CEM) and context entry engine (CEE), which performs the above task. DCM consists of typical context management components such as context wrapper (gathers context from sensors and other sources), context aggregator (triggers context reasoning), context reasoning, knowledge base (stores context), and several other components to manage user queries, publish/subscribe mechanism. The answers to the user query will return by using the same path as when received.
**CoMiHoc** [@P347] (Context Middleware for ad-HoC network) is a middleware framework that supports context management and situation reasoning. CoMiHoc proposes a CoMoS (Context Mobile Spaces), a context modeling, and situation reasoning mechanism that extends the context spaces [@P195]. CoMiHoc uses Java Dempster-Shafer library [@P441]. CoMiHoc architecture comprises six components: context provisioner, request manager, situation reasoner, location reasoner, communication manager, and On-Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP).
**ezContext** [@P294] is a framework that provides automatic context life cycle management. ezContext comprises several components: context source (any source that provides context, either physical sensors, databases or web service), context provider (retrieves context from various sources whether in push (passive) or pull (active) method, context manager (manages context modelling, storage and producing high-level context using low-level context), context wrapper (encapsulate retrieved context into correct format, in this approach, key-value pairs), and providers’ registry (maintains list of context providers and their capabilities). JavaBeans are used as the main data format.
**Octopus** [@P285] is an open-source, dynamically extensible system that supports data management and fusion for IoT applications. Octopus develops middleware abstractions and programming models for the IoT. It enables non-specialised developers to deploy sensors and applications without detailed knowledge of the underlying technologies and network. Octopus is focused on the smart home/office domain and its main component is *solver*. Solver is a module that performs sensor data fusion operations. Solvers can be added and removed from the system at any time based on requirements. Further solvers can be combined together dynamically to build complex operations.
Lessons Learned {#chapter2:LL}
===============
### Development Aids and Practices
### Mobility, Validity, and Sharing
### On Demand Data Modelling
### Hybrid Reasoning
### Hardware Layer Support
### Dynamic Configuration and Extensions
### Distributed Processing
### Other Aspects
Challenges and Future Research Directions {#chapter2:LLFRD}
=========================================
As we mentioned earlier, one of our goal in this survey is to understand how context-aware computing can be applied in the IoT paradigm based on past experience. Specifically, we evaluated fifty context-aware projects and highlighted the lessons we can learn from them in the IoT perspective. In this section our objective is to discuss six unique challenges in the IoT where novel techniques and solution may need to be employed.
### Automated configuration of sensors {#chapter2:LLFRD:Automated_configuration_of_sensors}
In traditional pervasive/ubiquitous computing, we connect only a limited number of sensors to the applications (e.g. smart farm, smart home). In contrast, the IoT envisions billions of sensors to be connected together over the Internet. As a result, a unique challenge would arise on connection and configuration of sensors to applications. Due to the scale, it is not feasible to connect sensors manually to an application or to a middleware [@ZMP005]. There has to be an automated or at least semi-automated process to connect sensors to applications. In order to accomplish this task, applications should be able to understand the sensors (e.g. sensors’ capabilities, data structures they produce, hardware/driver level configuration details). Recent developments such as Transducer Electronic Data Sheet (TEDS) [@P258], Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Sensor Web Enablement related standards such as Sensor Markup Languages (SensorML) [@P256], sensor ontologies [@P103], and immature but promising efforts such as Sensor Device Definitions [@ZMP002] show future directions to carry out the research work further, in order to tackle this challenge.
### Context discovery
Once we connect sensors to a software solution, as mentioned above, there has to be a method to understand the sensor data produced by the sensors and the related context automatically. We discussed context categorisation techniques comprehensively in Section \[chapter2:CAF:context Types\]. There are many types of context that can be used to enrich sensor data. However, understanding sensor data and appropriately annotating it automatically in a paradigm such as the IoT, where application domains vary widely, is a challenging task. Recent developments in semantic technologies [@P191; @P103; @P088] and linked data [@P520; @P068] show future directions to carry out further research work. Semantic technology is popularly used to encode domain knowledge.
### Acquisition, modelling, reasoning, and distribution
After analysing acquisition, modelling, and reasoning in different perspectives, it is evident that no single technique would serve the requirements of the IoT. Incorporating and integrating multiple techniques has shown promising success in the field. Some of the early work such as [@P216; @P463] have discussed the process in detail. However, due to the immaturity of the field of IoT, it is difficult to predict when and where to employ each technique. Therefore, it is important to define and follow a standard specification so different techniques can be added to the solutions without significant effort. Several design principles have been proposed by [@P143; @P384] as a step towards standardisation of components and techniques. The inner-workings of each technique can be different from one solution to another. However, common standard interfaces will insure the interoperability among techniques.
### Selection of sensors in sensing-as-a-service model
This is going to be one of the toughest challenges in the IoT. It is clear that we are going to have access to billions of sensors. In such an environment, there could be many different alternative sensors to be used. For example, let us consider a situation where an environmental scientist wants to measure environmental pollution in New York city. There are two main problems: (1) ‘what sensors provide information about pollution?’ [@ZMP004] (2) when there are multiple sensors that can measure the same parameter (e.g. pH concentration in a lake), ‘what sensor should be used?’ [@ZMP006] In order to answer question (1), domain knowledge needs to be incorporate with the IoT solution. Manually selecting the sensors that will provide information about environmental pollution is not feasible in the IoT due to its scale. In order to answer question (2), quality frameworks need to be defined and employed. Such a framework should be able to rank the sensors based on factors such as accuracy, relevancy, user feedback, reliability, cost, and completeness. Similar challenges have been addressed in the web service domain during the last decade [@P563; @P564] where we can learn from those efforts.
### Security, privacy, and trust
This has been a challenge for context-aware computing since the beginning. The advantage of context is that it provides more meaningful information that will help us understand a situation or data. At the same time, it increases the security threats due to possible misuse of the context (e.g. identity, location, activity, and behaviour). However, the IoT will increase this challenge significantly. Even though security and privacy issues are addressed at the context-aware application level, it is largely unattended at the context-aware middleware level. In the IoT, security and privacy need to be protected in several layers: sensor hardware layer, sensor data communication (protocol) layer, context annotation and context discovery layer, context modelling layer, and the context distribution layer. IoT is a community based approach where the acceptance of the users (e.g. general public) is essential. Therefore, security and privacy protection requirements need to be carefully addressed in order to win the trust of the users.
### Context Sharing {#chapter2:LLFRD:Context_Data_Sharing}
This is largely neglected in the context-aware middleware domain. Most of the middleware solutions or architectures are designed to facilitate applications in isolated factions. Inter-middleware communication is not considered to be a critical requirement. However, in the IoT, there would be no central point of control. Different middleware solutions developed by different parties will be employed to connect to sensors, collect, model, and reason context. Therefore, sharing context information between different kinds of middleware solutions or different instances of the same middleware solution is important. Sensor data stream processing middleware solutions such as GSN [@P050] have employed this capability to share sensor data among different instances (e.g. installed and configured in different computers and locations) where context is not the focus. However, in contrast to sensor data, context information has strong relationships between each other (e.g. context modelled using RDF). Therefore, relationship models also need to be transferred and shared among different solutions, which enables the receiver to understand and model the context accurately at the receivers end.
Conclusions {#chapter2:Conclusions}
===========
The IoT has gained significant attention over the last few years. With the advances in sensor hardware technology and cheap materials, sensors are expected to be attached to all the objects around us, so these can communicate with each other with minimum human intervention. Understanding sensor data is one of the main challenges that the IoT would face. This vision has been supported and heavily invested by governments, interest groups, companies, and research institutes. For example, context awareness has been identified as an important IoT research need by the Cluster of European Research Projects on the IoT (CERP-IoT) [@P019] funded by the European Union. The EU has allocated a time frame for research and development into context-aware computing focused on the IoT to be carried out during 2015-2020.
In this survey paper, we analysed and evaluated context-aware computing research efforts to understand how the challenges in the field of context-aware computing have been tackled in desktop, web, mobile, sensor networks, and pervasive computing paradigms. A large number of solutions exist in terms of systems, middleware, applications, techniques, and models proposed by researchers to solve different challenges in context-aware computing. We also discussed some of the trends in the field that were identified during the survey. The results clearly show the importance of context awareness in the IoT paradigm. Our ultimate goal is to build a foundation that helps us to understand what has happened in the past so we can plan for the future more efficiently and effectively.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
Authors acknowledge support from SSN TCP, CSIRO, Australia and ICT OpenIoT Project, which is co-funded by the European Commission under seventh framework program, contract number FP7-ICT-2011-7-287305-OpenIoT. The Author(s) acknowledge help and contributions from The Australian National University.
[Charith Perera]{} received his BSc (Hons) in Computer Science in 2009 from Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom and MBA in Business Administration in 2012 from University of Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom. He is currently pursing his PhD in Computer Science at The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. He is also working at Information Engineering Laboratory, ICT Centre, CSIRO and involved in OpenIoT Project (Open source blueprint for large scale self organizing cloud environments for IoT applications), which is co-funded by the European Commission under seventh framework program. His research interests include Internet of Things, pervasive and ubiquitous computing with a focus on sensor networks, middleware, context aware computing, mobile computing and semantic technologies. He is a member of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
[Arkady Zaslavsky]{} is the Science Leader of the Semantic Data Management science area at Information Engineering Laboratory, ICT Centre, CSIRO. He is also holding positions of Adjunct Professor at ANU, Research Professor at LTU and Adjunct Professor at UNSW. He is currently involved and is leading a number of European and national research projects. Before coming to CSIRO in July 2011, he held a position of a Chaired Professor in Pervasive and Mobile Computing at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden where he was involved in a number of European research projects, collaborative projects with Ericsson Research, PhD supervision and postgraduate education. Between 1992 and 2008 Arkady was a full-time academic staff member at Monash University, Australia. Arkady made internationally recognised contribution in the area of disconnected transaction management and replication in mobile computing environments, context-awareness as well as in mobile agents. He made significant internationally recognised contributions in the areas of data stream mining on mobile devices, adaptive mobile computing systems, ad-hoc mobile networks, efficiency and reliability of mobile computing systems, mobile agents and mobile file systems. Arkady received MSc in Applied Mathematics majoring in Computer Science from Tbilisi State University (Georgia, USSR) in 1976 and PhD in Computer Science from the Moscow Institute for Control Sciences (IPU-IAT), USSR Academy of Sciences in 1987. Before coming to Australia in 1991, Arkady worked in various research positions at industrial R&D labs as well as at the Institute for Computational Mathematics of Georgian Academy of Sciences where he lead a systems software research laboratory. Arkady Zaslavsky has published more than 300 research publications throughout his professional career and supervised to completion more than 30 PhD students. Arkady Zaslavsky is a Senior Member of ACM, a member of IEEE Computer and Communication Societies.
[Peter Christen]{} is an Associate Professor in the Research School of Computer Science at the Australian National University. He received his Diploma in Computer Science Engineering from ETH Zürich in 1995 and his PhD in Computer Science from the University of Basel in 1999 (both in Switzerland). His research interests are in data mining and data matching (entity resolution). He is especially interested in the development of scalable and real-time algorithms for data matching, and privacy and confidentiality aspects of data matching and data mining. He has published over 80 papers in these areas, including in 2012 the book ‘Data Matching’ (by Springer), and he is the principle developer of the *Febrl* (Freely Extensible Biomedical Record Linkage) open source data cleaning, deduplication and record linkage system.
[Dimitrios Georgakopoulos]{} is a Research Director at the CSIRO ICT Centre where he heads the Information Engineering Laboratory that is based in Canberra and Sydney. The laboratory has 70 researchers and more than 40 visiting scientists, students, and interns specializing in the areas of Service/Cloud Computing, Human Computer Interaction, Machine Learning, and Semantic Data Management. Dimitrios is also an Adjunct Professor at the Australian National University. Before coming to CSIRO in October 2008, Dimitrios held research and management positions in several industrial laboratories in the US. From 2000 to 2008, he was a Senior Scientist with Telcordia, where he helped found Telcordia’s Research Centers in Austin, Texas, and Poznan, Poland. From 1997 to 2000, Dimitrios was a Technical Manager in the Information Technology organization of Microelectronics and Computer Corporation (MCC), and the Chief Architect of MCC’s Collaboration Management Infrastructure (CMI) consortial project. From 1990-1997, Dimitrios was a Principal Scientist at GTE (currently Verizon) Laboratories Inc. Dimitrios has received a GTE (Verizon) Excellence Award, two IEEE Computer Society Outstanding Paper Awards, and was nominated for the Computerworld Smithsonian Award in Science. He has published more than one hundred journal and conference papers. Dimitrios is the Vice-Chair of the 12th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2013) in Sydney, Australia, 2013, and the General Co-Chair of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Collaborative Computing (CollaborateCom 2013) in Austin, Texas, USA, 2013. In 2011, Dimitrios was the General chair of the 12th International Conference on Web Information System Engineering (WISE), Sydney, Australia, and the 7th CollaborateCom, Orlando, Florida, October 2011. In 2007, he was the Program Chair of the 8th WISE in Nancy France, and the 3rd CollaborateCom in New York, USA. In 2005, he was the General chair of the 6th WISE in New York. In 2002, and he served as the General Chair of the 18th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) in San Jose, California. In 2001, he was the Program Chair of the 17th ICDE in Heidelberg, Germany. Before that he was the Program Chair of 1st International Conference on Work Activity Coordination (WACC) in San Francisco, California, 1999, and has served as Program Chair in a dozen smaller conferences and workshops.
[^1]: Charith Perera, Arkady Zaslavsky and Dimitrios Georgakopoulos are with the Information and Communication Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia (e-mail: [email protected])
[^2]: Peter Christen is with the Research School of Computer Science, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. (e-mail: [email protected])
[^3]: Manuscript received xxx xx, xxxx; revised xxx xx, xxxx.
[^4]: The term *‘context*’ implicitly provide the meaning of *‘information*’ according to the widely accepted definition provided by [@P104]. Therefore, it is inaccurate to use the term ‘*context information*’ where *‘information*’ is explicitly mentioned. However, research community and documents on the web frequently use the term ‘*context information*’. Therefore, we also use both terms interchangeably.
[^5]: We use both terms, ‘*objects*’ and ‘*things*’ interchangeably to give the same meaning as they are frequently used in IoT related documentation. Some other terms used by the research community are ‘smart objects’, ‘devices’, ‘nodes’.
[^6]: The name ‘Hydra’ has changes its name due to name conflict between another project registered under same name in Germany. The new name of the middleware is the ‘LinkSmart’ middleware.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We study limit models in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation and in the class of torsion-free abelian groups with the pure subgroup relation. We show:
1. If $G$ is a limit model of cardinality $\lambda$ in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation, then $G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty))$.
2. If $G$ is a limit model of cardinality $\lambda$ in the class of torsion-free abelian groups with the pure subgroup relation, then:
- If the length of the chain has uncountable cofinality, then $$G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}.$$
- If the length of the chain has countable cofinality, then $G$ is not algebraically compact.
We also study the class of finitely Butler groups with the pure subgroup relation, we show that it is an AEC, Galois-stable and $(<\aleph_0)$-tame and short.
address: |
Department of Mathematical Sciences\
Carnegie Mellon University\
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
author:
- 'Marcos Mazari-Armida'
date: '.'
title: Algebraic description of limit models in classes of abelian groups
---
[[^1]]{}
Introduction
============
Abstract elementary classes (AECs for short) were introduced in the late seventies by Shelah [@sh88] to capture the semantic structure of non-first-order theories, Shelah was interested in capturing logics like $\mathbb{L}_{\lambda^+, \omega}(\textbf{Q})$. The setting is general enough to encompass many examples, but it still allows a development of a rich theory as witnessed by Shelah’s two volume book on the subject [@shelahaecbook] and many dozens of publications by several researchers. As a first approximation, an AEC is a class of structures with morphisms that is closed under colimits and such that every set is contained in a small model in the class.
\[aec-def\] An *abstract elementary class* is a pair ${\mathbf{K}}= (K, {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}})$, where:
1. $K$ is a class of $\tau$-structures, for some fixed language $\tau = \tau ({\mathbf{K}})$.
2. ${{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}$ is a partial ordering on $K$.
3. $(K, {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}})$ respects isomorphisms: If $M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$ are in $K$ and $f: N \cong N'$, then $f[M] {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N'$. In particular (taking $M = N$), $K$ is closed under isomorphisms.
4. If $M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$, then $M \subseteq N$.
5. Coherence: If $M_0, M_1, M_2 \in K$ satisfy $M_0 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M_2$, $M_1 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M_2$, and $M_0 \subseteq M_1$, then $M_0 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M_1$.
6. Tarski-Vaught axioms: Suppose $\delta$ is a limit ordinal and $\{ M_i \in K : i < \delta \}$ is an increasing chain. Then:
1. $M_\delta := \bigcup_{i < \delta} M_i \in K$ and $M_i {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M_\delta$ for every $i < \delta$.
2. \[smoothness-axiom\]Smoothness: If there is some $N \in K$ so that for all $i < \delta$ we have $M_i {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$, then we also have $M_\delta {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$.
7. Löwenheim-Skolem-Tarski axiom: There exists a cardinal $\lambda \ge |\tau({\mathbf{K}})| + \aleph_0$ such that for any $M \in K$ and $A \subseteq |M|$, there is some $M_0 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M$ such that $A \subseteq |M_0|$ and $\|M_0\| \le |A| + \lambda$. We write ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})$ for the minimal such cardinal.
The main objective in the study of AECs is to develop a classification theory like the one of first-order model theory. The notions of non-forking, superstability and stability have been extended to this more general setting. The main test question is Shelah’s eventual categoricity conjecture which asserts that if an AEC is categorical in *some* large cardinal then it is categorical in *all* large cardinals. Many partial results have been obtained in this direction as witnessed by for example [@sh87a], [@sh87b], [@sh394], [@shelahaecbook], [@tamenesstwo], [@tamenessthree], [@bont], [@vaseye], [@vaseyf],[@vaseyu], [@vasey18] and [@shvas].[^2]
The notion of limit model was introduced in [@kosh] as a substitute for saturation in the non-elementary setting (see Definition \[limit\]). If $\lambda > {\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})$ is a regular cardinal and ${\mathbf{K}}$ is an AEC with joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models, then: $M$ is $\lambda$-Galois-saturated if and only if $M$ is a $(\lambda, \lambda)$-limit model ([@grva 2.8]).
Limit models have proven to be an important concept in tackling Shelah’s eventual categoricity conjecture as witnessed by for example [@shvi], [@tamenessone] and [@vasey18]. The key question has been the uniqueness of limit models of the same cardinality but with chains of different lengths. This has been studied thoroughly [@shvi], [@van06], [@grvavi], [@extendingframes], [@vand], [@bovan], [@viza] and [@vasey18]. In this same line, [@grva] and [@vas16a] showed that if a class has a monster model and is tame then uniqueness of limit models on a tail of cardinals is equivalent to being Galois-superstable[^3].
Despite the importance of limit models in the understanding of AECs, explicit examples have never been studied. This paper ends this by studying examples of limit models in some classes of abelian groups. The need to analyze examples is also motivated by the regular inquiry of the model theory community when presenting results on AECs. In particular, the analysis of limit models in the class of torsion-free abelian groups provides a missing example needed for[@bovan].
In this article, we study limit models in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation and in the class of torsion-free abelian groups with the pure subgroup relation[^4]. Observe that both classes are first-order axiomatizable, but since we are studying them with a strong substructure relation that is different from elementary substructure, their study is outside of the framework of first-order model theory. This freedom in choosing the strong substructure relation is a key feature of our examples and in the context of AECs has only been exploited in [@grp] and [@baldwine].
The case of limit models in the class of abelian groups is simple.
**Theorem \[abelian\].** *Let $\alpha < \lambda^+$ a limit ordinal. If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation, then we have that: $$G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty)).$$*
The case of torsion-free abelian groups (with the pure subgroup relation) is more interesting and the examination of limit models is divided into two cases. In the first one, we study limit models with chains of uncountable cofinality and by showing that they are algebraically compact we are able to give a full structure theorem. In the second one, we study limit models with chains of countable cofinality and we show that they are not algebraically compact. More precisely we obtain the following.
**Theorem \[tf\].** In particular, the class does not have uniqueness of limit models for any infinite cardinal.\
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents necessary background. Section 3 characterizes limit models in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation. Section 4 studies the class of torsion-free abelian groups with the pure subgroup relation. We show that limit models of uncountable cofinality are algebraically compact (and characterize them) while those of countable cofinality are not. Section 5 studies basic properties of the class of finitely Butler groups.
This paper was written while the author was working on a Ph.D. under the direction of Rami Grossberg at Carnegie Mellon University and I would like to thank Professor Grossberg for his guidance and assistance in my research in general and in this work in particular. I would also like to thank John T. Baldwin, Hanif Cheung, Sebastien Vasey and an anonymous referee for valuable comments that significantly improved the paper.
Preliminaries
=============
We present the basic concepts of abstract elementary classes that are used in this paper. These are further studied in [@baldwinbook09 §4 - 8] and [@ramibook §2, §4.4]. Regarding the background on abelian groups, we assume that the reader has some familiarity with it and introduce the necessary concepts throughout the text.[^5]
Basic notions
-------------
Before we introduce some concepts let us fix some notation.
- If $M \in K$, $|M|$ is the underlying set of $M$.
- If $\lambda$ is a cardinal, ${\mathbf{K}}_{\lambda} =\{ M \in K : \| M \| =\lambda \}$.
- Let $M, N \in K$. If we write “$f: M \to N$" we assume that $f$ is a ${\mathbf{K}}$-embedding, i.e., $f: M \cong f[M]$ and $f[M] {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$. Observe that in particular ${\mathbf{K}}$-embeddings are always monomorphisms.
All the examples that we consider in this paper have the additional property of admitting intersections. This class of AECs was introduced in [@bash] and further studied in [@vaseyu §2].
An AEC *admits intersections* if for every $N \in K$ and $A \subseteq |N|$ there is $M_0 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N$ such that $|M_0|= \bigcap\{M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N : A \subseteq |M|\}$. For $N \in K$ and $A \subseteq |N|$, we denote by $cl^{N}_{{\mathbf{K}}}(A)=\bigcap\{M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N : A \subseteq |M|\}$, if it is clear from the context we will drop the ${\mathbf{K}}$.
Since an AEC is a semantic object, the notion of syntactic type (first-order type) does not interact well with the strong substructure relation of the AEC. Even when the AEC is axiomatizable in some extension of first-order logic, syntactic types do not behave well since equality of types does not imply the existence of ${\mathbf{K}}$-embeddings between the models mentioned in the types. For this reason Shelah introduced a notion of semantic type called Galois-type. We use the terminology of [@mv 2.5].
\[gtp-def\] Let ${\mathbf{K}}$ be an AEC.
1. Let ${\mathbf{K}}^3$ be the set of triples of the form $({\bold{b}}, A, N)$, where $N \in K$, $A \subseteq |N|$, and ${\bold{b}}$ is a sequence of elements from $N$.
2. For $({\bold{b}}_1, A_1, N_1), ({\bold{b}}_2, A_2, N_2) \in {\mathbf{K}}^3$, we say $({\bold{b}}_1, A_1, N_1)E_{\text{at}} ({\bold{b}}_2, A_2, N_2)$ if $A := A_1 = A_2$, $\ell({\bold{b}}_1)=\ell({\bold{b}}_2)$ and there exists $f_\ell : N_\ell \xrightarrow[A]{} N$ such that $f_1 ({\bold{b}}_1) = f_2 ({\bold{b}}_2)$.
3. Note that $E_{\text{at}}$ is a symmetric and reflexive relation on ${\mathbf{K}}^3$. We let $E$ be the transitive closure of $E_{\text{at}}$.
4. For $({\bold{b}}, A, N) \in {\mathbf{K}}^3$, let ${$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}} ({\bold{b}}/ A; N) := [({\bold{b}}, A, N)]_E$. We call such an equivalence class a *Galois-type*. Usually, ${\mathbf{K}}$ will be clear from context and we will omit it.
5. For ${$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}} ({\bold{b}}/ A; N)$ and $C \subseteq A$, ${$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}} ({\bold{b}}/ A; N)\upharpoonright_{C}:= [({\bold{b}}, C, N)]_E$.
In classes that admit intersections types are easier to describe as it was shown in [@vaseyu 2.18].
\[tp-int\] Let ${\mathbf{K}}$ be an AEC that admits intersections. ${$ga-tp$}({\bold{a}}_1/ A ; N_1)={$ga-tp$}({\bold{a}}_2/A ; N_2)$ if and only if there is $f: cl^{N_1}({\bold{a}}_1 \cup A) \cong_{A} cl^{N_2}({\bold{a}}_2 \cup A)$ such that $f({\bold{a}}_1)={\bold{a}}_2$.
The notion of Galois-stability generalizes that of a stable first-order theory. Since it will play an important role, as witness by Fact \[existence\], we recall it.
- An AEC is *$\lambda$-Galois-stable* if for any $M \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ it holds that $| {$gS$}(M) | \leq \lambda$, where ${$gS$}(M) = \{ {$ga-tp$}(a/M; N) : M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N \text{ and } a \in N\}$. Observe that ${$gS$}(M)$ denotes the 1-ary Galois-types over $M$.
- An AEC is *Galois-stable* if there is a $\lambda \geq {\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})$ such that ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable.
Tameness (for saturated models) appears implicitly in the work of Shelah [@sh394], but it was not until Grossberg and VanDieren isolated it in [@tamenessone] that it became a central notion in the study of AECs. Tameness was first used to prove a stability spectrum theorem in [@tamenessone] and to prove an upward categoricity transfer theorem in [@tamenesstwo]. For further details on tameness the reader can consult the survey by Boney and Vasey [@survey].
${\mathbf{K}}$ is *$(< \kappa)$-tame* if for any $M \in K$ and $p \neq q \in {$gS$}(M)$, there is $A \subseteq M$ such that $|A |< \kappa$ and $p\upharpoonright_{A} \neq q\upharpoonright_{A}$.
Later, Boney isolated an analogous notion to tameness which he called type shortness in [@bont].
${\mathbf{K}}$ is *$(<\kappa)$-short* if for any $M, N \in K$, $\bar{a} \in M^{\alpha}$, $\bar{b} \in N^{\alpha}$ and ${$ga-tp$}(\bar{a}/\emptyset, M )\neq {$ga-tp$}(\bar{b}/\emptyset, N)$, there is $I \subseteq \alpha$ such that $|I| < \kappa$ and ${$ga-tp$}(\bar{a}\upharpoonright_I /\emptyset ; M )\neq {$ga-tp$}(\bar{b}\upharpoonright_I/\emptyset ; N)$.
Limit models
------------
Before introducing the concept of limit model we recall the concept of universal model.
$M$ is *universal over* $N$ if and only if $N {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M$, $\| M \|=\| N\| =\lambda$ and for any $N^* \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ such that $N {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N^*$, there is $f: N^* \xrightarrow[N]{} M$.
Recall that an increasing chain $\{ M_i : i < \alpha\}\subseteq {\mathbf{K}}$ (for $\alpha$ an ordinal) is a *continuous chain* if $M_i =\bigcup_{j < i} M_j$ for every $i < \alpha$ limit ordinal. With this we are ready to introduce the main concept of this paper, it was originally introduced in [@kosh].
\[limit\] Let $\alpha < \lambda^+$ a limit ordinal. $M$ is a *$(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model over* $N$ if and only if there is $\{ M_i : i < \alpha\}\subseteq {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ an increasing continuous chain such that $M_0 :=N$, $M_{i+1}$ is universal over $M_i$ for each $i < \alpha$ and $M= \bigcup_{i < \alpha} M_i$. We say that $M\in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model if there is $N \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ such that $M$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model over $N$. We say that $M\in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ is a limit model if there is $\alpha < \lambda^+$ limit such that $M$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model.
\[simple\]
1. If $M \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ is universal over $N$ and $M {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}M^* \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$, then $M^*$ is universal over $N$.
2. Let ${\mathbf{K}}$ be an AEC with joint embedding and amalgamation. If $M$ is a limit model of cardinality $\lambda$, then for any $N \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ there is $f: N \to M$.
The first assertion is trivial so we prove the second one.
Fix $\alpha < \lambda^+$, $\{M_i : i < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $M$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and let $N \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$. By the joint embedding property applied to $M_0$ and $N$ and using the Löwenheim-Skolem-Tarski axiom there is $N^*\in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ and $g: N \to N^*$ such that $M_0 {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}N^*$. Then since $M_1$ is universal over $M_0$, there is $h: N^* \xrightarrow[M_0]{} M_1$. Hence $f:= h \circ g: N \to M$.
The following fact gives conditions for the existence of limit models.
\[existence\] Let ${\mathbf{K}}$ be an AEC with joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models. If ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable, then for every $N \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda$ and $\alpha < \lambda^+$ limit there is $M$ a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model over $N$. Conversely, if ${\mathbf{K}}$ has a limit model of cardinality $\lambda$, then ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable
The forward direction is claimed in [@sh600] and proven in [@tamenessone 2.9]. The backward direction is straightforward.
As mentioned in the introduction, the uniqueness of limit models of the same cardinality is a very interesting assertion. When the lengths of the cofinalities of the chains are equal, an easy back-and-forth argument gives the following.
\[scof\] Let ${\mathbf{K}}$ be an AEC with joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models. If $M$ is a $(\lambda,\alpha)$-limit model and $N$ is a $(\lambda, \beta)$-limit model such that $cf(\alpha)=cf(\beta)$, then $M\cong N$.
The question of uniqueness is intriguing when the cofinalities of the lengths of the chains are different. This question has been studied in many papers, among them [@shvi], [@van06], [@grvavi], [@extendingframes], [@vand], [@bovan], [@viza] and [@vasey18].
Abelian groups
==============
In this third section, we study limit models in the class of abelian groups with the subgroup relation. Since this class was studied in great detail in [@grp] and [@baldwine], the section will be short and we will cite several times.
Let ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}=(K^{ab}, \leq)$ where $K^{ab}$ is the class of abelian groups in the language $L_{ab}=\{0\} \cup \{ +,-\}$ and $\leq$ is the subgroup relation, which is the same as the substructure relation in $L_{ab}$.
\[basic-ab\]
1. ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ is an AEC with ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}}^{ab})=\aleph_0$.
2. ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ admits intersections.
3. ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models.
4. ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ is a universal class.
5. ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ is $(< \aleph_0)$-tame and short.
\(1) and (3) are shown in [@grp 3.3] and (2) is clear, so we show the last two assertions:
1. It follows from the fact that $K^{ab}$ is axiomatizable by a set of universal first-order sentences in the language $L_{ab}=\{0\} \cup \{ +,-\}$. It is fundamental that we have “$-$" in the language.
2. It follows from (4) and [@vaseyu 3.7, 3.8].
The following fact is implied by [@grp 3.4, 3.5].
\[ab-st\] Let $G \leq H$ and $a, b \in H$, the following are equivalent:
1. There exists $f: cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{ab}}(G \cup \{a\})\cong_{G} cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{ab}}(G \cup \{b\})$ such that $f(a)=b$.
2. - $\langle a \rangle \cap G = 0 = \langle b \rangle \cap G$, or
- There are $ n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $g^* \in G$ such that $na=g^*=nb$ and $ma, mb \notin G$ for all $m < n$.
In particular, ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable for every $\lambda$ infinite cardinal.
Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models, ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ has limit models in every infinite cardinal by Fact \[ab-st\] and Fact \[existence\].
Recall that a group $G$ is *divisible* if for each $g \in G$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, there is $h\in G$ such that $nh=g$. In the next lemma we show that limit models in ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ are divisible groups.
If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model, then $G$ is a divisible group.
Fix $\{G_i : i < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model. Let $g \in G$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, we want to show that $n|g$. Since $G = \bigcup_{i < \alpha} G_i$, there is $i < \alpha$ such that $g\in G_i$. Recall that every group can be embedded as a subgroup into a divisible group (see [@fuchs §4.1.4]), so there is $D \in {\mathbf{K}}_{\lambda}$ divisible group such that $G_i \leq D$. In particular there is $d \in D$ with $nd=g$. Since $G_{i + 1}$ is universal over $G_i$, there is $f: D \xrightarrow[G_i]{} G$. Hence $nf(d)= f(g)=g$ and $f(d) \in G$.
Using the following structure theorem for divisible groups we can characterize the limit models of ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$. A proof of this fact appears in [@fuchs §4.3.1].
If $G$ is a divisible group, then we have that: $$G \cong (\oplus_{\kappa}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime }} (\oplus_{\kappa_p} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty))$$ where the cardinal numbers $\kappa$, $\kappa_p$ (for all $p$ prime number) correspond to the ranks $rk_0(G)$, $rk_p(G)$ (for all $p$ prime number)[^6].
From it we are able to show our first theorem.
\[abelian\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model in ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$, then we have that: $$G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty)).$$
Fix $\{G_i : i < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model. Observe that $G_0\leq G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty))$, therefore there is $$f: G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty)) \xrightarrow[G_0]{} G.$$ In particular, $rk_0(G)= \lambda$ and $rk_p(G)=\lambda$ for all $p$ prime, then by the structure theorem for divisible groups we have that $G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda}\mathbb{Q}) \oplus \oplus_{p \text{ prime}} (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}(p^\infty))$.
As a simple corollary we obtain the following.
${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ has uniqueness of limit models for every infinite cardinal.
Fact \[ab-st\] and Fact \[basic-ab\].(3) together with [@vaseyt 3.7, 11.3, 11.7] imply that ${\mathbf{K}}^{ab}$ has uniqueness of limit models above $\beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+}$, so the result of the above corollary is only new for small cardinals.
Torsion-free abelian groups
===========================
In this fourth section, we study the class of torsion-free abelian groups with the pure subgroup relation. In the first half of the section we examine basic properties of the class while in the second one we look at limit models. As we will see in this case the theory becomes more interesting.
Let ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}=(K^{tf}, \leq_p)$ where $K^{tf}$ is the class of torsion-free abelian groups in the language $L_{ab}=\{0\} \cup \{ +,-\}$ and $\leq_p$ is the pure subgroup relation. Recall that $H$ is a *pure subgroup* of $G$ if for every $n \in \mathbb{N}$ it holds that $nG \cap H = nH$.
Basic properties
----------------
Before analyzing the set of limit models, we obtain a few basic properties for the class of torsion-free abelian groups. As for abelian groups the basic properties of torsion-free abelian groups were studied in [@grp] and [@baldwine].
\[basictf\]
1. ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is an AEC with ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}}^{tf})=\aleph_0$.
2. ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ admits intersections.
3. ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models.
\(1) and (3) are shown in [@grp 3.3] and [@baldwine] and (2) is known to hold (an argument for this is given in [@fuchs §5.1]).
The following proposition characterizes the closure operator in ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$, since the proof is a straightforward induction we omit it.
\[cl\] If $A \subseteq H $, then $cl^{H}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}(A)=\bigcup_{n < \omega} A_n$ where:
- $A_0=A$.
- $A_{2k+1}=\{-h : h \in A_{2k} \} \cup \{ \Sigma_{i=0}^{n} h_i : h_0,...,h_n \in A_{2k}, n \in \mathbb{N}\}$.
- $A_{2k+2}=\{ h \in H : \text{ there are } h^* \in A_{2k +1} \text{ and } n\in \mathbb{N} \text{ s.t. } nh=h^*\}$.
Recall the following definition from [@vaseyu 3.1].
${\mathbf{K}}$ is a *pseudo-universal class* if it admits intersections and for any $N_1, N_2\in K$ and $\bar{a}_1 \in N_1$, $\bar{a}_2 \in N_2$, if ${$ga-tp$}(\bar{a}_1/\emptyset ; N_1)= {$ga-tp$}(\bar{a}_2/ \emptyset; N_2)$ and $f,g: cl^{N_1}(\bar{a}_1) \cong cl^{N_2}(\bar{a}_2)$ are such that $f(\bar{a}_1)=g(\bar{a}_1)=\bar{a}_2$, then $f=g$.
The reason pseudo-universal classes will be of interest to us is due to the following statement showed in [@vaseyu 3.7].
\[puni\] If ${\mathbf{K}}$ is a pseudo-universal class, then ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame and short.
With this let us prove the following lemma.
\[tflocal\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is a pseudo-universal class. In particular, ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame and short.
Let $H \in K^{tf}$, $\bar{a},\bar{b} \in H$ with ${$ga-tp$}(\bar{a}/\emptyset ; H)= {$ga-tp$}(\bar{b}/ \emptyset; H)$ and $f,g: cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}(\bar{a}) \cong cl^{H}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}(\bar{b})$ such that $f(\bar{a})=g(\bar{a})=\bar{b}$. We show by induction that $f{\upharpoonright}_{A_n}= g{\upharpoonright}_{A_n}$ for all $n < \omega$, where the $A_n$’s are obtained by applying Proposition \[cl\] to $cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}(\bar{a})$. The base step is the hypothesis, so we do the induction step. The odd step is straightforward, so we do the even step. Let $h \in A_{2k+2}$, by definition there is $h^* \in A_{2k + 1}$ and $n\in\mathbb{N}$ such that $nh = h^*$, then since $f, g$ are isomorphisms we have that $nf(h) = f(h^*)$ and $ng(h) = g(h^*)$. By induction hypothesis $f(h^*)=g(h^*)$, so $nf(h)=ng(h)$; using that divisors in torsion-free groups are unique, we obtain that $f(h)=g(h)$. Hence ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is pseudo-universal. The fact that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame and short follows from Fact \[puni\].
In [@baldwine 0.3] the following key result is obtained.
\[st-tf\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable if and only if $\lambda^{\aleph_0}=\lambda$. In particular, ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is a Galois-stable AEC.
Limit models
------------
In this subsection we classify the limit models in the class of torsion-free groups. It is clear that they are not divisible groups because if $G$ is not divisible then $G$ can not be a pure subgroup of a divisible group, but as we will show they are the next best thing, at least when the cofinality of the chain is uncountable. The examination of limit models will be done in two cases, we will first look at chains of uncountable cofinality and then at those of countable cofinality.
Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation and no maximal models, ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has limit models when $\lambda^{\aleph_0}=\lambda$ (and only in those cardinals) by Fact \[st-tf\] and Fact \[existence\].
Recall the following characterization of algebraically compact groups [@fuchs §6.1.3]. For more on algebraically compact groups the reader can consult [@fuchs §6].
A group $G$ is algebraically compact if given $\mathbb{E}=\{f_i(x_{i_0},...,x_{i_{n_i}})=a_i : i < \omega \}$ a set of linear equations over $G$, $\mathbb{E}$ is finitely solvable in $G$ if and only if $\mathbb{E}$ is solvable in $G$.
\[limit-ac\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda,\alpha)$-limit model and $cf(\alpha)\geq \omega_1$, then $G$ is algebraically compact.
Fix $\{G_\beta : \beta < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model. Let $\mathbb{E}=\{f_i(x_{i_0},...,x_{i_{n_i}})=a_i : i < \omega \}$ a set of linear equations finitely solvable in $G$. Since $cf(\alpha)\geq \omega_1$ there is $\beta^* < \alpha$ such that $\{a_i : i < \omega \} \subseteq G_{\beta^*}$. Add new constants $\{ c_i : i < \omega \}$ and consider: $$\Sigma = \{ f_i(c_{i_0},...,c_{i_{n_i}})=a_i : i < \omega \} \cup ED(G_{\beta^*}) \cup T_{tf} \cup \{ \neg \exists x( nx=g): G_{\beta^*} \vDash \neg \exists x (nx =g), n\in \mathbb{N}, g\in G_{\beta^*} \},$$ where $T_{tf}$ is the first-order theory of torsion-free abelian groups and $ED(G_{\beta^*}) $ is the elementary diagram of $G_{\beta^*}$.
Since $\mathbb{E}$ is finitely solvable in $G$ and $G_{\beta^*} \leq_p G$, it is easy to show that any finite subset of $\Sigma$ is realized in $G$. Then by compactness and Löwenheim-Skolem-Tarski there is $H \in K^{tf}_\lambda$ such that $G_{\beta^*}\leq_p H$ ($G_{\beta^*}$ is a pure subgroup by the last element in the definition of $\Sigma$) and $H \vDash \{ f_i(c_{i_0},...,c_{i_{n_i}})=a_i : i < \omega\}$ . Using the fact that $G_{\beta^* + 1}$ is universal over $G_{\beta^*}$, there is $f: H \xrightarrow[G_{\beta^*}]{} G_{\beta^* +1}$ and it is easy to show that $\{ f(c_i^{H}) : i < \omega\}$ is a set of solutions to $\mathbb{E}$ which is contained in $G$.
As a simple corollary we obtain a new proof for the following well-known assertion, the assertion without the torsion-free hypothesis appears for example in [@fuchs §6 1.10].
Every torsion-free group can be embedded as a pure subgroup in a torsion-free algebraically compact group.
Follows from the joint embedding property, Fact \[simple\] and the previous lemma.
Before proving a theorem parallel to Theorem \[abelian\], we prove the following proposition. In it the group $\mathbb{Z}_{(p)}$ will play a crucial role, recall that $\mathbb{Z}_{(p)}=\{ n/m : (m,p)= 1 \}$.
\[zpdim\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model, then $dim_{\mathbb{F}_p}(G/pG)=\lambda$ for all $p$ prime.[^7]
Fix $\{G_i : i < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model. Notice that $G_0 \leq_{p} G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})$, then using that $G_1$ is universal over $G_0$, there is $f: G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}) \xrightarrow[G_0]{} G$. In particular, we may assume that $(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}) \leq_{p} G$.
: $\{ e_i : i < \lambda \} \subseteq (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}) \subseteq G$ satisfy that for every $g \in G$, $A \subseteq_{fin} \lambda$ and $(n_i)_{i\in A} \in \{0,...,p-1\}^{|A|} \backslash \{\bar{0}\}$ the following holds: $$\Sigma_{i\in A} n_ie_i\neq pg .$$
Where each $e_i$ is the $i^{th}$-element of the canonical basis.
: Suppose for the sake a contradiction that it is not the case, then there is $g \in G$, $A \subseteq_{fin} \lambda$ and $(n_i)_{i \in A} \in \{0,...,p-1\}^{|A|}\backslash \{\bar{0}\}$ such that $$\Sigma_{i\in A} n_ie_i=pg .$$
Since $(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}) \leq_{p} G$ and $G\in K^{tf}$, we have that $g \in (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})$. Then $g=\Sigma_{i\in B} g_i$ for $B \subseteq_{fin} \lambda$ and unique $(g_i)_{i\in B} \in \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}^{|B|}$. Hence using the above equality it follows that $n_i=pg_i$ for each $i \in A$. Then $p$ would divide the denominator of $g_i$ for some $i \in A$, contradicting the fact that each $g_i \in \mathbb{Z}_{(p)}$, or $g=0$, contradicting the linear independence of the $e_i$’s.$\dagger_{\text{Claim}}$
From the above claim it follows that $\{ e_i + pG : i < \lambda\}$ is a linearly independent set over $\mathbb{F}_p$. Hence $dim_{\mathbb{F}_p}(G/pG)=\lambda$.
The following fact puts together the information from [@ef §1] that we will need in this paper.[^8]
\[ac\] If $G$ is a torsion-free algebraically compact group, then: $$G \cong (\oplus_{\delta} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\beta_p} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}.$$ Where:
1. $\beta_p =dim_{\mathbb{F}_p}(G/pG)$ for all $p$ prime ([@ef 1.7.a]).
2. $\delta = rk_0(G_d)$, where $G_d$ is the maximal divisible subgroup of $G$ ([@ef 1.10]).
3. $\mathbb{Z}_{(p)}=\{ n/m : (m,p)= 1 \}$ for $p$ prime and the overline refers to the completion[^9] (look at the discussion between [@ef 1.4] and [@ef 1.6]).
\[pureac\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and $G$ is algebraically compact, then $$G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}.$$
Fix $\{G_i : i < \alpha\}$ a witness to the fact that $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model. Since by hypothesis $G$ is algebraically compact, by Fact \[ac\] it is enough to show that $\beta_p=\lambda$ for all $p$ prime and that $\delta=\lambda$.
By Fact \[ac\].(1) and Proposition \[zpdim\] it follows that $\beta_p= dim_{\mathbb{F}_p}(G/pG)=\lambda$ for all $p$ prime, so we just need to show that $\delta=\lambda$. Observe that $G_0 \leq_p G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q})$, then there is $f: G_0 \oplus (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \xrightarrow[G_0]{} G$, from which it follows that $ rk_0(G_d)= \lambda$ since $f[ (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q})] \subseteq G_d$. Hence by Fact \[ac\].(2), we have that $\delta=\lambda$.
With this we obtain our main result on limit models of uncountable cofinality.
\[purec\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and $cf(\alpha) \geq \omega_1$, then $$G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}.$$
By Lemma \[limit-ac\] $G$ is algebraically compact. Then the result follows from Lemma \[pureac\].
The following corollary follows directly from Theorem \[purec\].
If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and $H$ is a $(\lambda, \beta)$-limit model such that $cf(\alpha), cf(\beta) \geq \omega_1$, then $G\cong H$.
Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation, no maximal models and is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame, by [@vaseyt 3.7] non-splitting has weak continuity and then by [@vaseyt 11.3, 11.7] it follows that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has uniqueness of limit models for large $\lambda$ and $cf(\alpha)$. Therefore, the result of the above corollary is only new for small cardinals.
The next corollary follows from the above corollary doing a similar construction to [@grva 2.8.(3)].
\[sat\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and $cf(\alpha)\geq \omega_1$, then $G$ is $\lambda$-Galois-saturated.[^10]
This finishes the characterization of $G$ when $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model and the cofinality of $\alpha$ is uncountable, we know tackle the question when the cofinality of $\alpha$ is countable. Regarding it, we will only have negative results, i.e., we will show that if $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model then $G$ is not algebraically compact. In order to do that, we will use some deep results on AECs which appear in [@grva] and [@vas16a]. Realize that since limit models with lengths of chains of the same cofinality are isomorphic, we only need to study $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models.
The proof will be divided into two parts. In the first we will use [@grva] and [@vas16a] to show that for $\lambda$ big $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models are not algebraically compact and in the second we will reflect the big groups into smaller cardinalities.
The following fact contains the information we will need from [@grva] and [@vas16a]. For the readers not familiar with the theory of AECs this can be taken as a black box.
\[saec\] Assume that ${\mathbf{K}}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation, no maximal models, ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})=\aleph_0$ and is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame. Let $\lambda \geq \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$ be such that ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable and there is a Galois-saturated model of cardinality $\lambda$. If every limit model of cardinality $\lambda$ is Galois-saturated, then ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\chi$-Galois-stable for every $\chi\geq \lambda$.
By [@grva 3.2] ${\mathbf{K}}$ does not have the $\aleph_0$-order property of length $\beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+}$. Then by [@grva 3.18] ${\mathbf{K}}$ has no long splitting chains in $\lambda$. Since ${\mathbf{K}}$ has no long splitting chains in $\lambda$, is $\lambda$-Galois-stable and is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame by [@vas16a 5.6] we can conclude that ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\chi$-Galois-stable for every $\chi\geq \lambda$.
\[large\] Let $\lambda \geq \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$. If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model, then $G$ is not algebraically compact.
Since $G$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model, it follows that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable by Fact \[existence\].
Assume for the sake of contradiction that $G$ is algebraically compact, then by Lemma \[pureac\] $G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}$. Then by Theorem \[purec\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has uniqueness of limit models of cardinality $\lambda$. Hence every limit model of cardinality $\lambda$ is Galois-saturated by [@grva 2.8.(3)].
By Fact \[basictf\] and Lemma \[tflocal\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ has joint embedding, amalgamation, no maximal models, ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}}^{tf})=\aleph_0$ and is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame. Then by Fact \[saec\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\chi$-Galois-stable for every $\chi \geq \lambda$. But this contradicts Fact \[st-tf\], since there is $\chi \geq \lambda$ such that $\chi^{\aleph_0}\neq \chi$.
\[small\] Let $\lambda < \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$. If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model, then $G$ is not algebraically compact.
Since $G$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model, it follows that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable by Fact \[existence\].
Let $\mu \geq \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$ such that $\mu^{\aleph_0}=\mu$, by Fact \[st-tf\] ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\mu$-Galois-stable. Let $G^*$ a $(\mu, \omega)$-limit model witnessed by $\{ G^*_i : i < \omega \}$. By Lemma \[large\] $G^*$ is not algebraically compact, so there is $\mathbb{E}=\{f_k(x_{k_0},...,x_{k_{n_k}})=a_k : k < \omega \}$ a set of linear equations finitely solvable in $G^*$ but not solvable in $G^*$.
We build $\{r_i : i < \omega\} \subseteq \mathbb{N}$, $\{S_i : i < \omega \}$ and $\{ H_i : i < \omega \}$ by induction such that:
1. $\{r_i : i < \omega \} $ is strictly increasing.
2. $a_i \in H_i$.
3. $S_i \subseteq H_i$ and $S_i$ is a finite set.
4. $S_i$ has a solution to $\{f_k(x_{k_0},...,x_{k_{n_k}})=a_k : k \leq i \}$.
5. $H_i \leq_p G_{r_i}^*$.
6. $H_i \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda^{tf}$.
7. $H_{i+1}$ is universal over $H_i$.
Before we do the construction, let us show that this is enough. Let $H_\omega := \bigcup_{i < \omega} H_i$, by (6) and (7) it follows that $H_\omega$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model. Since limit models of the same cofinality are isomorphic by Fact \[scof\], it follows that $H_\omega \cong G$. So it is enough to show that $H_\omega$ is not algebraically compact. Assume for the sake of contradiction that $H_\omega$ is algebraically compact. Since $\mathbb{E}=\{f_k(x_{k_1},...,x_{k_{n_k}})=a_k : k < \omega \}$ is finitely solvable in $H_\omega$ by (4), it follows that there is ${\bold{a}}\in H_\omega^\omega$ a solution for $\mathbb{E}$. But this contradicts the fact that $\mathbb{E}$ is not solvable in $G^*$, since $H_\omega \leq_p G^*$ by (5). Therefore, $H_\omega$ is not algebraically compact.
Now let us do the construction.
Let $\{b_0,...,b_l \} \subseteq G^*$ a solution to $f_0(x_{0_0},...,x_{0_{n_0}})=a_0$, this exists by finite solvability of $\mathbb{E}$ in $G^*$, and $r < \omega$ such that $\{b_0,...,b_l, a_0 \} \subseteq G^*_r$. Let $r_0:= r$, $S_0 := \{b_0,...,b_l \}$ and applying Löwenheim-Skolem-Tarski axiom to $\{b_0,...,b_l, a_0 \}$ in $G_{r_0}^*$ we get $H_0 \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda^{tf}$ such that $H_0 \leq_p G_{r_0}^*$ and $\{b_0,...,b_l, a_0 \} \subseteq H_0$. It is easy to see that this works.
By construction there are $r_i \in\mathbb{N}$ and $H_i \leq_p G_{r_i}^*$. Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable we can build $H \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda^{tf}$ such that $H$ is universal over $H_i$ by Fact \[existence\]. Using that $H_i \leq_p G_{r_i}^*$, the amalgamation property and that $G_{r_i + 1}^*$ universal over $G_{r_i}^*$, there is $f: H \xrightarrow[H_i]{} G_{r_i +1}^*$.
Let $\{b_0,...,b_l\} \subseteq G^*$ a solution to $\{f_k(x_{k_0},...,x_{k_{n_k}})=a_k : k \leq i+1 \}$ and take $r \geq r_i + 1$ such that $\{b_0,...,b_l,a_{i+1}\} \subseteq G^*_{r}$. Let $r_{i+1}:=r$, $S_{i+1}:= \{b_0,...,b_l \}$ and applying Löwenheim-Skolem-Tarski axiom to $f[H] \cup \{b_0,...,b_l,a_{i+1}\} $ in $G_{r_{i+1}}^*$ we get $H_{i+1} \in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda^{tf}$ such that $H_{i+1} \leq_p G_{r_{i+1}}^*$ and $f[H] \cup \{b_0,...,b_l,a_{i+1}\} \subseteq H_{i+1}$. Using that $H_i\leq_p f[H] \leq_{p} H_{i+1}$ and that $f[H]$ is universal over $H_i$, it is easy to show that (1) through (7) hold.
Putting together the last two lemmas we obtain the following.
\[limit-count\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda,\omega)$-limit model, then $G$ is not algebraically compact.
If $\lambda \geq \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$ it follows from Lemma \[large\] and if $\lambda < \beth_{(2^{\aleph_0})^+ + \omega}$ it follows from Lemma \[small\].
After discussing Theorem \[limit-count\] with Sebastien Vasey, he realized that by applying [@vaseyt 4.12] instead of [@grva 3.18] one could prove Theorem \[limit-count\] without dividing the proof into cases. The proof using [@vaseyt 4.12] is similar to that of Lemma \[large\]. We decided to keep our original argument since the proof presented here shows how to transfer the failure of being algebraically compact and since we believe that showing that there are cofinally many $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models that are not algebraically compact is provable using only group theoretic methods.
Since $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models are not algebraically compact we ask:
Is there a natural class of groups that contain the $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models?
Regarding the structure of $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models, using the fact that every group is a direct sum of a divisible group and a reduced group[^11] (see [@fuchs §4.2.5]), it is straightforward to show that if $G$ is a $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit model, then $G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus G_r$ where $G_r \cong G/G_d$, $G_d$ is the maximal divisible subgroup of $G$ and $G_r$ is reduced. So it is natural to ask the following.
Is there a structure theorem for $(\lambda, \omega)$-limit models similar to that of Theorem \[purec\]?
Let us conclude with the main theorem of this section.
\[tf\] If $G$ is a $(\lambda, \alpha)$-limit model in ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$, then we have that:
1. If the cofinality of $\alpha$ is uncountable, then $G \cong (\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Q}) \oplus \Pi_{p \text{ prime}} \overline{(\oplus_{\lambda} \mathbb{Z}_{(p)})}$.
2. If the cofinality of $\alpha$ is countable, then $G$ is not algebraically compact.
In particular, ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ does not have uniqueness of limit models for any infinite cardinal.
The first part is Theorem \[purec\] and the second one is Theorem \[limit-count\]. The “in particular" follows from the fact that limit models with chains of uncountable cofinality are algebraically compact by (1), while those with chains of countable cofinality are not algebraically compact by (2).
Finitely Butler Groups
======================
In this last section, we look at some basic properties of the class of finitely Butler groups. The results in this section are weaker than those of the previous two sections and in some sense incomplete, but we decided to present them since we see this section as a stepping stone and moreover finitely Butler groups had never been isolated as an AEC.
Butler groups were introduced by Butler in [@butler], while finitely Butler groups were first studied in [@bican] and given a name in [@fuchsv]. We follow the exposition of [@fuchs §14] and recommend the reader to consult it for further details.
A torsion-free group $G$ of finite rank[^12] is a *Butler group* if $G$ is a pure subgroup of a finite rank completely decomposable group. Recall that a torsion-free group is *completely decomposable* if and only if it is the direct sum of groups of rank one.
A torsion-free group $G$ is a *finitely Butler group* ($B_0$-group) if every pure subgroup of finite rank of $G$ is a Butler group.
Let us introduce the class we will study.
Let ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}=(K^{B_0}, \leq_p)$ where $K^{B_0}$ is the class of finitely Butler groups in the language $L_{ab}=\{0\} \cup \{ +,-\}$ and $\leq_p$ is the pure subgroup relation.
\[easy\] Notice that if $G \in K^{B_0}$ and $H \leq_p G$, then $H \in K^{B_0}$.
Our first assertion is that indeed ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is an AEC.
${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}=(K^{B_0}, \leq_p)$ is an AEC with ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}}^{B_0})=\aleph_0$ that admits intersections.
From the closure under pure subgroups and the fact that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ is an AEC, it follows that ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ satisfies all the axioms of an AEC except the first Tarski-Vaught axiom. We show that it holds.[^13]
Let $\{ G_i : i < \delta \}$ such that $G_i \leq_p G_j$ for all $i< j$ and $G =\bigcup_{i < \delta} G_i$. It is clear that $G_i \leq_p G$ for all $i< j$, so we only need to show that $G \in K^{B_0}$, so let $H \leq_p G$ of finite rank.
Take $X$ a finite maximal linearly independent subset of $H$, it exists because $H$ has finite rank. Since $X$ is finite, there is $i < \delta$ such that $X \subseteq G_i$. Since $X$ is maximal linearly independent $H \subseteq span_{\mathbb{Q}}(X)$. Then using that $G_i \leq_p G$ and $G_i$ is torsion-free, it follows that $H\leq_p G_i$. Therefore, since $G_i \in K^{B_0}$, we conclude that $H$ is a Butler group.
Moreover, the class admits intersections because ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ admits intersections and the closure of ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ under pure subgroups.
${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ has joint embedding and no maximal models.
By [@fuchs §14.5.(B)] ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is closed under direct sums so the result follows.
Regarding the amalgamation property, we are only able to provide the following partial solution. We actually think that the amalgamation property might not hold for the class.
If $G \in K^{B_0}$ and $G$ is divisible, then $G$ is an amalgamation base, i.e., if $G\leq_p H_i \in K^{B_0}$ for $i\in \{1,2\}$, then there are $H \in K^{B_0}$ and $f_i: H_i \to H$ for $i\in \{1,2\}$ such that $f_1{\upharpoonright}_G =f_2{\upharpoonright}_G$.
Let $G \leq_p H_i$ for $i\in \{1,2\}$. Let $H := H_1 \oplus H_2/ G^*$ where $G^*:=\{(g,-g) : g \in G\}$, $f_1: H_1\to H$ be $f(h)=(h,0) + G^*$ and $f_2: H_2 \to H$ be $f(h)=(0, h) + G^*$. In [@grp 3.27] it is shown that $H \in K^{tf}$, $f_1,f_2$ are pure embeddings and $f_1{\upharpoonright}_G =f_2{\upharpoonright}_G$. So we only need to show that $H \in K^{B_0}$.
Let $E \subseteq H_1 \oplus H_2$ such that $E/G^* \leq_p H_1 \oplus H_2/ G^*$ and $E/G^*$ has rank $n$. Take $\{e_i + G^* : i < n\}$ a maximal linearly independent subset of $E/G^*$.
Observe that $E \leq_p H_1 \oplus H_2$, because $G^* \leq_p H_1 \oplus H_2$ and $E/G^* \leq_p H_1 \oplus H_2/ G^*$. Moreover, $cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\}) \leq_p H_1 \oplus H_2$, $cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$ has finite rank and $H_1 \oplus H_2 \in K^{B_0}$ (see [@fuchs §14.5.(B)]), so it follows that $cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$ is a Butler group (where the closure is the one described in Proposition \[cl\] by Remark \[easy\]).
: $E= G^* + cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$.
: Let $e \in E$, since $\{e_i + G^* : i < n\}$ is maximal linearly independent $e + G^* \in span_{\mathbb{Q}}(\{e_i + G^* : i < n\})$, then there are $\{ m,k_0,...,k_{n-1}\} \subseteq \mathbb{N}$ and $g^*_0 \in G^*$ such that: $$me= \Sigma_{i=0}^{n-1} k_ie_i + g^*_0.$$
Since $G$ is divisible, $G^*$ is divisible so there is $g^*_1 \in G^*$ such that $mg^*_1= g^*_0$. Then $m(e-g^*_1)=\Sigma_{i=0}^{n-1} k_ie_i$, thus $e-g^*_1 \in cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$. Hence $e \in G^* + cl^{E_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$.$\dagger_{\text{Claim}}$
Then $E/G^* \cong G^* + cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})/ G^* \cong cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})/ cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\}) \cap G^*$. By the fact that torsion-free epimorphic images of Butler groups are Butler groups (see [@fuchs §14.1.6]) and that $cl^{E}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{e_0,...,e_{n-1}\})$ is a Butler group, we conclude that $E/G^*$ is a Butler group. Hence $H \in K^{B_0}$.
The next proposition is straightforward, but we include it because of its strong consequences.
\[tp-b0\] If $G, H \in K^{B_0}$, ${\bold{a}}\in G$, ${\bold{b}}\in H$ and $A \subseteq G,H$, then ${$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}({\bold{a}}/A; G)= {$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}({\bold{b}}/A; H)$ if and only if ${$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}({\bold{a}}/A; G)= {$ga-tp$}_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}({\bold{b}}/A; H)$.
Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is closed under pure subgroups by Remark \[easy\], using the minimality of the closures, it is easy to show that for all $H'\in K^{B_0}$ and $B \subseteq H'$ it holds that $cl_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}^{H'}(B)=cl_{{\mathbf{K}}^{tf}}^{H'}(B)$. Then using that ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ and ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ admit intersections and Fact \[tp-int\] the result follows.
\[st-fb\]
- ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is $(<\aleph_0)$-tame and short.
- If $\lambda=\lambda^{\aleph_0}$, then ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable. In particular, ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is a Galois-stable AEC.
The proof follows directly from Proposition \[tp-b0\] and the fact that ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ satisfies both of the properties we are trying to show.
Do we have as in ${\mathbf{K}}^{tf}$ that: if ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable, then $\lambda=\lambda^{\aleph_0}$?
We were unable to answer the above question, but we have a partial solution (see Lemma \[nst\]). In order to present it, we will need some results from [@fuchs §12.1] and the following definitions.
Let $G$ be a torsion-free abelian group and $a \in G$:
- Given a prime $p$ the *$p$-height* of $a$ (denoted by $h_p(a)$) is the maximum $n\in \mathbb{N}$ such that $p^n|a$ or $\infty$ if the maximum does not exist.
- The *characteristic* of $a$ is $\chi_G(a)=(h_{p_n}(a))_{n < \omega}$ where $\{p_n : n< \omega\}$ is an increasing enumeration of the prime numbers.
- Given $\eta, \nu \in (\mathbb{N}\cup\{\infty\})^{\omega}$ we define the equivalence relation $\sim$ as $\eta \sim \nu$ if and only if $\eta$ and $\nu$ differ on finitely many natural numbers and when they differ they are both finite. A *type $\textbf{t}$* is an element of $(\mathbb{N}\cup\{\infty\})^{\omega}/\sim$ and the *type of $a$* is $\textbf{t}_{G}(a)=\chi_G(a)/\sim$.
- We say that $G$ has type $\textbf{t}$, if for every $b \neq 0\in G$ it holds that $\textbf{t}=\textbf{t}_{G}(b)$.
The proof of the following lemma uses similar ideas to those of [@kojsh 3.7].
\[nst\] If $\lambda< 2^{\aleph_0}$, then ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is not $\lambda$-Galois-stable.
Let $G\in {\mathbf{K}}_\lambda^{B_0}$ and $\{ \textbf{t}_\eta : \eta \in 2^\omega \}$ an enumeration of all the types (in the sense of the previous definition). For each $\eta \in 2^{\omega}$, let $G_\eta$ a group of rank one with type $\textbf{t}_\eta$, it exists by [@fuchs §12.1.1]. Let $H= G \oplus (\oplus_{\eta \in 2^{\omega}} G_\eta)$. Since ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ is closed under direct sums (see [@fuchs §14.5.(B)]) and rank one groups are in ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$, because they are completely decomposable, we have that $H \in K^{B_0}$.
For each $\eta \in 2^{\omega}$ take $a_\eta \in G_{\eta}$ with $a_\eta \neq 0$ and let $p_\eta:= {$ga-tp$}(a_\eta/G; H)$. We show that all the Galois-types in the set $\{p_\eta : \eta \in 2^\omega \}$ are different.
If $\eta \neq \nu \in 2^\omega$, then $p_\eta \neq p_\nu$.\
: Suppose for the sake of contradiction that ${$ga-tp$}(a_\eta/G; H) = {$ga-tp$}(a_\nu/G; H)$, then by Fact \[tp-int\] there is $f: cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{a_\eta\}\cup G) \cong_{G} cl^H_{{\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}}(\{a_\nu\} \cup G)$ with $f(a_\eta) =a_\nu$. Then since the closures give rise to pure subgroups of $H$ we have that $\chi_{H}(a_\eta)=\chi_H(a_\nu)$, so $\textbf{t}_{H}(a_\eta) =\textbf{t}_H(a_\nu)$. This contradicts the fact that $\textbf{t}_{H}(a_\eta) = \textbf{t}_{G_\eta}(a_\eta)=\textbf{t}_\eta \neq \textbf{t}_\nu=\textbf{t}_{G_\nu}(a_\nu)= \textbf{t}_H(a_\nu)$, the first and last equality follow from the fact that $G_\eta, G_\nu \leq_p H$. $\dagger_{\text{Claim}}$
Therefore, $|{$gS$}(G)|\geq 2^{\aleph_0}$. Since $\lambda < 2^{\aleph_0}$, ${\mathbf{K}}$ is not $\lambda$-Galois-stable.
As we mentioned in the introduction we are interested in limit models, therefore we ask the following:
Do limit models exist in ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$? If they exist, what is their structure?
Regarding the first part of the question, realize that if ${\mathbf{K}}^{B_0}$ has the amalgamation property, then by Corollary \[st-fb\] and Fact \[existence\] limit models would exist. As for the second part, even if they existed the techniques to characterize them would have to be different from the ones presented in section four since finitely Butler groups do not seem to be first-order axiomatizable.
Besides the function of this article as a pool of examples of limit models in the context of AECs. We believe that the study of limit models (in different classes of groups) as a classes of infinite rank groups could be an interesting area of research on its own. We think this is possible since limit model are tame enough to be analyzable, but their theory is nontrivial as showcased in this article. A good place to look for new classes of limit models is [@baldwine].
[She01b]{}
John Baldwin, *Categoricity*, American Mathematical Society (2009).
John Baldwin, Wesley Calvert, John Goodrick, Andres Villaveces, Agatha Walczak-Typke, Abelian groups as aec’s. Preprint. URL: www.aimath.org/WWN/categoricity/abeliangroups\_10\_1\_3.tex.
John Baldwin, Paul Eklof, and Jan Trlifaj, *$N^{\perp}$ as an abstract elementary class*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **149**(2007), no. 1,25–39.
John Baldwin and Saharon Shelah, *Example of non-locality*, Journal f Symbolic Logic **73**(2008), 765–782.
L. Bican and L. Salce, *Butler groups of infinite rank*, Abelian Group Theory. Lecture notes in Mathematics. vol. 1006 (Springer, Berlin, 1983), 171–189.
Will Boney, *Tameness and extending frames*, Journal of Mathematical Logic **14** (2014), no. 2, 1450007, 27 pp.
Will Boney, *Tameness from large cardinal axioms*, Journal of Mathematical Logic **14** (2014), no. 4, 1092–1119.
Will Boney and Monica VanDieren, *Limit Models in Strictly Stable Abstract Elementary Classes*, Preprint. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.04717 .
Will Boney and Sebastien Vasey, *A survey on tame abstract elementary classes*, Beyond First Order Model Theory (José Iovino ed.), CRC Press (2017), 353–427.
M.C.R Butler, *A Class of Torsion-Free Abelian Groups of Finite Rank*, Proc. London Mathematical Society **15**(1965), 680–698.
Paul Eklof and Edward Fischer, *The elementary theory of abelian groups*, Annals of Mathematical Logic **4** (1972), no. 2,115–171.
Laszlo Fuchs, *Abelian Groups*, Springer (2015).
Laszlo Fuchs and G. Viljoen, *Note on the extensions of Butler groups*, Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society **41**(1990), no. 1, 117–122
Rami Grossberg, *Classification theory for abstract elementary classes*, Logic and Algebra (Yi Zhang, ed.), vol. 302, American Mathematical Society, 2002, 165–204.
Rami Grossberg, *A Course in Model Theory*, in Preparation, 201X.
Rami Grossberg and Monica VanDieren, *Galois-stability for tame abstract elementary classes*, Journal of Mathematical Logic **6** (2006), no. 1, 25–49.
Rami Grossberg and Monica VanDieren, *Shelah’s categoricity conjecture from a successor for tame abstract elementary classes*, Journal of Symbolic Logic **71** (2006), no. 2, 553–568.
Rami Grossberg and Monica VanDieren, *Categoricity from one successor cardinal in tame abstract elementary classes*, Journal of Mathematical Logic **6** (2006), no. 2, 181–201.
Rami Grossberg, Monica VanDieren and Andres Villaveces, *Uniqueness of limit models in classes with amalgamation*, Mathematical Logic Quarterly **62** (2016), 367–382.
Rami Grossberg, and Sebastien Vasey, *Equivalent definitions of superstability in tame abstract elementary classes*, Journal of Symbolic Logic **82** (2017), no. 4, 1387 – 1408.
Menachem Kojman and Saharon Shelah, *Universal abelian groups*, Israel Journal of Mathematics **92** (1995), 113–24.
Oren Kolman and Saharon Shelah, *Categoricity of Theories in $L_{\omega, \kappa}$ when $\kappa$ is a measurable cardinal. Part 1*, Fundamenta Mathematicae **151** (1996), 209–240.
Marcos Mazari-Armida and Sebastien Vasey, *Universal classes near $\aleph_1$*, Journal of Symbolic Logic **83** (2018), no. 4, 1633–1643.
Saharon Shelah, *Classification theory for nonelementary classes, I. The number of uncountable models of $\psi \in L_{\omega _{1},\omega }$. Part A*, Israel Journal of Mathematics **46** (1983), 212–240.
Saharon Shelah, *Classification theory for nonelementary classes, I. The number of uncountable models of $\psi \in L_{\omega _{1},\omega }$. Part B*, Israel Journal of Mathematics **46** (1983), 241–273.
Saharon Shelah, *Classification of nonelementary classes, [II]{}. [A]{}bstract elementary classes*, Classification theory (John Baldwin, ed.) (1987), 419–497.
Saharon Shelah, *Categoricity for abstract classes with amalgamation*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **98**(1999), Issues 1–3, 261–294.
Saharon Shelah, *Categoricity in abstract elementary classes: going up inductively*, math.LO/0011215. See Chapter II of volume I \[Sh:h\].
Saharon Shelah, *Classification Theory for Abstract Elementary Classes*, vol. 1 & 2, Mathematical Logic and Foundations, no. 18 & 20, College Publications (2009).
Saharon Shelah and Andres Villaveces, *Toward categoricity for classes with no maximal models*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **97** (1999), no. 1-3,1–25.
Saharon Shelah and Sebastien Vasey, *Categoricity and multidimensional diagrams*, Preprint. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.06291.
Monica VanDieren, *Categoricity in abstract elementary classes with no maximal models*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **141** (2006), 108–147.
Monica VanDieren, *Superstability and symmetry*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **167** (2016), no. 12, 1171–1183.
Sebastien Vasey, *Forking and superstability in tame AECs*, Journal of Symbolic Logic **81** (2016), no. 1, 357–383.
Sebastien Vasey, *Shelah’s eventual categoricity conjecture in tame AECs with primes*, Mathematical Logic Quarterly **64** (2018), nos. 1–2, 25–36.
Sebastien Vasey, *Shelah’s eventual categoricity conjecture in universal classes: part II*, Selecta Mathematica **23** (2017), no. 2, 1469–1506.
Sebastien Vasey, *Shelah’s eventual categoricity conjecture in universal classes: part I*, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic **168** (2017), no. 9, 1609 - 1642.
Sebastien Vasey, *Toward a stability theory of tame abstract elementary classes*, Journal of Mathematical Logic **18** (2018), no. 2, 1850009 (34 pages).
Sebastien Vasey, *The categoricity spectrum of large abstract elementary classes*, Preprint. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.04068.
Andres Villaveces and Pedro Zambrano, *Limit models in metric abstract elementary classes: the categorical case*, Mathematical Logic Quarterly **62**(2016), 319–334.
[^1]: [AMS 2010 Subject Classification: Primary 03C48. Secondary: 03C45, 20K20. Key words and phrases. Abstract Elementary Classes; Limit models; Abelian groups; Torsion-free groups.]{}
[^2]: For a more detailed introduction to the theory of AECs we suggest the reader to look at [@grossberg2002], [@baldwinbook09] or [@survey] (this only covers tame AECs, but the AECs that we will study in this paper are all tame).
[^3]: We say that ${\mathbf{K}}$ is *Galois-superstable* if there is $\mu < \beth_{(2^{{\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})})^+}$ such that ${\mathbf{K}}$ is $\lambda$-Galois-stable for every $\lambda\geq \mu$. Under the assumption of joint embedding, amalgamation, no maximal models and ${\operatorname{LS}}({\mathbf{K}})$-tameness (which hold for all the classes studied in this paper, except perhaps the one introduced in the last section) by [@grva] and [@vaseyt] the definition of the previous line is equivalent to any other definition of Galois-superstability given in the context of AECs.
[^4]: Recall that $H$ is a pure subgroup of $G$ if for every $n \in \mathbb{N}$ it holds that $nG \cap H = nH$.
[^5]: An excellent encyclopedic resource is [@fuchs]. We recommend the reader to keep a copy of [@fuchs] nearby since we will cite frequently from it, specially in the last section.
[^6]: The $rk_0(G)$ is the cardinality of a maximal linearly independent subset of elements of infinite order in $G$ and $rk_p(G)$ is the cardinality of a maximal linearly independent subset of elements of order a power of $p$ in $G$. The notion of linear independence in the context of abelian groups differs slightly from that of vector spaces, the reader can consult [@fuchs p. 91] for the definition of linear independence in this setting.
[^7]: Notice that the proposition includes the case when the cofinality of $\alpha$ is countable.
[^8]: We recommend the reader to take a look at [@ef §1] or [@fuchs §6.3].
[^9]: For the reader familiar with abelian group theory, this is precisely the pure-injective hull (see [@fuchs §6.4]).
[^10]: Recall that $G$ is $\lambda$-Galois-saturated if for every $H {{\le_{{\mathbf{K}}}}}G$ and $p \in {$gS$}(H)$ such that $\|H\| < \lambda$, $p$ is realized in $G$. $G$ is Galois-saturated if it is $\| G\|$-Galois-saturated.
[^11]: Recall that a group $H$ is reduced if its only divisible subgroup is $0$.
[^12]: Given $G$ a torsion-free group, the rank of $G$ is $rk_0(G)$ (see footnote 6 for the definition).
[^13]: This is exercise [@fuchs §14.4.1].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
[Lu Lu, Qiongxiang Huang[^1], Jiangxia Hou[^2]]{}\
College of Mathematics and Systems Science, Xinjiang University, Urumqi, Xinjiang 830046, P.R.China
title: 'Infinite classes of strongly regular graphs derived from $GL(n,F_2)$[^3]'
---
It is known that the automorphism group of the elementary abelian $2$-group $Z_2^n$ is isomorphic to the general linear group $GL(n,F_2)$ of degree $n$ over $F_2$. Let $W$ be the collection of permutation matrices of order $n$. It is clear that $W\le GL(n,F_2)$. In virtue of this, we consider the Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$, where $S$ is the union of some orbits under the action of $W$. We call such graphs the orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$. In this paper, we give eight infinite families of strongly regular graphs among orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$, in which six families are new as we know. By the way, we formulate the spectra of orbit Cayley graphs as well.
**Keywords:** Cayley graph; Strongly regular graph; Vector space; Galois field
**AMS subject classifications:** 05A19; 05C50; 05C25
Introduction
============
Let $\Gamma$ be a graph with vertex set $V=\{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$. The *adjacency matrix* of $\Gamma$, denoted by $A(\Gamma)=(a_{i,j})_{n\times n}$, is the $n\times n$ matrix such that the $a_{i,j}=1$ if $v_i\sim v_j$ and $0$ otherwise. The eigenvalues of $A(G)$ are called the *eigenvalues* of $\Gamma$ and the multiset of such eigenvalues together with their multiplicities is called the *spectrum* of $\Gamma$, denoted by $\mathrm{Spec}(\Gamma)$. The *distance* $d(v_i,v_j)$ (or $d_{ij}$ for short) between two vertices $v_i$ and $v_j$ is the length of a shortest path from $v_i$ to $v_j$. The largest distance in $\Gamma$ is the *diameter* of $\Gamma$, denoted by $d(\Gamma)$, that is, $d(\Gamma)=\max\{d(v_i,v_j)\mid v_i,v_j\in V\}$. For $1\le l\le d(\Gamma)$, let $N^{(l)}(v_i)=\{v_j\mid d(v_i,v_j)=l\}$. Therefore, $V=N^{(1)}(v_i)\cup \cdots\cup N^{(d(\Gamma))}(v_i)$ is a partition of $V$ for any vertex $v_i$. Particularly, we alway write $N(v_i)$ for $N^{(1)}(v_i)$, which is just the neighborhood of $v_i$. Moreover, the size of $N(v_i)$ is the *degree* of $v_i$, denoted by $d(v_i)$. A bijection $\sigma$: $V\rightarrow V$ is an *automorphism* of $\Gamma$ if $v_i^{\sigma}\sim v_j^{\sigma}$ if and only if $v_i\sim v_j$. The set of all automorphisms forms the *automorphism group* of $\Gamma$, denoted by $Aut(\Gamma)$. The graph $\Gamma$ is *vertex transitive* if for any vertex $v_i$ there exists $\sigma\in Aut(\Gamma)$ such that $v_1^{\sigma}=v_i$.
In 1970, Doob [@Doob] started the investigation of graphs with few distinct eigenvalues. Such graphs has been proved to possess nice combinatorial properties and rich structures [@Dam]. It is clear that the connected graphs with exactly two distinct eigenvalues are complete graphs. However, it is far from been solving to characterize the graphs with exactly three distinct eigenvalues. The non-regular graphs with three distinct eigenvalues are studied by many mathematicians, see, for example, [@Dam] and [@Koolen]. A connected regular graph with exactly three distinct eigenvalues must be a so called strongly regular graph [@Godsil]. A *strongly regular graph* with parameters $(n,r,\lambda,\mu)$ is an $r$ regular graph on $n$ vertices in which any two adjacent vertices have exactly $\lambda$ common neighbors and any two non-adjacent vertices have exactly $\mu$ common neighbours. The characterization of strongly regular graphs is a classical problem in algebraic graph theory which has caused wide public attention and numerous results are obtained, especially, on the strongly regular Cayley graphs, we refer the reader to [@Calderbank; @Feng; @Ge; @Momihara] and references therein. Let $G$ be a group and $S$ a subset of $G$. The *Cayley graph* $X=Cay(G,S)$ is the graph such that $V(X)=G$ and two vertices $x$ and $y$ are adjacent if $x^{-1}y\in S$. If $S$ contains no identity element of $G$ and $S^{-1}=S$, then $X$ is an undirected simple graph. The *circulant graphs* are the Cayley graphs over cyclic groups. The complete characterization of strongly regular circulant graphs are independently given by Bridges and Mena [@Bridges], Ma [@Ma], and partially by Marušič [@Marusic]. For other abelian groups, Leifman and Muzychuk [@Leifman] classified strongly regular Cayley graphs on $Z_{p^n}\times Z_{p^n}$ for a prime $p$. Recently, the complete characterization of *minimal Cayley graphs* (that is Cayley graphs $Cay(G,S)$ such that $S$ is a minimal generating set of $G$) over abelian groups was given by [@Stefko].
In this paper, we focus on the Cayley graphs over the elementary abelian $2$-group $Z_2^n$. It is clear that the automorphism group of $Z_2^n$ is isomorphic to the general linear group $GL(n,F_2)$. Let $W$ be the collection of permutation matrices of order $n$. It is clear that $W\le GL(n,F_2)$. Note that $Z_2^n$ can be viewed as the vector space of dimension $n$ over the field $F_2$. Therefore, each element $v$ in $Z_2^n$ is a vector $v=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)^T$ such that $a_i\in F_2$. Let $|v|$ be the number of $1$’s in $v$, that is, $|v|=\sum_{i=1}^na_i$. Denote by $O_i=\{v\in Z_2^n\mid |v|=i\}$ for $0\le i\le n$. It is clear that $Pv\in O_i$ for any $P\in W$ and $v\in O_i$. Moreover, for any two vectors $u,v\in O_i$, there exists $P\in W$ such that $Pu=v$. Therefore, each $O_i$ is an orbit of $Z_2^n$ under the action of $W$. A Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ is called an *orbit Cayley graph* if $S$ is the union of some $O_i$. In this paper, we present a simpler criterion for a Cayley graph to be strongly regular. By using this criterion and some combination identities, we construct eight infinite families of strongly regular graphs among the orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$, in which six families are new as we know. By the way, we formulate the spectra of orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$. At last, we propose two research problems.
Orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$
================================
We start with the connectivities of orbit Cayley graphs. Since $Cay(Z_2^n,O_0)$ is the union of $2^n$ copies of loops and $Cay(Z_2^n,O_n)$ is the union of $2^{n-1}$ copies of $K_2$, we exclude them when we consider the connectivity of an orbit Cayley graph.
\[lem-z-1\] For $i\not\in\{0,n\}$, the set $O_i$ is a generating set of $Z_2^n$ if and only if $i$ is odd.
If $i$ is even, then $O_i$ generates a subgroup in which each element $v$ satisfies that $|v|$ is even. The necessity follows. Now suppose that $i$ is an odd. If $i=1$ then $O_1$ is exactly a base of $Z_2^n$, and so is a generating set. If $i=3$, then $O_3$ contains $x_1=(1110\cdots 0)^T$, $x_2=(1101\cdots 0)^T$ and $x_3=(1011\cdots 0)^T$. We have $e_1=(1000\cdots 0)^T=x_1+x_2+x_3$. Since $O_3$ is an orbit under $W$, we have $O_1\subset\langle O_3\rangle$. Thus $O_3$ generates $Z_2^n$. Similarly we can prove that $O_i$ generates $Z_2^n$ for other odd number.
It is well known that a Cayley graph $Cay(G,S)$ is connected if and only if $S$ is a generating set of $G$, that is, $\langle S\rangle=G$. The following result is immediate from Lemma \[lem-z-1\].
\[cor-z-1\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ ($S\ne O_0$ or $O_n$) is connected if and only if $S$ contains $O_i$ for some odd $i$.
In what follows, we focus on the spectra of connected orbit Cayley graphs. Note that the eigenvalues of Cayley graphs over an abelian group have been given by Babai.
\[lem-z-2\] Let $G$ be an abelian group of order $n$ and $S$ a subset of $G$ such that $1\not\in S$ and $S^{-1}=S$. If $\chi_1,\ldots,\chi_n$ are all irreducible characters of $G$, then the eigenvalues of the Cayley graph $Cay(G,S)$ are $\lambda_i=\sum_{s\in S}\chi_i(s)$ for $1\le i\le n$.
To get the eigenvalues of orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$, we should know the irreducible characters of $Z_2^n$.
\[lem-z-3\] The irreducible characters of $Z_2^n$ are $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}$ for $i_j\in\{0,1\}$ and $1\le j\le n$, where $\displaystyle \chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(v)=(-1)^{a_1i_1+\cdots+a_ni_n}$ for $v=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)^T\in Z_2^n$.
For a group $G$ and a subset $T$, denote by $\chi(T)=\sum_{t\in T}\chi(t)$ for a character $\chi$. By immediate calculation, we get the following result.
\[lem-z-4\] Let $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}$ be an irreducible character of $Z_2^n$ and $O_i$ an orbit. If $i_1+\cdots+i_n=k$, then $\displaystyle \chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(O_i)=\sum_{j=0}^i{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j$.
By definition, we have $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(O_i)=\sum_{v\in O_i}\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(v)$. Denote by $\Lambda_j^i=\{v=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)^T\in O_i\mid a_1i_1+\cdots+a_ni_n=j\}$. Therefore, for each $v\in \Lambda_j^i$, we have $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(v)=(-1)^j$ and thus $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(O_i)=\sum_{j=0}^{r(i,k)}|\Lambda_j^i|(-1)^j$, where $r(i,k)=\min\{i,k\}$. It is not hard to verify that $|\Lambda_j^i|={k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}$. Thus, we have $$\displaystyle \chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(O_i)=\sum_{j=0}^{r(i,k)}{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j=\sum_{j=0}^i{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j.$$
\[thm-z-1\] Let $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ be an orbit Cayley graph over $Z_2^n$. If $S=\cup_{i\in I}O_i$ for some subset $I\subseteq\{1,\ldots,n\}$, then the eigenvalues of $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ consist of $\lambda_k(S)$ with multiplicity ${n\choose k}$ for $0\le k\le n$, where $$\displaystyle \lambda_k(S)=\sum_{i\in I}\sum_{j=0}^{i}{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j.$$
By Lemma \[lem-z-2\], the eigenvalues of $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ are given by $$\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(S)=\sum_{i\in I}\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(O_i)$$ where $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}$ are irreducible characters of $Z_2^n$. Denote by $\Upsilon_k=\{\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}\mid i_1+\cdots+i_n=k\}$ for $0\le k\le n$. By Lemma \[lem-z-4\], we have $$\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}(S)=\sum_{i\in I}\sum_{j=0}^i{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j$$ for any $\chi_{i_1,\ldots,i_n}\in \Upsilon_k$. It means that all characters in $\Upsilon_k$ correspond to the same eigenvalue, denoted by $\lambda_k$. Note that $|\Upsilon_k|={n\choose k}$. It means that the multiplicity of $\lambda_k$ is ${n\choose k}$. It completes the proof.
At a glance of Theorem \[thm-z-1\], one may think that any orbit Cayley graph over $Z_2^n$ has exactly $n+1$ distinct eigenvalues. However, the values $\lambda_k$ and $\lambda_{k'}$ may be the same for distinct integers $k$ and $k'$. Thus, Theorem \[thm-z-1\] just implies the following result.
\[cor-z-2\] If $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ is an orbit Cayley graph, then it has at most $n+1$ distinct eigenvalues.
Note that, if $S=Z_2^n\setminus \{\mathbf{0}\}$, then the orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ is isomorphic to the complete graph, which has exactly two distinct eigenvalues. In general, we pose the following problem.
\[conj-d-1\] If there exists an orbit Cayley graph over $Z_2^n$ with exactly $m$ distinct eigenvalues for any integer $m$ such that $2\le m\le n+1$ ?
The answer is positive for $m=2$. The following examples imply that the answer is also positive for $m=n+1$, $\lfloor n/2\rfloor+2$ and $3$, respectively. Note that, if an $r$-regular graph has eigenvalues $r>\lambda_2\ge\cdots\ge\lambda_n$, then its complement has eigenvalues $n-1-r>-1-\lambda_n>\cdots>-1-\lambda_2$ [@Cvetkovic].
\[exa-1\] We consider the orbit Cayley graph $X=Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ where $S=Z_2^n\setminus(\{\mathbf{0}\}\cup O_1)$. It is clear that $\overline{X}=Cay(Z_2^n,O_1)$. By Theorem \[thm-z-1\], the spectrum of $\overline{X}$ consists of $$\lambda_k(O_1)=\sum_{j=0}^1{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j={k\choose 0}{n-k\choose 1}-{k\choose 1}{n-k\choose 0}=n-2k$$ with multiplicity ${n\choose k}$ for $0\le k\le n$. Note that $\overline{X}$ is $n$-regular. The spectrum of $X$ consists of $\mu_0=2^n-1-n$ with multiplicity $1$ and $\mu_k=2k-1-n$ with multiplicity ${n\choose k}$ for $1\le k\le n$. Therefore, $X$ and $\overline{X}$ are both connected orbit Cayley graphs having $n+1$ distinct eigenvalues.
\[exa-2\] We consider the orbit Cayley graph $X=Cay(Z_2^n,O_2)$. By Corollary \[cor-z-1\], $X$ is disconnected and thus $\overline{X}$ is connected. By Theorem \[thm-z-1\], the eigenvalues of $X$ consist of $$\lambda_k(O_2)=\sum_{j=0}^2{k\choose j}{n-k\choose i-j}(-1)^j=\frac{n(n-1)-4k(n-k)}{2}$$ with multiplicity ${n\choose k}$ for $0\le k\le n$. Therefore, the eigenvalues of $\overline{X}$ consist of $\mu_0=2^n-1-\frac{n(n-1)}{2}$ with multiplicity $1$ and $\mu_k=-1-\frac{n(n-1)-4k(n-k)}{2}$ with multiplicity ${n\choose k}$ for $1\le k\le n$. Note that $\lambda_k=-1-\frac{n(n-1)-4k(n-k)}{2}=-1-\frac{n(n-1)-4k'(n-k')}{2}=\lambda_{k'}$ if and only if $k'=k$ or $k'=n-k$. It means that the connected orbit graph $\overline{X}$ has exactly $\lfloor n/2\rfloor+2$ eigenvalues.
\[exa-3\] We consider the orbit Cayley graph $X=Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ where $S=\cup_{i=1}^{n-1}O_i$. It is clear that $\overline{X}=Cay(Z_2^n,O_n)$ which is the union of $2^{n-1}$ copies of $K_2$. Therefore, the spectrum of $\overline{X}$ consists of $\pm 1$ with multiplicity $2^{n-1}$ and thus the spectrum of $X$ consists of $2^n-2$ with multiplicity $1$, $0$ with multiplicity $2^{n-1}$ and $-2$ with multiplicity $2^{n-1}-1$. It follows that $X$ has exactly three distinct eigenvalues.
Note that the Cayley graphs having three distinct eigenvalues are strongly regular graphs. However, it is not easy to characterize the strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs by immediately calculating their spectra by applying Theorem \[thm-z-1\]. In the rest of this paper, we will characterize some strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs by analyzing their structures. We need some combination identities.
Combination identities
======================
In this part, we shall give some combination identities, which will be used to prove our main results. Throughout this paper, we always set ${s\choose t}=0$ if $t<0$ or $t>s$.
\[lem-z-5\] For a positive integer $n$, we have $$\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i}=\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i+1}=2^{n-1}.$$
It is clear that $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle (1+1)^n=\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose i}=\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i}+\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i+1}\\
\displaystyle (1-1)^n=\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose i}(-1)^i=\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i}-\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i+1}
\end{array}\right.$$ By summation the two equations, we get $2\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i}=2^n$ and thus $\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i}=2^{n-1}$. Subtracting the second equation from the first one, we have $2\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i+1}=2^n$ and thus $\sum_{i=0}^n{n\choose 2i+1}=2^{n-1}$.
\[lem-z-6\] For a positive integer $m$, we have $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{m}{4m\choose 4j}=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}\\
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{m}{4m\choose 4j+2}=2^{4m-2}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1}\\
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{m}{4m\choose 4j+1}=\sum_{j=0}^{m}{4m\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m-2}\\
\end{array}\right.$$
Let $i$ be the imaginary unit. Note that $1+i=\sqrt{2}e^{\pi i/4}$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\displaystyle 2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}+(2^{2m}\sin{m\pi}) i=2^{2m}e^{m\pi i}=(\sqrt{2}e^{\pi i/4})^{4m}=(1+i)^{4m}\\
&=&\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+2}i^2+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+1}i+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+3}i^3\\
&=&\displaystyle \left(\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+2}\right)+\left(\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+1}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+3}\right)i.\end{aligned}$$ It leads to that $$\label{eq-x-1}\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+2}=2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}=(-1)^m2^{2m}\\
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+1}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+3}=2^{2m}\sin{m\pi}=0.
\end{array}\right.$$ From Lemma \[lem-z-5\], we have $$\label{eq-x-2}
\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+2}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+1}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m-1}.$$ Thus, the result follows from (\[eq-x-1\]) and (\[eq-x-2\]).
Similarly, by respectively considering $(1+i)^{4m+1}$, $(1+i)^{4m+2}$ and $(1+i)^{4m+3}$, we get the following result.
\[lem-z-7\] For a positive integer $m$, we have\
(a) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+1}=2^{4m-1}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$;\
(b) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m-1}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$;\
(c) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+2\choose 4j}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+2\choose 4j+2}=2^{4m}$;\
(d) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+2\choose 4j+1}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(e) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+2\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(f) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+3\choose 4j}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+3\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m+1}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(g) $\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+3\choose 4j+1}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+3\choose 4j+2}=2^{4m+1}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$.
As similar as the proof of Lemma \[lem-z-6\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
&&\displaystyle 2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}+(2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}) i=(\sqrt{2}e^{\pi i/4})^{4m+1}=(1+i)^{4m+1}\\
&=&\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}i^2+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+1}i+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}i^3\\
&=&\displaystyle \left(\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}\right)+\left(\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+1}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}\right)i.\end{aligned}$$ It leads to that $$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}=2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}=(-1)^m2^{2m}\\
\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+1}-\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}=2^{2m}\cos{m\pi}=(-1)^m2^{2m}.
\end{array}\right.$$ From Lemma \[lem-z-5\], we have $$\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+1}+\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m}.$$ Therefore, we have $\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j}=2^{4m-1}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$ and $\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+2}=\sum_{j=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4j+3}=2^{4m-1}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$. It follows (a) and (b).
Similarly, we get (c) (d) and (e) when we consider $(1+i)^{4m+2}$ and get (f) and (g) when we consider $(1+i)^{4m+3}$.
By applying Lemmas \[lem-z-6\] and \[lem-z-7\], we get the following combination identity.
\[thm-z-2\] For two positive integers $k$ and $m$ such that $k\le m$, we have $$\label{eq-2-1}
\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j+1}=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}.$$
Note that $\{j\mid j\in Z, 0\le j\le 2k\}=\{2i\mid i\in Z, 0\le i\le k\}\cup \{2i+1\mid i\in Z, 0\le i\le k-1\}$. We have $$\begin{array}{lll}
&&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j+1}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i}\sum_{t=0}^m{4(m-k)+1\choose 4(t-i)+1}+\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t=0}^m{4(m-k)+1\choose 4(t-i)-1}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i}\sum_{t'=-i}^{m-i}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'+1}+\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t'=-i}^{m-i}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'-1}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'+1}+\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'-1},\\
\end{array}$$ the third equality holds because ${4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'+1}=0$ and ${4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'-1}=0$ if $t'<0$ or $t'>m-k$. From Lemmas \[lem-z-6\] and \[lem-z-7\], we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
&&\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'+1}+\sum_{i=0}^{k}{4k\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k}{4(m-k)+1\choose 4t'-1}\\
&=&\displaystyle(2^{4k-2}+(-1)^k2^{2k-1})(2^{4(m-k)-1}+(-1)^{m-k}2^{2(m-k)-1})\\&&+(2^{4k-2}-(-1)^k2^{2k-1})(2^{4(m-k)-1}-(-1)^{m-k}2^{2(m-k)-1})\\
&=&\displaystyle2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}.
\end{array}$$
It completes the proof.
By the similar methods, we obtain the following combination identities.
\[thm-z-3\] For two positive integers $k$ and $m$ such that $k\le m$, we have\
(i) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$;\
(ii) $\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$;\
(iii) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$;\
(iv) $\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+3\choose 4t-2j+1}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(v) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(vi) $\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(vii) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j-1}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(viii) $\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+3\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(ix) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(x) $\displaystyle 2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j-1}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$;\
(xi) $\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j+3}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$.
As similar as the proof of Theorem \[thm-z-2\], we prove these identities by two steps. At first, by using $\{j\mid j\in Z, 0\le j\le 2k\}=\{2i\mid i\in Z, 0\le i\le k\}\cup \{2i+1\mid i\in Z, 0\le i\le k-1\}$, the left side of each identity can be written as the sum of two parts. Next, by using the identities in Lemmas \[lem-z-6\] and \[lem-z-7\], we obtain the identity.
For example, the left side of (i) can be written as $$\begin{array}{lll}
&&\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}\\
&=&\displaystyle \sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i}\sum_{t=0}^m{4(m-k)-1\choose 4(t-i)}+\sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t=0}^m{4(m-k)-1\choose 4(t-i)-2}\\
&=&\displaystyle \sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k-1}{4(m-k-1)+3\choose 4t'}+\sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k-1}{4(m-k-1)+3\choose 4t'+2}.
\end{array}$$ By Lemma \[lem-z-7\] (a) (b) (f) and (g), we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
&&\displaystyle \sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k-1}{4(m-k-1)+3\choose 4t'}+\sum_{i=0}^{4k}{4k+1\choose 4i+2}\sum_{t'=0}^{m-k-1}{4(m-k-1)+3\choose 4t'+2}\\
&=&(2^{4k-1}+(-1)^k2^{2k-1})(2^{4(m-k-1)+1}-(-1)^{m-k-1}2^{2(m-k-1)})\\
&&+(2^{4k-1}-(-1)^k2^{2k-1})(2^{4(m-k-1)+1}+(-1)^{m-k-1}2^{2(m-k-1)})\\
&=&2^{4m-3}+(-1)^m2^{2m-2}.\end{array}$$ It leads to (i).
By these same processes, one can verify the other identities one by one.
At last, we mention that (i), (ii) and (iii) of Theorem \[thm-z-3\] and the identity of Theorem \[thm-z-2\] give four distinct combination representations but achieve the same value $2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}$; the next four identities and the last four identities of Theorem \[thm-z-3\] also give four distinct combination representations but achieve the same values $2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}$ and $2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}$, respectively. Such a properties are important to verify strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs in the next section.
Strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs
====================================
A connected $r$-regular graph on $n$ vertices is said to be *strongly regular* with parameter $(n,r,\lambda,\mu)$ if two vertices $x$ and $y$ have $\lambda$ common neighbors whenever they are adjacent and $\mu$ common neighbors whenever they are not adjacent. A strongly regular graph is said to be *trivial* if its complement is disconnected. It is clear that the complement of a trivial strongly regular graph is the union of some isomorphic complete graphs [@Godsil]. We first characterize the trivial strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$.
\[thm-z-4\] Let $S^-=\cup_{i=1}^{n-1}O_i$ and $S^o=\cup_{i=1}^{\lceil n/2\rceil}O_{2i-1}$ be two subsets of $Z_2^n$. The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ is a trivial strongly regular Cayley graph if and only if $S\in \{S^-,S^o\}$. Furthermore, $Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)$ is $(2^n, 2^n-2,2^n-4,2^n-2)$-strongly regular and $Cay(Z_2^n,S^o)$ is $(2^n,2^{n-1},0,2^{n-1})$-strongly regular.
We have proved that $Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)$ is a trivial strongly regular graph in Example \[exa-3\]. Similarly, one can verify that the complement of $Cay(Z_2^n,S^o)$ is $2K_{2^{n-1}}$ and thus it is a trivial strongly regular graph. Therefore, the sufficiency follows and we shall show the necessity in what follows. Let $X=Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ be a trivial strongly regular orbit Cayley graph. Therefore, $\overline{X}$ is disconnected and thus $\overline{S}=Z_2^{n}\setminus(\{\mathbf{0}\}\cup S)$ does not contain $O_i$ for any odd $i$ or $\overline{S}=O_n$. If the latter occurs, then we have $S=S^-$. If the former occurs, then $\overline{S}$ is the union of some $O_{2i}$. In fact, $\overline{S}$ contains all $O_{i}$ for even $i$ since otherwise the component $Cay(\langle\overline{S}\rangle,\overline{S})$ of $\overline{X}$ cannot be complete. It follows that $S=S^o$. Besides, one can easily get the parameters of $Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)$ and $Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)$ because $\overline{Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)}=2^{n-1}K_2$ and $\overline{Cay(Z_2^n,S^-)}=2K_{2^{n-1}}$.
In what follows, we consider the non-trivial strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs. At first we give a criterion for a vertex transitive graph to be strongly regular.
\[lem-z-8\] Let $\Gamma$ be a connected vertex transitive graph on $n$ vertices. Then $\Gamma$ is strongly regular if and only if the partition $\Pi:$ $V(\Gamma)=\{v\}\cup N(v)\cup N^2(v)$ is an equitable partition for some $v\in V(\Gamma)$.
It is known that if $\Gamma$ is strongly regular, then the partition $\Pi$: $V(\Gamma)=\{v\}\cup N(v)\cup N^2(v)$ is equitable for any $v\in V(\Gamma)$. The necessity follows. In what follows, we show the sufficiency. It is clear that $\Gamma$ is $r$-regular for some $r$ because it is vertex transitive. Since $\Pi$ is an equitable partition, assume the quotient matrix is $$B_{\Pi}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0&b_{12}&b_{13}\\b_{21}&b_{22}&b_{23}\\b_{31}&b_{32}&b_{33}\end{array}\right),$$ where $b_{12}+b_{13}=b_{21}+b_{22}+b_{23}=b_{31}+b_{32}+b_{33}=r$. For any two vertex $x,y$ such that $x\sim y$, there exists $\sigma\in Aut(\Gamma)$ such that $x^{\sigma}=v$ and thus $y^{\sigma}=v_1$ for some $v_1\in N(v)$. Therefore, we have $|N(x)\cap N(y)|=|(N(x)\cap N(y))^{\sigma}|=|N(x^{\sigma})\cap N(y^{\sigma})|=|N(v)\cap N(v_1)|=b_{22}$. Similarly, for any two vertices $x,y\in V(\Gamma)$ such that $x\not\sim y$, we have $|N(x)\cap N(y)|=|N(v)\cap N(v_2)|=b_{32}$, where $y^{\tau}=v_2\in N^2(v)$ for some $\tau\in Aut(\Gamma)$ and $x^{\tau}=v$. It means that $\Gamma$ is a $(n,r,b_{22},b_{32})$-strongly regular graph.
For a subset $S$ of a group $G$, let $\overline{S}=G\setminus(S\cup\{1\})$. Denote by $C(v,S)=\{(x,y)\mid x,y\in S \textrm{ and } v=xy\}$. By applying Lemma \[lem-z-8\], we get a criterion for a Cayley graph to be strongly regular.
\[cor-z-3\] Let $S$ be a subset of a group $G$ such that the identity element $1\not\in S$ and $S=S^{-1}$. Then the Cayley graph $Cay(G,S)$ is $(|G|,|S|,\lambda,\mu)$-strongly regular if and only if $|C(v,S)|=\lambda$ for any $v\in S$ and $|C(v',S)|=\mu$ for any $v'\in \overline{S}$.
At first, we will verify that $|N(v)\cap S|=|C(v,S)|$ for any $v\in G$. On the one hand, for any $x\in N(v)\cap S$, we have $x^{-1}v=y\in S$, that is, $v=xy$. It means that $(x,y)\in C(v,S)$ and thus $|N(v)\cap S|\le |C(v,S)|$. On the other hand, for any $(x,y)\in C(v,S)$, we have $x,y\in S$ and $v=xy$, that is, $x^{-1}v=y\in S$. It means that $x\in N(v)\cap S$ and thus $|C(v,S)|\le |N(v)\cap S|$.
Assume that $X=Cay(G,S)$ is $(|G|,|S|,\lambda,\mu)$-strongly regular. For any $v\in S$, we have $v\sim 1$ and thus $|N(v)\cap N(1)|=\lambda$. Therefore, by noticing $N(1)=S$, we have $|C(v,S)|=|N(v)\cap S|=|N(v)\cap N(1)|=\lambda$. For any $v'\in \overline{S}$, we have $v'\not\sim 1$ and thus $|N(v')\cap N(1)|=\mu$. Therefore, by noticing $N(1)=S$, we have $|C(v',S)|=|N(v')\cap S|=|N(v')\cap N(1)|=\mu$.
Conversely, assume that $|C(v,S)|=\lambda$ for any $v\in S$ and $|C(v',S)|=\mu$ for any $v'\in \overline{S}$. It is clear that $X=Cay(G,S)$ is vertex transitive and $\Pi$: $V(X)=\{1\}\cup S\cup \overline{S}$ is a partition. Moreover, we have $|N(v)\cap S|=|C(v,S)|=\lambda$ for any $v\in S$ and $|N(v')\cap S|=|C(v',S)|=\mu$ for any $v'\in \overline{S}$. Therefore, we see that $\Pi$ is an equitable partition with quotient matrix $$B_{\Pi}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0&|S|&0\\1&\lambda&|S|-1-\lambda\\0&\mu&|S|-\mu\end{array}\right)\begin{array}{c}\{1\}\\S\\\overline{S}\end{array}.$$ Thus, Lemma \[lem-z-8\] implies that $X$ is $(|G|,|S|,\lambda,\mu)$-strongly regular.
Easily to show that a vertex-transitive graph with diameter two is strongly regular if it is arc-transitive. Lemma \[lem-z-8\] gives a sufficient and necessary condition for a vertex transitive graph to be strongly regular, and Theorem \[cor-z-3\] also gives a sufficient and necessary condition for a Cayley graph to be strongly regular. Such a sufficient and necessary condition is essentially to verify wether $V(X)=\{1\}\cup N(1)\cup N^2(1)$ is an equitable partition, which is really weaker than the arc-transitivity.
Now we focus on the orbit Cayley graphs over $Z_2^n$. Recall that $O_i$ are the orbits of $Z_2^{n}$ under the action of $W$ for $0\le i\le n$. Denote by $S_0=\cup_{i\ne 0,i\equiv 0(\mod 4)}O_i$, $S_1=\cup_{i\equiv 1(\mod 4)}O_i$, $S_2=\cup_{i\equiv 2(\mod 4)}O_i$ and $S_3=\cup_{i\equiv 3(\mod 4)}O_i$.
\[lem-z-9\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m}$. If $v\in S_0\cup S_1$ then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-2.$$
We divide two cases to discuss.
[**Case 1.**]{} $v\in S_0$.\
In this case, assume that $v=4k$ where $1\le k\le m$. For $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$, we have $v=x+y$ and thus $x,y\in S_0$ or $x,y\in S_1$. Suppose that $x$ has $i$’s coordinates of $1$ coinciding with that of $v$, that is, $i=v^Tx$.
If $x,y\in S_0$ then $|x|=4t$ and $|y|=4s$ for some $0\le t,s\le m$ ($x,y\ne \mathbf{0}$). Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s=|y|=|v+x|=(4k-i)+(4t-i)$. It follows that $i$ is even, say $i=2j$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k,2t\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined whenever $x$ is chosen. Note that $x,y\ne\mathbf{0}$ and so $(v,\mathbf{0})$ and $(\mathbf{0},v)$ should be excluded. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}-2=\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}-2$ pairs of such $(x,y)$ as ${4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}=0$ if $j>r_{k,t}$.
If $x,y\in S_1$ then $|x|=4t+1$ and $y=4s+1$ for some $0\le t,s\le m-1$. Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s+1=|y|=|v+x|=(4k-i)+(4t+1-i)$. It follows that $i$ is also even, say $i=2j$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k,2t\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t+1-2j}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined whenever $x$ is chosen. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t+1-2j}=\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t+1-2j}$ pairs of such $(x,y)$ as ${4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t+1-2j}=0$ if $j>r_{k,t}$.
By arguments above, we have $$\begin{array}{lll}|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|&=&\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k\choose 4t+1-2j}-2\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j+1}-2.\end{array}$$ By Theorem \[thm-z-2\], we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-2.$$
[**Case 2.** ]{} $v\in S_1$.\
In this case, assume that $|v|=4k+1$ where $0\le k\le m-1$. For $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$, we have $v=x+y$ and thus $x\in S_0$, $y\in S_1$ or $x\in S_1$, $y\in S_0$. Suppose that $x$ has $i$’s coordinates of $1$ coinciding with that of $v$, that is, $i=v^Tx$.
If $x\in S_0$ and $y\in S_1$ then $|x|=4t$ and $y=4s+1$ for some $0\le t\le m$ and $0\le s\le m-1$. Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s+1=|y|=|v+x|=(4k+1-i)+(4t-i)$. It follows that $i$ is even, say $i=2j$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k,2t\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined when $x$ is chosen. Note that $x\ne \mathbf{0}$ and so $(\mathbf{0},v)$ should be excluded. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-1=\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of such $(x,y)$ as ${4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}=0$ if $j>r_{k,t}$. By the symmetry of $x$ and $y$, there are also $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$, $x\in S_1$ and $y\in S_0$.
By arguments above, we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-2.$$ By Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (i), we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-2.$$
It completes the proof.
\[lem-z-10\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m}$. If $v\in \overline{S_0\cup S_1}=S_2\cup S_3$, then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}.$$
We divide two cases to discuss. [**Case 1.** ]{} $v\in S_2$.\
In this case, assume that $|v|=4k+2$ where $0\le k\le m-1$. For $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$, we have $v=x+y$ and thus $x,y\in S_0$ or $x,y\in S_1$. Suppose that $x$ has $i$’s coordinates of $1$ coinciding with that of $v$, that is, $i=v^Tx$.
If $x,y\in S_0$ then $|x|=4t$ and $|y|=4s$ for some $0\le t,s\le m$. Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s=|y|=|v+x|=(4k+2-i)+(4t-i)$. It follows that $i$ is odd, say $i=2j+1$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k,2t\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j-1}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined whenever $x$ is chosen. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j-1}=\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of such $(x,y)$.
If $x,y\in S_1$ then $|x|=4t+1$ and $|y|=4s+1$ for some $0\le t,s\le m$. Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s+1=|y|=|v+x|=(4k+2-i)+(4t+1-i)$. It follows that $i$ is also odd, say $i=2j+1$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k,2t\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined whenever $x$ is chosen. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j}=\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j}$ pairs of such $(x,y)$.
By arguments above, we have $$\begin{array}{lll}|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|&=&\displaystyle \sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j-1}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-2\choose 4t-2j}\\
&=&\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}.\end{array}$$ By Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (ii), we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}.$$
[**Case 2.** ]{} $v\in S_3$.\
In this case, assume that $|v|=4k+3$ where $0\le k\le m-1$. For $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$, we have $v=x+y$ and thus $x\in S_0$, $y\in S_1$ or $x\in S_1$, $y\in S_0$. Suppose that $x$ has $i$’s coordinates of $1$ coinciding with that of $v$, that is, $i=v^Tx$.
If $x\in S_0$ and $y\in S_1$ then $|x|=4t$ and $|y|=4s+1$ for some $0\le t\le m$ and $0\le s\le m-1$. Note that $y=v+x$ due to $v=x+y$. By our assumption, $4s+1=|y|=|v+x|=(4k+3-i)+(4t-i)$. It follows that $i$ is odd, say $i=2j+1$ where $0\le j\le r_{k,t}=\min\{2k+1,2t-1\}$. Therefore, $x$ has exactly ${4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}$ possible choices and $y$ is uniquely determined whenever $x$ is chosen. Thus, there are exactly $\sum_{t=0}^{m}\sum_{j=0}^{r_{k,t}}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}=\sum_{t=0}^{m}\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of such $(x,y)$. By the symmetry of $x$ and $y$, there are also $\sum_{t=0}^{m}\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x\in S_1$ and $y\in S_0$.
By arguments above, we have $$\displaystyle |C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2\sum_{t=0}^{m}\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-3\choose 4t-2j-1}.$$ By Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (iii), we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}.$$
It completes the proof.
Note that, by Lemma \[lem-z-7\] (a), $|S_0\cup S_1|=\sum_{i=1}^m{4m\choose 4i}+\sum_{i=0}^m{4m\choose 4i+1}=\sum_{i=0}^m\left({4m\choose 4i}+{4m\choose 4i+1}\right)-1=\sum_{i=0}^m{4m+1\choose 4i+1}-1=2^{4m-1}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-1$. Combining Lemmas \[lem-z-9\], \[lem-z-10\] and Theorem \[cor-z-3\], we have the following result.
\[thm-z-5\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_0\cup S_1)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m},2^{4m-1}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-1,2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}-2,2^{4m-2}+(-1)^m2^{2m-1}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
Note that the complement of a non-trivial $(n,r,\lambda,\mu)$-strongly regular graph is an $(n,n-1-r,n-2-2r+\mu,n-2r+\lambda)$-strongly regular [@Godsil]. Since $\overline{Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_0\cup S_1)}=Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_2\cup S_3)$, we get the following result.
\[cor-z-4\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_2\cup S_3)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m},2^{4m-1}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1},2^{4m-2}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1},2^{4m-2}-(-1)^m2^{2m-1}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
By similar methods, we consider the orbit Cayley graphs $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_1)$ and $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_3)$.
\[lem-z-11\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m+2}$. If $v\in S_0\cup S_1$, then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.$$
As similar as the proof of Lemma \[lem-z-9\], if $v\in S_0$, one can verify that there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t-2j}-2$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$ such that $x,y\in S_0$ and there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t+1-2j}$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$ such that $x,y\in S_1$. Therefore, from Theorem (\[thm-z-3\]) (iv), we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t-2j}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t+1-2j}-2\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+3\choose 4t-2j+1}-2\\
&=&2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.\end{array}$$
If $v\in S_1$, there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$ such that $x\in S_0$ and $y\in S_1$. By symmetry of $x$ and $y$, there are also $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$ such that $y\in S_0$ and $x\in S_1$. Therefore, from Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (v), we also have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}-2=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.$$
It completes the proof.
\[lem-z-12\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m+2}$. If $v\in \overline{S_0\cup S_1}=S_2\cup S_3$, then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}.$$
As similar as the proof of Lemma \[lem-z-10\], if $v\in S_2$, there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j-1}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$. By Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (vi), we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j-1}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j}\\
&=&2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}.
\end{array}$$
If $v\in S_3$, there are $2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of $(x,y)\in C(v,S_0\cup S_1)$. By Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (vii), we also have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_1)|=2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j-1}=2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}.$$
It completes the proof.
Note that, from Lemma \[lem-z-7\] (g), $|S_0\cup S_1|=\sum_{i=1}^m{4m+2\choose 4i}+\sum_{i=0}^m{4m+2\choose 4i+1}=\sum_{i=0}^m\left({4m+2\choose 4i}+{4m+2\choose 4i+1}\right)-1=\sum_{i=0}^m{4m+3\choose 4i+1}=2^{4m+1}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-1$. Combining Lemmas \[lem-z-11\], \[lem-z-12\] and Theorem \[cor-z-3\], we get the following result.
\[thm-z-6\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_1)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m+2},2^{4m+1}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-1,2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}-2,2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
Since $\overline{Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_1)}=Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_2\cup S_3)$, we have the following result.
\[cor-z-5\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_2\cup S_3)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m+2},2^{4m+1}-(-1)^m2^{2m},2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m},2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
\[lem-z-13\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m+2}$. If $v\in S_0\cup S_3$, then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.$$
If $v\in S_0$, one can verify that there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t-2j}-2$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x,y\in S_0$, and there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t+3-2j}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x,y\in S_3$. Therefore, by Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (viii), we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t-2j}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+2\choose 4t-2j+3}-2\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k\choose 2j}{4m-4k+3\choose 4t-2j}-2\\
&=&2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.
\end{array}$$
If $v\in S_3$, one can verify that there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x\in S_0$, $y\in S_3$, and there are also $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-1$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x\in S_3$, $y\in S_0$. Therefore, by Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (ix), we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|=2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k+1}{4k+3\choose 2j}{4m-4k-1\choose 4t-2j}-2=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-2.$$
It completes the proof.
\[lem-z-14\] Let $v$ be an element of $Z_2^{4m+2}$. If $v\in \overline{S_0\cup S_3}=S_1\cup S_2$, then $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}.$$
If $v\in S_1$, there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x\in S_0$, $y\in S_3$, and there are also $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x\in S_3$, $y\in S_0$. Therefore, by Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (x), we have $$|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|=2\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+1\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j-1}=2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}.$$
If $v\in S_2$, there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j-1}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x,y\in S_0$, and there are $\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j+2}$ pairs of $(x,y)$ such that $v=x+y$ and $x,y\in S_3$. Therefore, by Theorem \[thm-z-3\] (xi), we have $$\begin{array}{lll}
|C(v,S_0\cup S_3)|&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j-1}+\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k\choose 4t-2j+2}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{t=0}^m\sum_{j=0}^{2k}{4k+2\choose 2j+1}{4m-4k+1\choose 4t-2j+3}\\
&=&2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}.
\end{array}$$ It completes the proof.
Note that, from Lemma \[lem-z-7\] (f), $|S_0\cup S_3|=2^{4m+1}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-1$. Combining Lemmas \[lem-z-13\], \[lem-z-14\] and Corollary \[cor-z-3\], we get the following result.
\[thm-z-7\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_3)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m+2},2^{4m+1}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-1,2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}-2,2^{4m}-(-1)^m2^{2m}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
Since $\overline{Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_0\cup S_3)}=Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_1\cup S_2)$, we have the following result.
\[cor-z-6\] The orbit Cayley graph $Cay(Z_2^{4m+2},S_1\cup S_2)$ is strongly regular with parameter $$\left(2^{4m+2},2^{4m+1}+(-1)^m2^{2m},2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m},2^{4m}+(-1)^m2^{2m}\right)$$ for any positive integer $m$.
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we have constructed six families of infinite non-trivial strongly regular graphs from the general linear group $GL(n,F_2)$, see Theorems \[thm-z-5\], \[thm-z-6\], \[thm-z-7\] and Corollaries \[cor-z-4\], \[cor-z-5\] and \[cor-z-6\]. We collect them in Table \[tab-1\], and especially for $m=1$ and $2$, we present these graphs in Table \[tab-2\]. Note that Brouwer <http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/graphs/srg/srgtab.html> has listed all strongly regular graphs on at most $1300$ vertices and thus the $12$ graphs in Table \[tab-2\] are contained in his collection. However, as we know, the six infinite families are new.
\[tab-1\]
Graphs $n$ $r$ $\lambda$ $\mu$ Graphs $n$ $r$ $\lambda$ $\mu$
---------------------------- --------- ------ ----------- ------- ----------------------------- ---------- ------- ----------- -------
$Cay(Z_2^{4},S_0\cup S_1)$ $2^4$ $5$ $0$ $2$ $Cay(Z_2^{8},S_0\cup S_1)$ $2^8$ $135$ $70$ $72$
$Cay(Z_2^{4},S_2\cup S_3)$ $2^{4}$ $10$ $6$ $6$ $Cay(Z_2^{8},S_2\cup S_3)$ $2^{8}$ $120$ $56$ $56$
$Cay(Z_2^{6},S_0\cup S_1)$ $2^6$ $27$ $10$ $12$ $Cay(Z_2^{10},S_0\cup S_1)$ $2^{10}$ $527$ $270$ $272$
$Cay(Z_2^{6},S_2\cup S_3)$ $2^{6}$ $36$ $20$ $20$ $Cay(Z_2^{10},S_2\cup S_3)$ $2^{10}$ $496$ $240$ $240$
$Cay(Z_2^{6},S_1\cup S_2)$ $2^{6}$ $28$ $12$ $12$ $Cay(Z_2^{10},S_1\cup S_2)$ $2^{10}$ $528$ $272$ $272$
$Cay(Z_2^{6},S_0\cup S_3)$ $2^{6}$ $35$ $18$ $20$ $Cay(Z_2^{10},S_0\cup S_3)$ $2^{10}$ $495$ $238$ $240$
: The non-trivial strongly regular orbit Cayley graphs for $m=1$ and $2$.
\[tab-2\]
It is clear that if a Cayley graph is arc-transitive with diameter $2$ then it must be strongly regular. However, it is always not easy to verify whether a Cayley graph is arc-transitive. In Theorem \[cor-z-3\], we present a simpler criterion for a Cayley graph to be strongly regular, which is also applicative for non arc-transitive Cayley graphs. Note that the graph $Cay(Z_2^4,S_0\cup S_1)$ is just the famous Clebsch graph, which is arc-transitive, and $Cay(Z_2^4, S_0\cup S_1)$ is just the special case for $m=1$ in the family of $Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_0\cup S_1)$. It is natural to ask whether $Cay(Z_2^{4m},S_0\cup S_1)$ is arc-transitive for any positive integer $m$. More general, we pose the following problem.
Does all strongly regular graphs in the six families are arc-transitive ?
The automorphism group of a graph always reflects some combinatoric properties of this graph. Therefore, many mathematicians would like to investigate the automorphism groups of graphs, especially the automorphism groups of Cayley graphs, see [@Feng-1] and reference therein. Note that the automorphism group of the Clebsch graph $Cay(Z_2^4,S_0\cup S_1)$ is isomorphic to the Coxeter group $D_5$. In fact, every isomorphism between two connected induced subgraphs of the Clebsch graph can be extended to an automorphism of it. The following problem is proposed.
Determine the automorphism groups of the strongly regular graphs in the six families.
[11]{}[ J.L. Alperin, R.B. Bell, Group and Representations, Springer (1995). L. Babai, Spectra of Cayley graphs, J. Combinatorial Theory, Series B 27 (1979) 180–189. W.G. Bridges, R.A. Mena, Rational circulants with rational spectra and cyclic strongly regular graphs, Ars Combin. 8 (1979) 143–161. R. Calderbank, W.M. Kantor, The geometry of two-weight codes, Bull. London Math. Soc. 18 (1986) 97–122. X. M. Cheng, A. L. Gavrilyuk, G. R. W. Greaves, J. H. Koolen, Biregular graphs with three eigenvalues, European J. Combinatorics 56 (2016) 57–80. D. Cvetković, M. Doob and H. Sachs, Spectra of Graphs-Theory and Application, Academic Press, New York, 1980. E.R. van Dam, Nonregular graphs with three eigenvalues, J. Combinatorial Theory, Series B 73 (1998) 101–118. M. Doob, Graphs with a small number of distinct eigenvaleus, Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 175 (1970) 104–110. T. Feng, K. Momihara, Q. Xiang, Constructions of strongly regular Cayley graphs and skew Hadamard difference sets from cyclotomic classes, Combinatorica 35 (2015) 413–434. Y.Q. Feng, Automorphism groups of Cayley graphs on symmetric groups with generating transposition sets, J. Combinatorial Theory, Series B 96 (2006) 67–72. G. Ge, Q. Xiang, T. Yuan, Construction of strongly regular Cayley graphs using index four Gauss sums, J. Algebraic Combin. 37 (2013) 313–329. C. Godsil, G. Royle, Algebraic Graph Theory, Springer, New York, 2001. Y. Leifman, M. Muzychuk, Strongly regular Cayley graphs over the group $Z_{p^n}\oplus Z_{p^n}$, Discrete Math. 305 (2005) 219–239. S.L. Ma, Partial difference sets, Discrete Math. 52 (1984) 75–89. D. Marušič, Strong regularity and circulant graphs, Discrete Math. 78 (1989) 119–125. S. Miklavič, P. Šparl, On distance-regular Cayley graphs on abelian groups, J. Combinatorial Theory, Series B 108 (2014) 102–122. K. Momihara, Strongly regular Cayley graphs, skew Hadamard difference sets, and rationality of relative Gauss sums, Europ. J. Combin. 34 (2013) 706–723. J.P. Serre, Linear representation of finite groups, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997. Translate from the second French edition by L. Scott, Granduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 42. ]{}
[^1]: Corresponding author.
[^2]: Email: [email protected] (L. Lu), [email protected] (Q. Huang), [email protected] (J. Hou)
[^3]: This work is supported by NSFC Grant No. 11671344.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We investigate double finger gate (DFG) controlled spin-resolved resonant transport properties in an n-type quantum channel with a Rashba-Zeeman (RZ) subband energy gap. By appropriately tuning the DFG in the strong Rashba coupling regime, resonant state structures in conductance can be found that is sensitive to the length of the DFG system. Furthermore, a hole-like bound state feature below the RZ gap and an electron-like quasi-bound state feature at the threshold of the upper spin branch can be found that is insensitive to the length of the DFG system.'
author:
- 'Chi-Shung Tang'
- 'Shu-Ting Tseng'
- Vidar Gudmundsson
- 'Shun-Jen Cheng'
title: |
Double-finger-gate controlled spin-resolved resonant quantum transport\
in the presence of a Rashba-Zeeman gap
---
Introduction
============
Spintronics utilizing the spin degree of freedom of conduction electrons is an emerging field due to its applications from logic to storage devices with high speed and very low power dissipation.[@Loss1998; @Zutic2004; @Wolf2001] Manipulating the spin information offers the possibility to scale down certain semiconductor spintronic devices to the nanoscale and is favorable for applications in quantum computing.[@Awschalom2002; @Awschalom2007; @Heedt2012] Various spin-orbit (SO) effects present in semiconductor structures provide a promising way to spin manipulation in two-dimensional electron gases (2DEG).[@Winkler2003; @Meier2007] Particularly, the Rashba SO interaction is of importance in spintronic devices, such as the gate-controllable spin field-effect transistor.[@Datta1990; @Bandyopadhyay2004; @Koo2009; @Tang2012; @Sadreev2013]
The SO interaction can be induced when the transported electron experiences a strong electric field due to an asymmetry in the confinement potential, namely the Rashba SO interaction is caused by a structure inversion asymmetry (SIA).[@Rashba60] Especially, the Rashba SO interaction due to SIA can be significantly induced in 2DEG confined by an asymmetric potential in semiconductor materials. Experimentally, the Rashba interaction has been shown to be effective for electron spin manipulation by using bias-controlled gate contacts.[@Nitta1997] Recently, several approaches were proposed to engineer a spin-resolved subband structure utilizing magnetic fields[@Muccio02; @Brataas02; @Zhang03; @Wang03; @Serra2005; @Scheid2007] or ferromagnetic materials.[@Sun03; @Zeng03] The combination of a Rashba SO interaction and an external in-plane magnetic field may modify the subband structure producing a spin-split Rashba-Zeeman (RZ) subband gap feature.[@Pershin2004; @Quay2010] To implement a quantum information storing and transfer, not only coherent manipulation[@Tang2012] but also resonant features involving SO interactions are of importance.[@Zhang2014] This can be achieved utilizing a double finger gate (DFG) forming a quantum dot in between the fingers where electrons are subjected to the Rashba SO coupling and the Zeeman interaction.
In this work, we consider a split-gate induced narrow constriction that is fabricated in a 2DEG in a narrow band gap semiconductor heterostructure. A very asymmetric structure in the 2DEG leads to strong SO coupling with the result that the Rashba effect is dominant. We shall explore spin-resolved quantum transport properties that are manipulated by a double finger gate (DFG) under an external in-plane magnetic field as shown in . Various resonant transport mechanisms in the conductance will be demonstrated analytically and numerically, including resonant states (RS), hole-like bound states (HBS), and electron-like quasi-bound states (EQBS).
![ (Color online) Schematic illustration of the quantum channel device constructed with a 2DEG induced from InAs-In$_{1-x}$Ga$_x$As semiconductor heterostructure. A split-gate is used to control the channel width. An external in-plane magnetic field $\vec{B} = B
\hat{\mb{x}}$ ($B<0$). The DFG is consisted of two finger gates located $x_1$ and $x_2$ to influence the spin-resolved resonant quantum transport.[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1.eps){width="45.00000%"}
The organization of the rest of this paper is as follows. In Sec.II we describe the propagation-matrix approach of tunneling through a DFG system under in-plane magnetic field. In Sec. III we present our calculated results on the spin-split subband structure and the spin-resolved conductance. A concluding remarks is given in Sec.IV.
DFG-contolled Transport Model
=============================
In this section, we shall show how the split-gate confined quantum device influenced by the RZ effect can be describe by a Hamiltonian technique in order to obtain the spin-split subband structures. The corresponding group velocity and effective mass will be obtained to analyze the spin-resolved resonant quantum transport behavior. A propagation matrix approach will be introduced to deal with the DFG-controlled spin-resolved quantum transport.
Hamiltonian of the DFG system
-----------------------------
As is illustrated for the device in , a two dimensional electron gas (2DEG) is induced in an InAs-In$_{1-x}$Ga$_x$As semiconductor heterojunction grown in the $(001)$ crystallographic direction and is subjected to a split-gate voltage. A pair of split-gates restrict the movement of the electrons of the 2DEG, and therefore a quantum channel is generated in the $[100]$ direction. Propagating electrons in the channel are driven from source to drain.
In the absence of the finger gates, the transported electron is affected by the Rashba effect $H_R$ due to SIA and the Zeeman effect $H_Z$ induced by an external in-plane magnetic field, described by the unperturbed Hamiltonian $$\widetilde{H}_0 = H_0 + H_{\rm R} + H_{\rm Z}.
\label{H0til}$$ The first term describes a bare quantum channel that is described by the ideal Hamiltonian $$H_0 = \frac{{\hbar ^2}{k^2}}{{2{m^*}}} + {U_c}(y).$$ The first term is the kinetic energy of an electron in the 2DEG, where $\hbar = h/2\pi$ is the reduced Planck constant. A conduction electron has an assigned wave number $k$ satisfying $k^2=k_x^2 +
k_y^2$ and $m^*$ is its effective mass. The second term is a confining potential energy modeled by a hard-wall confinement $${U_c}(y) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l}
0, \, \left| y \right| < W/2\\
\infty, \, {\rm{otherwise}},
\end{array} \right.
\label{Uc}$$ with $W$ being the width of the quantum channel that can be controlled by applying a split-gate with negative voltage.
In the second term of , we consider a $(001)$ crystallographic 2DEG system, and hence the Rashba SO Hamiltonian $H_{\rm R} = \alpha \left( \mb{\sigma}\times \mathbf{k}\right) \cdot
\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ couples the Pauli spin matrix $\mb{\sigma}$ to the momentum $\mathbf{p}= \hbar \mathbf{k}$ can be reduced as a $k$-linear form $$H_{\rm R} = \alpha \left( \sigma_x k_y - \sigma_y k_x \right),
\label{HR}$$ where the Rashba coupling strength $\alpha$ is proportional to the electric field along $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ direction perpendicular to the 2DEG.[@Nitta1997] The third term in describes an applied external in-plane magnetic field that is selected to be antiparallel to the channel in the $[100]$ direction and has the form $\vec{B}
= B \hat{\mathbf{x}}$ ($B<0$). The longitudinal in-plane magnetic field induced Zeeman term can be expressed as $$H_Z = g{\mu_B}B \sigma_x,$$ in which $g = g_s/2$ indicates half of the effective gyromagnetic factor ($g_s = -15$ for InAs) and $\mu_B = 5.788\times
10^{-2}$ ${\rm meV/T}$ is the Bohr magneton. In comparison with the Zeeman Hamiltonian $H_Z$, we may rewrite in a narrow channel in the form $H_{\rm R} = g \mu_B B_R \sigma_y$, where the effective Rashba magnetic field $\mathbf{B}_{\rm R}$ = $B_{\rm R}
\hat{\mathbf{y}}$ = $-\alpha k_x / (g\mu_B) \hat{\mathbf{y}}$. Hence, the spin-resolved quantum channel system without the DFG may be described by the unperturbed Hamiltonian $$\widetilde{H}_0 = H_0 + g \mu_B \left( {B}{\sigma _x} + B_{\rm R}
\sigma_y \right) \, .
\label{Htilde}$$
In order to manipulate the spin-resolved resonant transport properties, we applied the DFG on top of split gate with an insulator in between, as shown in . We consider that the width of the finger-gate scattering potential, $W$, should be less than the Fermi wave length $\lambda_F = 31.4$ nm to be described as a delta potential. We consider a high-mobility semiconductor materials so that impurity effects can be neglected. The considered DFG system is then described by the scattering potential energy $$U_{\rm sc}(x) = e \sum_{j=1}^2 V_j \delta(x-x_j),
\label{Usc}$$ where $V_j$ indicates the bias potential applied by the finger gate $j$. The DFG system under investigation is thus described by the Schrödinger equation $$\left[ \widetilde{H}_0 + U_{\rm sc}(x) \right] \Psi (x,y) = E \Psi (x,y).
\label{Htotal}$$ The eigenfunction $\Psi (x,y)$ in can be obtained by summing over all occupied subbands, $n$, for the product of the spatial wave functions and the spin states, given by $$\Psi (x,y) = \sum_n {\phi _n}(y){e^{i{k_x}x}}\chi_n \, .
\label{Psi}$$ Here the transverse wave function in subband $n$, of the split-gate induced confining potential energy (\[Uc\]), is of the form ${\phi _n}\left( y \right) = (\pi/W)^{1/2} \sin
( n\pi y / W )$ with quantized bare subband energy $$\varepsilon_{y,n} = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m^*}
\left( \frac{n\pi}{W}
\right)^2 .
\label{ey}$$ After some algebra, the corresponding eigenenergies of (\[Htotal\]) can be obtained $$E_n^\sigma(k_x) = \frac{\hbar^2 k_x^2}{2 m^*} + \varepsilon_{y,n} +
\sigma g \mu_B B_{\rm RZ},
\label{En}$$ where $\sigma = \pm$ is the spin index, and $B_{\rm RZ}^2 = B^2
+B_{\rm R}^2$ is the effective RZ magnetic field with $B_{\rm R} = 2
\alpha k_x /(g\mu_B)$ being a momentum dependent magnetic field due to the Rashba effect. This expression indicates that the subband spin-split energy gap $\Delta E_{\rm RZ}$ = $E_n^+ - E_n^-$ = $2g\mu_B B_{\rm RZ}$ can be changed by tuning the effective RZ magnetic field. It is interesting to note that this spin-split energy gap $\Delta E_{\rm RZ}$ is reduced to $\Delta E_{\rm Z} =
2g\mu_B B$ in the zero momentum limit.
For simplicity, we employ the Fermi-level in a 2DEG as an energy unit, namely $E^*$ = $E_F$ = $\hbar^2 k_F^2/2m^*$ with $m^\ast$ and $\hbar$ being, respectively, the effective mass of an electron and the reduced Planck constant. In addition, one selects the inverse wave number as a length unit, namely $l^* = k_F^{-1}$. Correspondingly, the magnetic field is in units of $B^* = \mu_B^{-1}
E^*$, and the Rashba SO-coupling constant $\alpha$ is in units of ${\alpha}^* = E^*l^*$. In the following we consider a sufficient narrow channel by assuming the channel width $W=\pi l^*=15.7$ nm so that the bare subband energy due to $U_c(y)$ is simply $\varepsilon_{y,n} = n^2$. The energy dispersion can thus be expressed as $$E_n^{\sigma} = k_x^2 + n^2 + \sigma \sqrt{ (gB)^2 + (2 \alpha
k_x)^2 },
\label{En_dimless}$$ where $\sigma = \pm$ indicates the upper ($+$) and lower ($-$) spin branches. Sufficiently low temperature $k_B T < 0.1 \Delta
\varepsilon$ or $T < 23$ K is required to avoid thermal broadening effect.
Spin-resolved quantum transport
-------------------------------
In order to investigate the DFG-controlled spin-resolved quantum transport properties, we shall explore how the spin-mixing effect due to the RZ coupling influences the propagating and evanescent modes for a given energy of an incident electron. The energy dispersion relation (\[En\_dimless\]) can be rewritten in the form $$k_x^4 - \left[ 4\alpha^2 - \left( {K_n^\sigma} \right)^2 \right]{k_x^2}
+ \left( {K_n^\sigma} \right)^2 - (gB)^2 = 0,$$ where $K_n^\sigma = E_n^\sigma - n^2$ indicates the ideal kinetic energy of an electron in the transverse subband $n$ in the absence of a RZ effect. To proceed, one has to label the four longitudinal wave numbers $k_x$ as the right-going $k_{\sigma}$ and left-going $q_{\sigma}$, in which the notation $\sigma = +$ indicates spin-up mode and $\sigma = -$ stands for spin-down mode.
Below, we focus on a sufficiently narrow quantum channel to explore the first two conductance steps associated with the two spin branches of a transported electron occupying the lowest subband. We calculate the quantum transport properties by using a generalized spin-resolved propagation matrix method, in which the spin branches as well as spin-flip scattering mechanisms are taken into account. The energy dispersion shown in (a) essentially divides the energy spectrum into three regimes, namely the low energy regime $E^-_{\rm bottom} < E < E^-_{\rm top}$, the intermediate energy regime $E^-_{\rm top} < E < E^+_{\rm bottom}$, and the high energy regime $E > E^+_{\rm bottom}$. In the low and high energy regimes, there are four propagating modes with real $k_{\sigma}$ and real $q_{\sigma}$. It should be noted that there are two propagating and two evanescent modes in the intermediate energy regime or the RZ energy gap region where the evanescent modes manifest a bubble behavior with imaginary wave vectors.[@Tang2012]
The spin-resolved wave functions around the scattering potential $U_{\rm sc}$ located at $x_j$ given by can be formally expressed as $$\psi \left( x \right) = \sum\limits_{\sigma = \pm } {{A_\sigma
}{e^{i{k_\sigma }x}}\chi ({k_\sigma })} + \sum\limits_{\sigma =
\pm } {{B_\sigma }{e^{i{q_\sigma }x}}\chi ({q_\sigma })} ,\quad x <
x_j \label{wf1}$$ $$\psi \left( x \right) = \sum\limits_{\sigma = \pm } {{C_\sigma
}{e^{i{k_\sigma }x}}\chi ({k_\sigma })} + \sum\limits_{\sigma =
\pm } {{D_\sigma }{e^{i{q_\sigma }x}}\chi ({q_\sigma })} ,\quad x >
x_j \label{wf2}$$ where $A_\sigma$ and $C_\sigma$ indicate the right-going wave amplitude corresponding to $k_\sigma$, while $B_\sigma$ and $D_\sigma$ represents the left-going wave amplitude corresponding to $q_\sigma$, and $\chi_\sigma$ stands for the momentum dependent spin states. It is possible to obtain the propagation matrix equation by matching suitable boundary conditions as shown below around the free space or the scattering potential induced by the finger gates, namely the electronic wave function is continuous $$\psi \left( {x_j^- } \right) = \psi \left( {x_j^+} \right)
\label{bc1}$$ and the derivative of wave function is discontinuous by a deduction of delta scattering potential energy, given by $$\psi '\left( {x_j^-} \right) = \psi '\left( {x_j^+} \right) -
e{V_j}\psi \left( {x_j^+} \right)\, .
\label{bc2}$$
Before matching the above boundary conditions, it is convenient to define the reflection coefficient $r_{{\sigma_i},{\sigma_f}} =
B_{\sigma_f} / A_{\sigma_i}$ and the transmission coefficient $t_{{\sigma_i},{\sigma_f}} = C_{\sigma_f} / A_{\sigma_i} $ that involves the spin flip states ($\sigma_i \neq \sigma_f$) and spin non-flip states ($\sigma_i = \sigma_f$). Taking into account the possible incident spin states $\sigma$ and $\bar{\sigma }$ allows us to write the propagation matrix equation (PME) in terms of the total propagation matrix $\rm{\bf P}^{\rm T}$ $$\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
{r_{\sigma ,\sigma }} & {r_{\bar \sigma ,\sigma }} \\
{r_{\sigma ,\bar \sigma }} & {r_{\bar \sigma ,\bar \sigma }} \\
\end{array}} \right] = {{\bf{P}}^{\rm T}}\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{t_{\sigma ,\sigma }} & {t_{\bar \sigma ,\sigma }} \\
{t_{\sigma ,\bar \sigma }} & {t_{\bar \sigma ,\bar \sigma }} \\
0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 \\
\end{array}} \right]\, .
\label{PME}$$ To proceed, we match the wave functions and using the boundary conditions and corresponding to $U_{\rm sc}(j)$, and then we rearrange these equations into a $4
\times 4$ interface propagation matrix ${\bf{P}^\delta}(j)$ of the delta scattering potential $j$. Moreover, one has to construct a spin-resolved free-space propagation matrix ${\bf{P}^{\rm F}}(L)$ with length $L$ between the finger gates, given by ${\bf{P}^{\rm
F}}(L) = \exp (-ik_{i,j}L) \delta_{i,j}$, in which $k_{1,1}=
k_{\sigma}$, $k_{2,2}= k_{\bar \sigma}$, $k_{3,3}= -q_{\sigma}$, and $k_{4,4}= -q_{\bar \sigma}$. The total propagation matrix $\mathbf{P}^{\rm T}$ thus consists of the matrices for the first and second scattering delta potentials $\mathbf{P^\delta }(1)$ and $\mathbf{P}^\delta(2)$ induced by the DFG as well as a free space propagation matrix $\mathbf{P}^{\rm F}(L)$ between them, given by $$\mathbf{P}^{\rm T} = \mathbf{P^\delta }(1) \mathbf{P}^{\rm F}(L)
\mathbf{P}^\delta(2)\, .$$ Solving the PME numerically, we may obtain the reflection and transmission coefficients of the scattering intermediate and final states in the presence of the DFG.
We consider an electron injected from the left reservoir (source electrode) and transported to the right reservoir (drain electrode) for a given incident energy. Solving for the spin non-flip and flip reflection coefficients $r_{\sigma ,\sigma}$ and $r_{\sigma ,\bar
\sigma}$, as well as the spin non-flip and flip transmission coefficients $t_{\sigma ,\sigma}$ and $t_{\sigma ,\bar \sigma}$, we can calculate numerically the conductance based on the Landauer-Büttiker framework[@Landauer1970; @Buttiker1990] $$G = G_0 \sum\limits_{\sigma_L,\sigma_R}
\frac{v_{\sigma_R}}{v_{\sigma_L}}
\left| t_{\sigma_L,\sigma_R} \right|^2 \, .
\label{eq3.2.30}$$ Here $G_0$ = $e^2/h$ is the conductance quantum per spin branch, and $\sigma_L$ and $\sigma_R$ indicate, respectively, the spin branches of the incident and transmitted waves in the left and right leads. Therefore, ${v_{{\sigma_L}}}$ and ${v_{{\sigma_R}}}$ represent the group velocity of corresponding modes in the left and right reservoirs, respectively.
Numerical Results
=================
Calculations presented below are carried out under the assumption that the electron effective mass $m^{\ast}=0.023 m_0$, which is appropriate for the InAs-In$_{1-x}$Ga$_x$As semiconductor interface with the typical electron density $n_e \sim
10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$.[@Nitta1997] Accordingly, the energy unit is $E^*$ = 66 meV, the length unit $l^*$ = 5.0 nm, the magnetic field unit $B^* = 1.14$ $\textrm{kT}$, and the spin-orbit coupling parameter is in units of ${\alpha^*} = 330$ meV$\cdot$nm. In addition, the bias potential of the finger gate is in units of $V^*
= 330$ mV$\cdot$nm. By using the above units, all physical quantities presented below are dimensionless.[@Tang2012]
Subband structures with Rashba-Zeeman effect
--------------------------------------------
It is known that the presence of an in-plane magnetic field may split the spin degenerate parabolic energy dispersion vertically toward the higher and lower energy and manifests an energy difference $\Delta {E_{\rm{Z}}} = 2gB$, as shown by black dotted line in . In addition, the Rashba SO coupling may let the subband structure shift horizontally toward the positive and negative momentum directions.
By appropriately tuning the applied in-plane magnetic field, the Rashba SO interaction can be separated into several coupling regimes.
In the intermediate Rashba coupling regime $2\alpha^2 = gB$, the spin-up branch is still parabolic while the spin-down branch manifests a flat subband bottom and $\Delta E_{\rm RZ} = \Delta
E_{\rm Z}$, as shown by red dashed line in . In the strong Rashba coupling regime $gB < 2\alpha^2 \leq 4gB$, the combination of the Rashba and Zeeman interactions provide a possibility to generate a RZ gap with a significant subband in the spin-down branch, as shown by green dash-dotted line in . A significant zero point energy of a transported electron in the DFG system occurs at the subband top of the spin-down branch. Furthermore, we shall show below that, in the ultra-strong coupling regime $\alpha^2 > 2gB$, the zero point energy will be changed to the subband bottom of the spin-down branch.
In (a), we show the energy dispersion of the first subband with the Rashba coefficient $\alpha = 0.2$ and an in-plane magnetic field $gB$ = 0.015. This is within the strong Rashba coupling regime, $2\alpha^2/(gB) > 1$. The subband bottom of the upper spin branch is at $E_{\rm bottom}^+ = 1 + gB$. However, the subband bottom at $k_x
= 0$ of the lower spin branch becomes a subband top with the same energy $E_{{\rm top}}^- = 1 - gB$. Therefore, the RZ energy gap of the plus and minus branches $\Delta {E_{\rm{RZ}}}$ is exactly the Zeeman energy $\Delta {E_{\rm{Z}}}$.
In order to explore the spin-resolved transport properties, it is important to define the group velocity of an electron in the $\sigma$ spin branch $$v_{\sigma} = \frac{dE_n^{\sigma}}{d{k_x}} = 2{k_x} + \sigma
\frac{{4{\alpha^2}{k_{x}}}}{\sqrt {(gB)^2 + 4{\alpha ^2}k_x^2}}
\label{vg}$$ as shown in (b). Defining the velocity allows us to determine a local minimum and a maximum in the subband structures by setting the group velocity identically zero. We see that there are two subband bottoms in the lower spin branch at $k_x = \pm \left[ \alpha^2 - (gB/2\alpha)^2 \right]^{1/2}$ with the same energy $E_{\rm bottom}^- = 1 - \left[ \alpha^2
+(gB/2\alpha)^2\right]$.
To identify an electron-like ($m^* > 0$) and a hole-like ($m^* <
0$) nature, it is necessary to define the effective mass by performing second derivation of energy band, given by $$\frac{1}{m^*_{\sigma}}
= \frac{d^2 E_n^\sigma}{dk_x^2}
= 2 + \sigma \frac{4\alpha^2\left(gB\right)^2}
{\left[ {\left(gB\right)^2 + \left(2\alpha k_x\right)^2} \right]^{3/2}}\, .
\label{effectivemass}$$ This expression allows us to define hole-like bound states (HBS) that occurs when the effective mass goes to infinity, as shown in (c). The corresponding HBS wave number can be analytically expressed as $$k_{\rm HBS} = \sqrt{
\left|
{\left[ {\frac{\left(gB\right)^2}{4\alpha}} \right]}^{2/3}
- \left( \frac{gB}{2\alpha }\right)^2
\right| }\, .
\label{k_HBS}$$ The fact that $k_{\rm HBS}$ goes to zero if $2\alpha^2 = gB$ implies the HBS feature can be found only in the strong Rashba coupling regime $2\alpha^2 > gB$.
It is clearly sown in (c) that the effective mass is always positive in the spin-up branch (blue dashed line) while the effective mass in the spin-down branch (red solid line) is allowed to be negative in the small momentum regime $|k_x| < k_{\rm HBS}$ (red shadow). The corresponding HBS energy can be obtained as $$E_{\rm HBS} = 1 - \left( \frac{gB}{2\alpha} \right)^2
+\left[ \frac{\left(gB\right)^2}{4\alpha} \right]^{2/3}
- \left[ 2 \alpha^2 \left(gB\right)^2 \right]^{1/3}
\label{E_HBS}$$ to investigate the HBS in the conductance as we shall demonstrate in the next section. Having a finite group velocity but an infinite effective mass implies that the electron will be restricted to the energy level corresponding to the inflection point in energy. This is recognized as a HBS in the lower spin branch. The HBS nature will significantly influence the spin-resolved resonant quantum transport behavior.
DFG controlled transport
------------------------
In this section, we discuss how the conductance is influenced by the DFG to manifest various electron-like and hole-like peak structures due to the presence of the RZ coupling. The length $L$ between the two finger gates is tuned to demonstrate these spin-resolved quantum transport features.
Figure \[fig4\] shows the spin-split energy dispersion and its corresponding influence on the conductance. Obvious are the peaks corresponding to the resonant ground state in low energy regime and the first excited state in the high energy regime. In (a), we show the spin-split energy dispersion by taking the Rashba coefficient $\alpha$ = 0.2 (66 meV nm) and $gB$ = 0.02 ($B=3$ ${\rm T}$) to ensure that the system is in the strong SO coupling regime ($2\alpha^2 >gB$). The upper spin branch $E^+$ manifests a single band bottom $E^+_{\rm
bottom}$=$\varepsilon_{y,1}+gB$=$1.02$. The lower spin branch $E^-$ exhibits a single band top at energy $E^-_{\rm
top}$=$\varepsilon_{y,1}-gB$=$0.98$ and two band bottoms with the same energy $E_{\rm bottom}^- = \varepsilon_{y,1} - \left[ \alpha^2
+(gB/2\alpha)^2\right]$=$0.958$.
In (b), we demonstrate how the transport properties are affected by the applied DFG by fixing the finger gate voltage $V_1$=$V_2$=0.6 while tuning the length $L$ between the two finger gates. In the low kinetic energy regime $E_{\rm bottom}^- < E <
E^-_{\rm top}$, there are two different resonant features in conductance. The first resonant feature at a lower energy is a resonant state (RS) due to multiple scattering between the two finger gates. When the transported electron is in the double scattering potential induced by the finger gates, it is quasi located in an imaginary quantum well embedded in the quantum channel. The $m$th RS states are sensitive to the length $L$ between the finger gates and can be approximately estimated by the theoretical formula $$E_{{\rm RS},m}^{\rm th} = E_{\rm zero} + \varepsilon_{x,m}\, ,
\label{ERS}$$ in which ${\varepsilon _{x,m}} = ( m\pi/L)^2$ is the $m$th energy level due to the DFG with zero point energy $E_{\rm zero}$. When the Rashba coupling strength is within the ultra-strong coupling regime $\alpha^2 > 2gB$ as shown in , the zero point energy $E_{\rm zero}$ is identically the subband bottom of the spin-down branch $E_{\rm bottom}^-$. Theoretically, the first RS structures in conductance are at $E_{{\rm RS},1}^{\rm th} = E_{\rm
bottom}^- + \varepsilon_{x,1}$ = 0.968, 0.966, 0.965 for $L=150,
160, 170$ nm, respectively. In (b), the numerical calculation by means of propagation matrix method gives $E_{{\rm
RS},1}$= 0.965, 0.963, and 0.961 for $L=150, 160, 170$ nm, respectively. To estimate the accuracy of our theoretical estimation, we define the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) in energy as $$M = \frac{100\%}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
\left|\frac{E_{L_i} - E^{\rm th}_{L_i}}{E_{L_i}}\right|\, ,
\label{MAPE}$$ where $n$ is the number of selected lengths $L_i$ of the DFG system. This formula gives the MAPE of the RS structure in conductance to be $M_{{\rm RS,1}} = 0.36\%$. Similarly, the theoretical estimation of the fourth RS structures in the conductance are $E_{{\rm RS},4}^{\rm th}
= E_{\rm bottom}^- + \varepsilon_{x,4}$ = 1.118, 1.098, 1.082 for $L=150, 160, 170$ nm, respectively. In the high kinetic energy regime $E > E_{\rm bottom}^+$, we can find RS peaks in the conductance at $E_{{\rm RS},4}$ = 1.078, 1.057, and 1.04 for $L=150, 160,
170$ nm, respectively. The MAPE of the fourth RS peak in the conductance is $M_{{\rm RS},4} = 3.86\%$.
The transport mechanisms of these conductance peaks are schematically shown by solid blue arrows in . These conductance peaks are associated with resonant bound energy levels $\varepsilon_{x,m}$ and can be tuned by changing the length $L$ between the two finger gates. They will be closer to the lower subband bottom when the length $L$ is increased. We note in passing that the second and the third RS structures $E_{{\rm RS},2}$ and $E_{{\rm RS},3}$ can not be found in the conductance, these RS features are suppressed due to the formation of the RZ energy gap.
![(Color online) (HBS) Schematic illustration of a hole-like particle transport. The electron transmission is not allowed if the electron energy is not aligned with the resonant state (blue dashed arrow). However, when the electron with incident energy equals the bound state energy of the hole-like subband structure (red solid line), it may contribute to a length insensitive peak structure in conductance (red solid arrow).[]{data-label="fig6"}](fig6.eps){width="40.00000%"}
The second resonant feature in the conductance shown in is a hole-like bound state (HBS) at the same energy $E_{\rm HBS} =
0.978$ for $L=150, 160, 170$ nm. The corresponding theoretical prediction based on is given by $E_{\rm HBS}^{\rm th} =
0.972$. The corresponding MAPE is $M_{\rm HBS} = 0.62\%$. It is found that such HBS structure in the conducatance is independent of the distance $L$ between the two finger gates. In the intermediate kinetic energy regime (i.e. in the RZ gap energy regime), a small peak in the conductance can be found at the threshold of the upper spin branch. This structure is recognized as a electron-like quasi-bound state (EQBS). In comparison with the case of a single finger gate system,[@Tang2012] the EQBS feature is a peak structure instead of dip structure in conductance.
This HBS mechanism is schematically shown by red arrows in indicating an electron occupying an inner mode in the low kinetic energy regime $E_{\rm bottom}^- < E < E^-_{\rm top}$ forming a HBS below the subband top of the spin-down branch. However, the electron with energy $E_{\rm HBS}$ occupying the outer mode is at off-resonant energy and cannot be transmitted through the DFG system, as is shown by the blue dashed arrows in .
![(Color online) Conductance is plotted as a function of the incident electron energy under magnetic field strength $gB = 0.01$: (a) $\alpha$=0.135 and (b) $\alpha$=0.18 with length $L$ = 150 nm (red solid) and 170 nm (blue dash) between the two finger gates. The DFG system is subject to the same positive potential $V_1$ = $V_2$ = 0.6 in both cases.[]{data-label="fig7"}](fig7a.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![(Color online) Conductance is plotted as a function of the incident electron energy under magnetic field strength $gB = 0.01$: (a) $\alpha$=0.135 and (b) $\alpha$=0.18 with length $L$ = 150 nm (red solid) and 170 nm (blue dash) between the two finger gates. The DFG system is subject to the same positive potential $V_1$ = $V_2$ = 0.6 in both cases.[]{data-label="fig7"}](fig7b.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
In , we show the conductance as a function of energy in an in-plane magnetic field $gB$ = 0.01 ($B$ = 1.5 T) while tuning the Rashba coefficient to be (a) $\alpha$ = 0.135 within the strong coupling regime and (b) $\alpha$ = 0.18 within the ultra-strong coupling regime. In both cases, we compare results for the distance $L$ = 150 nm (red solid line) and $L$ = 170 nm (blue dashed line) between the two finger gates.
In the strong Rashba regime as shown in (a), since the energy difference between the subband top $E^-_{\rm top}$ and the subband bottom $E^-_{\rm bottom}$ of the spin-down branch is small the transported electron occupying the RS manifests a conductance peak at $E_{\rm RS,1}$ satisfying . Our theoretical estimation predicts the zero point energy of the RS peaks in the conductance is at the subband top of the spin down branch, namely $E_{\rm zero} = E^{-}_{\rm top}$ = 0.9900. Therefore, we can estimate that the first RS peak in the conductance can be found at energy $E_{\rm RS,1}^{\rm th}$ = 1.0000 and 0.9978 for $L$ = 150 and 170 nm, respectively. The numerical result shown in (a) gives $E_{\rm RS,1}$ = 0.9997 and 0.9945 for $L$ = 150 and 170 nm, respectively. The MAPE of the first RS state $M_{{\rm RS},1} =
0.17\%$ in the case of $\alpha = 0.135$ is very accurate.
In the ultra-strong Rashba regime shown in (b), the energy difference between the subband top $E^-_{\rm top}$ and the subband bottom $E^-_{\rm bottom}$ of the spin-down branches become substancial. Therefore, the zero point energy of the first RS peak in the conductance satisfying will be changed to be $E_{\rm
zero}$ = $E^-_{\rm bottom}$ = 0.9668, and the theoretical estimation of the first RS peak is $E_{\rm RS,1}^{\rm th}$ = 0.9768 and 0.9746 for $L$ = 150 and 170 nm respectively. The numerical result shown in (a) gives $E_{\rm RS,1}$ = 0.9769 and 0.9726 for $L$ = 150 and 170 nm, respectively. The MAPE of the first RS state $M_{{\rm
RS},1} = 0.11\%$ in the case of $\alpha = 0.18$ is very accurate.
In summary, the above results shown in demonstrate that when the Rashba coupling is increased from the strong to the ultra-strong regime, the zero point energy of the first RS peak in the conductance will be changed from $E^-_{\rm top}$ to $E^-_{\rm bottom}$. Furthermore, the RS conductance peak feature can be significantly enhanced. We note in passing that in the intermediate Rashba coupling regime $2\alpha^2 \simeq gB$ (not shown),[@Tang2012] the zero point energy of the RS peaks will be changed to the subband bottom of the spin-up branch.
Concluding Remarks
==================
In conclusion, we have investigated the interplay of the Rashba SO coupling and the in-plane magnetic field induced Zeeman effect and its influence on the spin-resolved subband structure forming the Rashba-Zeeman effect induced energy gap. Moreover, we have demonstrated analytically and numerically the subband structure and the spin-resolved resonant quantum transport properties of a DFG system in the presence of a Rashba-Zeeman gap.
Manipulating the DFG system and the Rashba parameter in the strong Rashba regime, $gB < 2\alpha^2 < 4gB$, or in the ultra-strong Rashba coupling regime, $\alpha^2 > 2gB$, allows us to investigate various bound state features. These resonant transport features in the DFG controlled n-type quantum channel include resonant states with various zero point energy in different Rashba coupling regimes, hole-like bound states below the subband top of the spin-down branch, and electron-like quasi-bound states at the threshold of the spin-up branch. Our theoretical findings paving the way for the design of RZ-effect based spintronic device.
This work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan through Contract No. MOST 103-2112-M-239-001-MY3, and the National Science Council, Taiwan under Contracts No.NSC100-2112-M-239-001-MY3, No. NSC-100-2112-M-009-013-MY2, and No.NSC102-2112-M-009-009-MY2, the Icelandic Research and Instruments Funds, and the Research Fund of the University of Iceland.
[99]{}
D. Loss and D. P. Divincenzo, Phys. Rev. A **57**, 120 (1998).
I. $\breve{\rm Z}$utić, J. Fabian, and S. Das Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys. **76**, 323 (2004).
S. A. Wolf, D. D. Awschalom, R. A. Buhrman, J. M. Daughton, S. von Moln$\acute{\rm a}$r, M. L. Roukes, A. Y. Chtchelkanova, and D. M. Treger, Spintronics: A Spin-Based Electronics Vision for the Future, Science **294**, 1488 (2001).
*Semiconductor Spintronics and Quantum Computation*, edited by D.D. Awschalom, N. Samarth, and D. Loss (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002).
D. D. Awschalom and M. E. Flatte, Nat. Phys. **3**, 153 (2007).
S. Heedt, C. Morgan, K. Weis, D. E. B$\ddot{\rm u}$rgler, R. Calarco, H. Hardtdegen, D. Gr$\ddot{\rm u}$tzmacher, and T. Sch$\ddot{\rm
a}$pers, Nano Lett. **12**, 4437 (2012).
R. Winkler, *Spin-Orbit Coupling Effects in Two-Dimensional Electron and Hole Systems*, Springer Tracts in Modern Physics Vol. 191 (Springer, Berlin, 2003).
L. Meier, G. Salis, I. Shorubalko, E. Gini, S. Schon, and K. Enslin, Nat. Phys. **3**, 650 (2007).
S. Datta and B. Das, Appl. Phys. Lett. **56**, 665 (1990).
S. Bandyopadhyay and M. Cahay, Appl. Phys. Lett. **85**, 1814 (2004).
H. C. Koo, J. H. Kwon, J. H. Eom, J. Y. Chang, S. H. Han, and M. Johnson, Science **325**, 1515 (2009).
C. S. Tang, S. Y. Chang, and S. J. Cheng, Phys. Rev. B **86**, 125321 (2012).
A. F. Sadreev and E. Ya. Sherman, Phys. Rev. B **88**, 115302 (2013).
E. I. Rashba, Sov. Phys. Solid State **2**, 1109 (1960); Y. A. Bychkov and E. I. Rashba, J. Phys. C **17**, 6039 (1984).
J. Nitta, T. Akazaki, H. Takayanagi, and T. Enoki, Phys. Rev. Lett. **78**, 1335 (1997).
E. R. Mucciolo, C. Chamon, and C. M. Marcus, Phys. Rev. Lett. **89**, 146802 (2002); S. K. Watson, R. M. Potok, C. M. Marcus, and V. Umansky, *ibid.* **91**, 258301 (2003).
A. Brataas, Y. Tserkovnyak, G. E. W. Bauer, and B. I. Halperin, Phys. Rev. B **66**, 60404 (2002).
P. Zhang, Q. K. Xue, and X. C. Xie, Phys. Rev. Lett. **91**, 196602 (2003).
B. G. Wang, J. Wang, and H. Guo, Phys. Rev. B **67**, 092408 (2003).
L. Serra, D. Sánchez,1 and Rosa López, Phys. Rev. B **72**, 235309 (2005).
M. Scheid, D. Bercioux, and K. Richter, New J. Phys. **9**, 401 (2007).
Q. F. Sun, H. Guo, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. **90**, 258301 (2003).
W. Zeng, J. L. Wu, B. G. Wang, J. Wang, Q. F. Sun, and H. Guo, Phys. Rev. B **68**, 113306 (2003).
Y. V. Pershin, J. A. Nesteroff, and V. Privman, Phys. Rev. B **69**, 121306(R) (2004).
C. H. L. Quay, T. L. Hughes, J. A. Sulpizio, L. N. Pfeiffer, K.W. Baldwin, K.W.West, D. Goldhaber-Gordon, and R. de Picciotto, Nat. Phys. **6**, 336 (2010).
P. Zhang, Z.-L. Xiang, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. B **89**, 115417 (2014).
R. Landauer, Philos. Mag. **21**, 863 (1970).
M. Büttiker, Phys. Rev. B **41**, 7906 (1990).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
The quantum elliptic $R$-matrices of Baxter-Belavin type satisfy the associative Yang-Baxter equation in ${\rm Mat}(N,\mathbb C)^{\otimes
3}$. The latter can be considered as noncommutative analogue of the Fay identity for the scalar Kronecker function. In this paper we extend the list of $R$-matrix valued analogues of elliptic function identities. In particular, we propose counterparts of the Fay identities in ${\rm Mat}(N,\mathbb C)^{\otimes 2}$. As an application we construct $R$-matrix valued $2N^2\times 2N^2$ Lax pairs for the Painlevé VI equation (in elliptic form) with four free constants using ${\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb Z}_N$ elliptic $R$-matrix. More precisely, the four free constants case appears for an odd $N$ while even $N$’s correspond to a single constant.
date:
-
-
---
ITEP-TH-01/15\
\
\
\
$^\flat$ –\
$^\sharp$ –\
$^\natural$ –\
$^\diamondsuit$ –\
Introduction and summary
========================
In this paper we continue the study of identities for quantum (and classical) $R$-matrices, which are similar to the elliptic functions identities for scalar elliptic functions [@Pol; @LOZ9]. More concretely, we prove the Fay identities in ${\rm
Mat}(N,\mathbb C)^{\otimes 2}$. It allows us to construct multidimensional Lax pairs for the Painlevé VI equation with the $R$-matrices as matrix elements.
We start with the list of properties and identities for elliptic functions, and then give their $R$-matrix version. Most of the properties are known from [@Baxter; @Belavin], [@RicheyT], [@BazhStrog; @Takht], [@Pol] and [@LOZ9]. Consider the following functions: \[a01\]
[c]{}
\[a02\]
[c]{}
where ${\vartheta}(z)$ is the odd Riemann theta-function \[a03\]
[c]{}
and $\wp(z)$ is the Weierstrass $\wp$-function.
Following [@We] the function (\[a01\]) is referred to as the Kronecker function, and (\[a02\]) are called the (first and the second) Eisenstein functions.
The Kronecker function can be considered as a section of the Poincaré bundle ${\cal P}$ over $\Sigma_\tau\times\Sigma'_\tau$. Here $\Sigma_\tau$ is the elliptic curve \[a00\] \_=[C]{}/(Z +Z), m>0, $\Sigma'_\tau$ – is its Jacobian $~(\Sigma'_\tau\sim\Sigma_\tau)$. The Poincaré bundle ${\cal P}$ is a line bundle over $\Sigma_\tau\times\Sigma'_\tau$
\[po\] specialized by (\[a04\]), (\[a09\]), (\[a72\]) and (\[a73\]).
The properties of theta-function (\[a03\]) (including Riemann identities, see [@Mum]) provides the following set of properties and relations for the functions (\[a01\])-(\[a02\]):
- [*Arguments symmetry:*]{} \[a04\]
[c]{}
z\_, u’\_,
- [*Local expansion:*]{} \[a09\]
[c]{}
- [*Residues:*]{} \[a05\]
[c]{}
- [*Parity:*]{} \[a08\]
[c]{}
- [*(Quasi)periodicity properties:*]{} \[a72\]
[c]{}
\[a73\]
[c]{}
- [*Heat equation:*]{} \[a091\]
[c]{}
- [*Derivatives:*]{} \[a74\]
[c]{}
\[a75\]
[c]{}
- [*Fay (trisecant) identity [@Fay]:*]{} \[a10\]
[c]{}
- [*Degenerated Fay identities:*]{} \[a11\]
[c]{}
or \[a12\]
[c]{}
\[a13\]
[c]{}
- [*Geometric interpretation:*]{} The Kronecker function $\phi(z,u)$ is a section of the Poincaré bundle $\mathcal{P}$. It is a line bundle over $\Sigma_\tau\times\Sigma_\tau$, defined by the conditions (\[a04\]), (\[a09\]), (\[a72\]), (\[a73\]).
- [*Green function:*]{} The Kronecker function is the Green function for the operator $\bar\partial$ in the space of one forms $\mathcal{A}^{(1,0)}(\Sigma_\tau)$ with the boundary conditions (\[a72\]) and (\[a73\]): \[a127\]
[c]{}
[**Quantum $R$-matrices.**]{} Consider ${\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb
Z}_N$ (Baxter-Belavin’s) elliptic $R$-matrix [@Baxter; @Belavin] in the fundamental representation (see also [@RicheyT]). It is defined via the finite-dimensional representation of the Heisenberg group: \[a14\]
[c]{}
\[a15\]
[c]{}
Introduce the sin-algebra basis in $\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)$: \[a16\]
[c]{}
The same definition is used for any ${\gamma}\in{\mathbb Z}^{\times 2}$. Then \[a17\]
[c]{}
where ${\alpha}+{\beta}=({\alpha}_1+{\beta}_1,{\alpha}_2+{\beta}_2)$. The $R$-matrix is defined as \[a18\]
[c]{}
where[^1] \[a19\]
[c]{}
The ${\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb Z}_N$ symmetry means that for $g=Q,\Lambda$ \[a191\]
[c]{}
For $N=1$ the $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) is the scalar Kronecker function $\phi(\hbar,u)$ (\[a01\]). Notice that (\[a18\]) is normalized in such a way that the unitarity condition acquires the form: \[a20\]
[c]{}
The latter can be considered as analogue of (\[a13\]). Here $R_{21}(z)=P_{12}R_{12}(z)P_{12}$, where \[a201\]
[c]{}
is the permutation operator. We also use notation $R^\hbar_{ab}(z)$ which differs from (\[a20\]) by $T^a_{{\alpha}}\otimes T^b_{-{\alpha}}=1\otimes ... 1\otimes T_{{\alpha}}\otimes 1... 1\otimes T_{-{\alpha}}\otimes 1...
\otimes1$ instead of $T_{\alpha}\otimes T_{-{\alpha}}$ (i.e. $T_{\alpha}$ and $T_{-{\alpha}}$ are in the $a$-th and $b$-th components). The number of components in the tensor product is an integer $\tilde N$. It means that $R_{ab}^\hbar$ is considered as an element of $\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)^{\otimes \tilde
N}$, i.e. $N^{\tilde N}\times N^{\tilde N}$ matrix.
[**The properties and identities**]{} (\[a05\])-(\[a12\]) have the following analogues for $R$-matrices:
- [*Arguments symmetry:*]{} \[r04\]
[c]{}
- [*Local expansion*]{} in $\hbar$ is the classical limit: \[r09\]
[c]{}
where $r_{12}(z)$ is the classical (Belavin-Drinfeld [@Belavin]) $r$-matrix: \[r092\]
[c]{}
and \[r093\]
[c]{}
Similarly to (\[a09\]) we have: \[r094\]
[c]{}
i.e. the quantum $R$-matrix is a matrix analogue of the Kronecker function (\[a01\]) while the classical one is the analogue of the first Eisenstein function (\[a02\]).
Expansion with respect to $z$ (near $z=0$) is as follows: \[r095\]
[c]{}
where[^2] \[r096\]
[c]{}
- [*Residues*]{} \[r05\]
[c]{}
- [*Parity:*]{} \[r08\]
[c]{}
The $R$-matrix analogue of $E_2(u)=E_2(-u)$ (\[a02\]) appears as $F_{12}^0(u)=-\p_u
r_{12}(u)$ (It is natural because $r_{12}(u)$ is the analogue of $E_1(u)$). The classical $r$-matrix is odd. Hence $F_{12}^0(u)$ is even matrix function. The same answer follows from the local expansions (\[a09\]), (\[r09\]): $E_2(u)=-\p_u\phi(z,u)\left.\right|_{z=0}$, then $-\p_u R_{12}^{\,z}(u)\left.\right|_{z=0}=-\p_u
r_{12}(u)$.
- [*(Quasi)periodicity properties:*]{} \[r723\]
[c]{}
\[r724\]
[c]{}
In particular, \[r721\]
[c]{}\
\
\[r722\]
[c]{}
\[r73\]
[c]{}\
\
Let us also rewrite (\[r724\]) as follows: \[r725\]
[c]{}
\[r726\]
[c]{}
Recall now the $R$-matrix valued Lax matrix for ${\rm g}_{{\tilde{N}}}$ Calogero-Moser model [@LOZ9]: \[r727\]
[c]{}
where ${\tilde{\mathrm E}}_{ab}$ is the standard basis of ${\rm gl}_{{\tilde{N}}}$: $({\tilde{\mathrm E}}_{ab})_{cd}=\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd}$, $a,b,c,d=1...{\tilde{N}}$. Then it follows from (\[r725\])-(\[r726\]) that \[r728\]
[c]{}\
\
where \[r729\]
[c]{}
are block diagonal matrices. The number of blocks is ${\tilde{N}}\times
{\tilde{N}}$, the size of a block is $N^{{\tilde{N}}}\times N^{{\tilde{N}}}$.
- [*Heat equation:*]{} \[r091\]
[c]{}
- [*Derivatives*]{}[^3][ *:*]{} \[r74\]
[c]{}\
\
\[r75\]
[c]{}\
\
- [*The Fay identity in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 3}$ [@Aguiar; @Pol; @LOZ9]:*]{} \[r101\]
[c]{}
Both parts of the identity are elements of ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 3}$. It was used in [@LOZ9] for constructing higher-dimensional Lax pairs for Calogero-Moser models. Here we will prove another analogue of (\[a10\]) – in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$.
- [*The Fay identity in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$:*]{} \[r102\]
[l]{}
$$\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{
N\phi(N\hbar',\frac{z\!-\!w}{N}+\hbar'\!-\!\hbar)\, R_{12}^{\hbar-\hbar'}(z\!+\!N\hbar')
-N\phi(N\hbar,\frac{z\!-\!w}{N}+\hbar'\!-\!\hbar)\, R_{12}^{\hbar-\hbar'}(w\!+\!N\hbar)
}
\\ \ \\
\displaystyle{
+N\phi(-w,\frac{z\!-\!w}{N}+\hbar'\!-\!\hbar)\,
R_{12}^{\frac{z-w}{N}}(w\!+\!N\hbar)
-N\phi(-z,\frac{z\!-\!w}{N}+\hbar'\!-\!\hbar)\,
R_{12}^{\frac{z-w}{N}}(z\!+\!N\hbar')\,.
}
\end{array}$$ The scalar analogue of this identity is obtained as follows: apply (\[a10\]) (with $x=\hbar$, $y=\hbar'$) to $\phi(\hbar,z)\phi(\hbar',-w)$, and then apply (\[a10\]) once again to the obtained r.h.s.. Then we get the scalar analogue of r.h.s. of (\[r102\]).
- [*Degenerated Fay identities in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 3}$ (\[r101\]):*]{} \[r11\]
[c]{}
\[r120\]
[c]{}
where $F_{ab}^\hbar(u)=\p_u R_{ab}^\hbar (u)$ and $R_{ab}^{\hbar,(0)}$ is from (\[r095\])-(\[r096\]).
- [*Degenerated Fay identities in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$ (\[r102\]):*]{} \[r12\]
[c]{}\
\
\
\
and \[r13\]
[c]{}\
\
\
\
- *Geometric interpretation.* Due to the quasi-periodicities (\[r723\])-(\[r722\]) the $R$-matrix have the following geometrical interpretation. Let $V_1$ ($V_2$) be a rank $N$ and degree one vector bundle over elliptic curve $\Sigma^{(1)}_\tau$ with coordinate $z_1$ ($\Sigma^{(2)}_\tau$ with coordinate $z_2$). Consider the bundle $V_1\boxtimes V_2$ over $\Sigma^{(1)}_\tau\times\Sigma^{(2)}_\tau$. Let $Aut_{{\rm PGL}(N)}(V_1\boxtimes V_2)$ be the automorphism group of the bundle (the gauge group). The sections $\Gamma(Aut_{{\rm PGL}(N)}(V_1\boxtimes V_2))$ depends only on the anti-diagonal $\tilde\Sigma_\tau$ of $\Sigma^{(1)}_\tau\times\Sigma^{(2)}_\tau$ with the coordinate $z=z_1-z_2$. Let $\tilde\Sigma'_\tau$ be the dual curve, $\hbar$ is the coordinate on $\tilde\Sigma'_\tau$ and ${\cal P}$ is the Poincaré bundle ${\cal P}$ over $\tilde\Sigma_\tau\times\tilde\Sigma'_\tau$ (\[po\]). Then the $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) is a section $$R_{12}^\hbar(z)\in\Gamma\left((Aut_{{\rm PGL}(N)}(V_1\boxtimes V_2))\otimes{\cal P}\right)\,.$$
- *Green function.* Similarly to (\[a127\]) the $R$-matrix can be considered as the Green function of $\bar\p$-operator: \[gf1\] | R\_[12]{}\^(z)=NP\_[12]{}\^2(z,|[z]{}).
Properties (\[r09\])-(\[r091\]) simply follows from their scalar counterparts except (\[r094\]) which follows from the unitarity condition (\[a20\]) in the classical limit (\[r09\]). Identities for derivatives (\[r74\]), (\[r75\]) were obtained in [@BazhStrog; @Takht]. Degenerated Fay identities (\[r11\]), (\[r120\]) in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 3}$ follows from the nondegenerated one (\[r101\]) and local expansions (\[r09\]), (\[r095\]).
[**Our main interest**]{} (in this paper) is the Fay identity in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$ (\[r102\]) and its degenerations (\[r12\]), (\[r13\]). We prove them below. The computational trick is based on the “arguments symmetry” property (\[r04\]) and the scalar Fay identities (\[a10\])-(\[a12\]).
[**Painlevé VI.**]{} As an application of the obtained formulae we construct higher-dimensional Lax pairs for the Painlevé VI equation. Denote the half-periods of the elliptic curve $\Sigma_\tau$ as \[a41\]
[c]{}
The Painlevé VI equation in the elliptic form [@P6] is \[a42\]
[c]{}
Let $N$ be an odd (positive) integer. Consider the following pair of block-matrices[^4]: \[a43\]
[c]{}
\[a44\]
[c]{}
where \[a45\]
[c]{}\
\
and \[a46\]
[c]{}\
\
with \[a47\]
[c]{}
The matrices $L(\hbar)\,,M(\hbar)\in\hbox{Mat}(2,\mathbb
C)\otimes{\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$. Their size equals $2N^2\times 2N^2$. The Painlevé VI equation (\[a42\]) is equivalent to the monodromy preserving equation \[a48\]
[c]{}
where the Planck constant $\hbar$ plays the role of the spectral parameter (see [@LOZ9]).
For $N=1$ the answer (\[a43\]), (\[a44\]) reproduces the elliptic $2\times 2$ Lax pair proposed in [@Z].
The Lax pair (\[a43\]), (\[a44\]) works for even $N$’s as well. But the Painlevé equation in this case has only one free constant: \[a49\]
[c]{}
Kronecker double series and Baxter-Belavin $R$-matrix
=====================================================
Following idea suggested in [@Pol] we derive here the Baxter-Belavin $R$-matrix as generalization of the Kronecker series.
**$R$-matrix in Jacobi variables.** Represent the elliptic curve $\Sigma_\tau$ (\[a00\]) in the Jacobi form $$C_q=\mathbb{C}/q^{\mathbb{Z}}\,,~~q={{\bf{e}}}(\tau)=\exp\,2\pi\imath\tau\,.$$ Consider the product $C_q\times C_q$ with the coordinates $s={{\bf{e}}}(u)$, $t={{\bf{e}}}(z)$. Instead of the Kronecker function $\phi(z,u)$ we consider the distribution $g(s,t)$ on the space of the Laurent polynomials $\mathbb{C}[[s^{-1},t^{-1},s,t]]$. For $|q|<|t|<1$ it can be represented as the series \[deq0\] g(s,t|q)=\_[n ]{}. If simultaneously $|q|<|s|<1$ then \[g\] g(s,t|q)=-g\^+(s,t|q)+g\^-(s,t|q), g\^+(s,t|q)=\_[i,n0]{}s\^iq\^[in]{}t\^n, g\^-(s,t|q)=\_[i,n< 0]{}s\^iq\^[in]{}t\^n or \[deq2\] g(s,t|q)=1--+g\^-(s,t)-\_[i,n> 0]{}s\^iq\^[in]{}t\^n. In the domain $|q|<|t|<1$ and $|q|<|s|<1$ we have \[deq5\] g(s,t|q)|\_[s=u,t=z]{}=(z,u). The distribution $g(s,t|\,q)$ has the properties analogous to (\[a04\])-(\[a08\]). In particular, \[deq1\] g(s,t|q)=g(t,s|q). It follows from (\[g\]) that \[deq3\] g(s\^[-1]{},t\^[-1]{}|q)=-g(s,t|q)+(t)+(s)-2, where $\delta(s)$ is the distribution on the space of the Laurent polynomials\
$\mathbb{C}[t,t^{-1}]=\{\psi(t)=\sum_lc_lt^l\}$, defined by the functional $\langle\delta,\psi\rangle=Res|_{t=0}\psi(t)$ and represented by the formal series \[def\] (t)=\_[n]{}t\^n. The analog of the quasiperiodic property (\[a73\]) is the following. The distribution $g(s,t)$ is a solution of the difference equation on $t$ (the Green function) variable \[deq4\] sg(s,tq|q)-g(s,t|q)=(t)-1. It defines the continuation of $g(s,t|\,q)$ from the annulus $|q|<|t|<1$ to $\mathbb{C}^*$. Due to (\[deq1\]) the similar equation can be written with respect to the $s$ variable.
Let $\eta={{\bf{e}}}(\hbar)$. The $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) takes the following form in variables $(s,t,\eta)$: \[rkr\] R\^\_[12]{}(s)=\_[ [Z]{}\_N\_N]{}s\^[\_2/N]{}g(s,\_+)T\_T\_[-]{}= $$\sum\limits_{{\alpha}\in\, {\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb
Z}_N}s^{{\alpha}_2/N}\left(\sum_{m,n}{{\bf{e}}}(n{\alpha}_1/N)q^{n(m+{\alpha}_2/N)}\eta^ns^m
\right)\,T_{\alpha}\otimes T_{-{\alpha}}\,.$$ It plays the role of the Green function for the difference operator \[gf2\] (1)R\^\_[12]{}(sq)(\^[-1]{}1)-R\^\_[12]{}(s) =((s)-1) P\_[12]{}. **Kronecker double series [@We]**\
The distribution $g(s,t|\,q)$ (and $\phi(z,u)$) can be represented as a Kronecker double series. Consider the lattice in $\mathbb{C}$ $$W=\{\gamma=m+n\tau\,,~m,n\in\mathbb{Z}\}\,.$$ Represent the argument $u$ of $\phi(z,u)$ as $u=u_1+u_2\tau$ $(u_1,u_2$ are real), and let $$\chi_u(\gamma)={{\bf{e}}}(-mu_2+nu_1)$$ be a character of the lattice $W$ ($\chi_u(\gamma)\,:\,W\to S^1$), parameterized by $u\in\Sigma_\tau$. The Kronecker double series is defined as: \[krs\] S(z,u|)=\_[W]{}. From the definition we find that \[qpk\]
[c]{}\
\
It was proved in [@We] that $S(z,u|\,\tau)$ is related to the Kronecker function as \[k1\] S(z,u|)=[[**[e]{}**]{}]{}(u\_2 z)(z,u), or in the Jacobi coordinates \[kro\] S(t,s|q)=t\^[u\_2]{}g(s,t|q).
Let us now pass to the $R$-matrix and describe it in terms of the Kronecker double series $S(z,u|\,\tau)$ (\[krs\]).
Define the lattice $W$ by the two generators $(\alpha_1/N+\hbar_1, (\alpha_2/N+\hbar_2)\tau)$, where $\hbar=\hbar_1+\hbar_2\tau$, $\hbar_{1,2}\in\mathbb R$. The corresponding character of $W$ is \[nr1\]
[c]{}
Then the $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) is defined in terms of the Kronecker double series (\[krs\]) as \[nrm\]
[c]{}
The quasi-periodicities (\[r721\]), (\[r722\]) now become evident. It follows from (\[k1\]) that the singular behavior $z,\hbar\to 0$ of this representation is in agreement with (\[r05\]).
We pass from ${R}^\hbar_{12}(z)$ to the modified matrix $$\tilde{{R}}^\hbar_{12}(z)={{\bf{e}}}(\hbar_2z){R}^\hbar_{12}(z)\,.$$ It satisfies the Yang-Baxter equation and has the quasi-periodicities $$\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{
\tilde{R}_{12}^\hbar(z+1)={{\bf{e}}}(\hbar_2)(Q^{-1}\otimes 1) \tilde{R}_{12}^\hbar(z)(Q\otimes 1)\,,
}
\\ \ \\
\displaystyle{
\tilde{R}_{12}^\hbar(z+\tau)={{\bf{e}}}(\hbar_1)\,(\Lambda^{-1}\otimes 1)
\tilde{R}_{12}^\hbar(z)(\Lambda\otimes
1)\,,
}
\end{array}$$ (compare with (\[r721\])). In contrast with (\[r722\]) $\tilde{R}$ is not holomorphic in $\hbar$ and is double-periodic.
The representation (\[nrm\]) means that the elliptic $\tilde{R}$-matrix is represented as the averaging of the Yang matrix $z^{-1}P_{12}$ along the lattice $W$ twisted by the character (\[nr1\]).
From (\[r09\]) we also find the representation for the classical $r$-matrix: $$\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{
r_{12}(z)=E_1(z)\,1\otimes 1 +\sum_{m,n\in(\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z})\backslash(0,0)}\frac
{\sum\limits_{{\alpha}\in\, {\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb
Z}_N}\chi_{(m,n)}({\alpha},0)\,T_{\alpha}\otimes T_{-{\alpha}}} {z+m+n\tau}
}
\end{array}$$ and $$\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{
m_{12}(z)=\frac{E_1^2(z)-\wp(z)}{2}\,1\otimes 1
+\sum_{m,n\in(\mathbb{Z}\oplus\mathbb{Z})\backslash(0,0)}\frac
{\sum\limits_{{\alpha}\in\, {\mathbb Z}_N\times {\mathbb
Z}_N}(z+m+n\bar{\tau})\chi_{(m,n)}({\alpha},0)\,T_{\alpha}\otimes T_{-{\alpha}}}
{(z+m+n\tau)(\bar{\tau}-\tau)}\,.
}
\end{array}$$
Derivation of identities
========================
The $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) satisfies the arguments symmetry property (\[r04\]).
Using definitions (\[a201\]) and (\[a17\]) we have \[a501\]
[c]{}\
\
Since $\kappa_{{\alpha},{\beta}}=\kappa_{{\alpha},{\alpha}+{\beta}}$, the property (\[r04\]) is equivalent to the following set of $N^2$ identities: \[a502\]
[c]{}
or \[a5021\]
[c]{}
The latter is verified by comparing residues. To do it we also need the relation for the sums of $N$-th roots of $1$ (it also follows from $P_{12}^2=1$): \[a503\]
[c]{}
Let us calculate the residue of both parts of (\[a502\]) at $\hbar=-{\omega}_\mu$. The answer for the r.h.s. is obviously $\delta_{\mu,{\gamma}}\exp(2\pi\imath \p_\tau{\omega}_{\gamma}z)$ due to (\[a05\]). For the l.h.s. we have: \[a504\]
[c]{}\
\
\
\
The $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) satisfies the Fay identity (\[r102\]) in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$.
Consider \[a510\]
[c]{}
Here we already used $R_{21}^{\hbar'}(-w)=-R_{12}^{-\hbar'}(w)$. Apply the Fay identity (\[a10\]), then (\[a5021\]), and then (\[a10\]) again: \[a511\]
[c]{}\
\
\[a512\]
[c]{}\
\
\[a513\]
[c]{}\
\
\
\
\
\
The $R$-matrices (\[a18\]) and (\[r092\]) satisfies the degenerated Fay identities (\[r12\]), (\[r13\]) in ${\hbox{Mat}(N,\mathbb C)}^{\otimes 2}$.
We begin with (\[r12\]). Consider \[a515\]
[c]{}
Subdivide it into two parts: $\sum_{{\alpha},{\beta}}=\sum_{{\alpha}\neq
-{\beta}}+\sum_{{\alpha}= -{\beta}}$. The first part is transformed as in the previous Proposition (via (\[a10\]), then (\[a5021\]), and then (\[a10\]) again) \[a516\]
[c]{}\
\
\[a517\]
[c]{}\
\
\
\
\
\
By adding (and subtracting) scalar terms ($1\otimes 1$) to each line one obtains the first and the second lines of (\[r12\]). The input to the scalar part should be summed up together with \[a518\]
[c]{}\
The latter expression is transformed via (\[a5021\]) for ${\gamma}=0$ $$\sum\limits_{{\alpha}}
{\varphi}_{\alpha}(z-w,{\omega}_{\alpha}+\hbar)=N\phi(N\hbar,\frac{z-w}{N})$$ and its derivative (\[a74\]), (\[a75\]) with respect to $\hbar$: $$\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{
\sum\limits_{{\alpha}} {\varphi}_{\alpha}(z-w,{\omega}_{\alpha}+\hbar)\,
(E_1(z-w+\hbar+{\omega}_{\alpha})-E_1(\hbar+{\omega}_{\alpha}))
}
\\
\displaystyle{
=N^2\phi(N\hbar,\frac{z-w}{N})\,\left(E_1(N\hbar+\frac{z-w}{N})
-E_1(N\hbar)\right)\,. }
\end{array}$$ This finishes the proof of (\[r12\]). The identity (\[r13\]) can be derived similarly. Equivalently, (\[r13\]) follows from (\[r12\]) by using the properties (\[r04\]) and (\[r08\]). $\blacksquare$
Higher-dimensional elliptic Lax pairs for Painlevé VI
=====================================================
Different types of matrix-valued Lax pairs for Painlevé equations are known (see e.g. [@JM; @Dubrovin; @LOZ2]). In this section we construct $R$-matrix valued generalization of the elliptic $2\times
2$ Lax pair suggested in [@Z].
The Painlevé VI equation in the elliptic form (\[a42\]) is equivalent to the monodromy preserving equation (\[a48\]) with the Lax pair (\[a43\])-(\[a47\]) and the elliptic $R$-matrix (\[a18\]) for odd $N$.
is similar to the one given in [@Z] for the scalar ($N=1$) case. First, notice that $\frac{d}{d\tau}L(\hbar)=\frac{du}{d\tau}\p_u
L(\hbar)+\p_\tau L(\hbar)$, where the last term is the derivative by explicit dependence on $\tau$. It is canceled out by $\frac{1}{2\pi\imath}\frac{d}{d\hbar} M(\hbar)$ due to the heat equation (\[r091\]) $2\pi\imath\,\p_\tau \mathcal
R^{\hbar,a}_{bc}(u)=\p_\hbar \mathcal F^{\hbar,a}_{bc}(u)$.
Denote \[a701\]
[c]{}
The main statement which we need to verify is that for $a\neq b$ \[a702\]
[c]{}
i.e. the input to $[L(\hbar), M(\hbar)]$ comes only from $[L^a,M^a]$. Indeed, it follows from the unitarity condition (\[a20\]) that \[a703\]
[c]{}
Differentiating (\[a703\]) with respect to $u$ we get \[a704\]
[c]{}
This identity provides the equation of motion. Notice that in order to have all four constants $N$ should be odd since $\wp'(u+N\Omega_a)=\wp'(u+\Omega_a)$ in this case. If $N$ is even then $\wp'(u+N\Omega_a)=\wp'(u)$, and we have only one constant as in (\[a49\]).
To prove (\[a702\]) let us recall that in the scalar case this followed from \[a705\]
[c]{}\
\
where $$f_a(z,u+\Omega_a)=\exp(2\pi\imath\p_\tau\Omega_a
\hbar)\p_w\phi(\hbar,w)\left.\right|_{w=u+\Omega_a}$$ is the scalar analogue of $\mathcal F^{\hbar,a}_{12}(u)$. The identity (\[a705\]) appears from (\[a11\]) and (\[a72\])-(\[a73\]) as follows: \[a706\]
[c]{}\
\
The r.h.s. of (\[a706\]) is independent of $u$. The derivative of (\[a706\]) with respect to $u$ gives (\[a705\]).
Similarly to (\[a706\]) it follows from the degenerated Fay identity (\[r12\]) that \[a707\]
[c]{}\
\
It can be verified directly using (\[a72\])-(\[a73\]) which can be re-written as $$\phi(z,w+\Omega_a)=\exp(-2\pi\imath
z\p_\tau\Omega_a)\phi(z,w-\Omega_a)\,.$$ The r.h.s. of (\[a707\]) is scalar and independent of $u$. The derivative of (\[a707\]) with respect to $u$ gives \[a708\]
[c]{}
This identity underlies (\[a702\]). $\blacksquare$
### Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
We would like to thank N. Slavnov and A. Zabrodin for useful remarks. The work was done at the Steklov Mathematical Institute RAS, Moscow. It was supported by RSCF grant 14-50-00005.
[99]{}
[^1]: Here $\p_\tau{\omega}_{\alpha}={\alpha}_2/N$.
[^2]: $R_{12}^{\hbar,(0)}$ appears as a part of the inverse inertia tensor for relativistic tops [@LOZ8].
[^3]: The identities for derivatives of $R$-matrix with respect to the Planck constant and spectral parameter were found in [@BazhStrog] and [@Takht] respectively. Authors of [@BazhStrog; @Takht] used different normalization of the $R$-matrix.
[^4]: The coefficient $1/{\sqrt{-2}}$ gives the normalization of the constants as in (\[a42\]).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'M.Sako'
- 'S.M.Kahn'
- 'E.Behar'
- 'J.S.Kaastra'
- 'A.C.Brinkman'
- 'Th.Boller'
- 'E.M.Puchnarewicz'
- 'R.Starling'
- 'D.A.Liedahl'
- 'J.Clavel'
- 'M.Santos-Lleo'
date: 'Received 29 September 2000 / Accepted'
title: 'Complex resonance absorption structure in the X-ray spectrum of [^1]'
---
Introduction
============
is an archetypal highly-polarized radio-quiet quasar at a redshift of $z = 0.10764$ (Kim et al. [@kim95]). Since its identification as an infrared-luminous quasar (Beichman et al. [@beichman86]), this source has been extensively studied in the optical, infrared, and X-ray bands. In a detailed investigation of the optical and infrared spectra and polarization measurements, Wills et al. ([@wills92]) demonstrated that the nuclear spectrum exhibits two distinct components; a highly-reddened component and a highly-polarized component that suffers much lower extinction. Based on these observational facts, Wills ([@wills92]) constructed a simple and elegant picture of the nuclear region of in which the direct AGN radiation is attenutated by a thick dusty torus, while the observed highly-polarized light is produced by scattering in an extended bipolar region, either by warm electrons or by small dust grains.
was detected in the [*ROSAT*]{} All-Sky-Survey (Walter & Fink [@walter93]; Brinkmann & Siebert [@brinkmann94]), and has been the target of extensive pointed PSPC observations with [ *ROSAT*]{} (Brandt, Fabian, & Pounds [@brandt96]), and with [*ASCA*]{} (Brinkmann et al. [@brinkmann96]; Brandt et al. [@brandt97]). The soft X-ray spectrum obtained with the PSPC shows a lack of absorption by cold material indicated by the observed optical reddening, and suggests the presence of a warm, dusty medium along the line of sight (Brandt, Fabian, & Pounds [@brandt96]).
In a more recent investigation of the complex X-ray properties of , Siebert, Komossa, & Brinkmann ([@siebert99]) self-consistently accounted for the effects of dust embedded in the warm absorbing medium, and concluded that single zone models, both with and without internal dust, do not provide adequate fits to the combined, [ *ROSAT*]{}, [*ASCA*]{}, and optical data sets. In particular, they find that a dust-free warm absorber model formally gives the best fit to the X-ray data, and conclude that the X-ray absorption and optical reddening must arise in spatially distinct regions. However, owing to the moderate spectral-resolving-power capabilities of the available detectors on [ *ROSAT*]{} and [*ASCA*]{}, and the likely cross-calibration uncertainties, the precise nature of the soft X-ray spectrum has remained controversial.
In this Letter, we present results from the first high-resolution X-ray observation of with the [*XMM-Newton*]{} Observatory. The spectrum obtained with the Reflection Grating Spectrometer (RGS) shows a wealth of discrete spectral features, including the first astrophysical detection of inner-shell $2p -3d$ absorption by M-shell iron ions in the form of an unresolved transition array (UTA). From a detailed analysis of the rich absorption spectrum, we measure the column density and velocity field of the line-of-sight material. We show that the spectrum contains absorption features from regions with two distinct levels of ionization. The column density of the lower ionization component is consistent with the observed optical reddening, and we tentatively associate this component with the dusty torus.
Observation and Data Reduction
==============================
was observed with the [*XMM-Newton*]{} observatory (Jansen et al. [@jansen01]) on 19 – 20 June, 2000 during the Performance Verification phase for a total exposure time of 42 ks. The data obtained with the Reflection Grating Spectrometer (RGS; den Herder et al. [@denherder01]) were filtered through standard event-selection criteria using the [*XMM-Newton*]{} Science Analysis Software (SAS). The source spectrum was extracted using a spatial filter in dispersion/cross-dispersion coordinates to isolate from other possible contaminating sources and to reduce contribution from background events. Subsequently, the first order events were selected by applying a dispersion/pulse-height filter. The background spectrum was generated using all of the events that lie outside the spatial mask. Wavelengths were then assigned to the dispersion coordinates. The current wavelength scale is accurate to within $\sim 8$ mÅ across the entire RGS band of $\lambda = 5
- 35$ Å ($E = 0.35 - 2.5$ keV).
The European Photon Imaging Camera (EPIC; Turner et al. [@turner01]; Stüder et al. [@struder01]) MOS1 data were also processed with the SAS. The MOS2 detector was operated in FAST UNCOMP mode, for which reduction by the SAS is not possible as yet. Source events were extracted using a circular region of radius 45. A nearby source-free region with a radius of 3 was used to assess the background.
Three modes of the Optical Monitor (OM; Mason et al. [@mason01]) were used during the observation. The V grism (or optical grism; exposure time 3000 s), UV grism (exposure time 1000 s), and the UVW2 filter ($\sim 1500 -
3000$ Å; effective exposure time 6340 s). There is no significant variability in the UVW2 observations. Absolute flux calibrations for the grism data were not available at the time of writing. The optical spectrum shows clear evidence of H$\beta$ emission but the signal-to-noise is insufficient to determine the presence of any other emission lines (within an observer frame wavelength range of $\sim 3000 - 6000$ Å). The UV spectrum (coverage $\sim 2000 - 3500$ Å) is too weak for spectral extraction.
Results of Spectral Fitting
===========================
Underlying Continuum Radiation
------------------------------
To first obtain a rough characterization of the shape of the continuum, we use the PN spectrum, which has the highest statistical quality and covers a broad range in energy. During the observation, the source exhibited a gradual and steady increase in brightness by $\sim 30$%, but with no noticable change in the spectral shape. We, therefore, use the cumulative spectrum for all of our subsequent analyses. The $0.2 - 10$ keV spectral region can be well-fitted with a phenomenological model that consists of a powerlaw and two black body components absorbed through a Galactic column density of $N_{\rm{H}}^{\rm{gal}} = 1.1 \times 10^{20} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$ (Murphy et al. [@murphy96]). The PN data require two black body components with temperatures of $kT \sim 70$ eV and $\sim 12$ eV. The best-fit powerlaw photon index of $\Gamma \sim 2.2$ is consistent with the value implied by the [*ASCA*]{} data (Brinkmann et al. [@brinkmann96]; Brandt et al. [@brandt97]).
The MOS1 data from $0.3$ to $10$ keV, excluding the $0.6 - 1.2$ keV region where the RGS shows complex absorption features, were best-fit using a single blackbody plus power-law (a $\chi_r^2$ of 1.59 for 199 degrees of freedom), which is generally consistent with the PN data. The blackbody temperature is $kT \sim 110$ eV. The best-fit photon index is $\Gamma =
2.1$ with a column density of $1.4 \times 10^{20} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$, which is only slightly higher than the Galactic value.
The Absorption Spectrum of
---------------------------
The RGS spectrum shown in Figure \[fig:f1\] exhibits numerous absorption lines from a wide range in levels of ionization. The most prominent features in the spectrum are K-shell absorption lines of H- and He-like carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and neon, and L-shell lines of . The spectrum also shows a broad absorption feature between $\lambda
\sim 16 - 17$ Å ($E \sim 730 - 770$ eV). The observed location of the red “edge” of this feature is at $\lambda = 17.10 \pm 0.05$ Å in the rest-frame of the quasar, and is close but undoubtedly inconsistent with that of the photoelectric edge ($\lambda = 16.78$ Å). The shape of the absorption trough towards the shorter wavelengths is also incompatible with that of a photoelectric edge. We identify this feature as a UTA of inner-shell $2p -3d$ resonance absorption lines in relatively cool, M-shell iron. The shape of this feature is strikingly similar to laboratory absorption measurements of a heated iron foil (Chenais-Popovics et al. [@chenais00]), and also agrees well with our own calculations as described below.
We adopt a continuum model similar to that inferred from the PN data; i.e., the sum of a powerlaw and a blackbody component, the latter merely in order to parametrize empirically the soft X-ray spectral shape. We also fix the powerlaw photon index to $\Gamma = 2.2$ and the column density of cold material to the Galactic value. With the continuum model defined, we then apply absorption components of H- and He-like C, N, O, and Ne, and . Each ion is treated as a separate component in the spectral fit and contains all relevant resonance transtions from the ground-state and photoelectric edges in the RGS band. The line profiles are calculated accounting for thermal and turbulent velocity broadening. Transition wavelengths and oscillator strengths were calculated with the atomic physics package HULLAC (Bar-Shalom et al. [@barshalom98]), except for the wavelengths of the strong Fe L resonance lines where we use laboratory measurement values described in Brown et al. ([@brown00]). We use photoionization cross sections from Verner et al. ([@verner96]). For the iron UTA absorption, photoexcitation cross sections from L-shell to M-shell in are computed. All of the transitions $2l^8$ $3l^x$ - $2l^7$ $3l^{x+1}$ ($x$ = 1 through 12) are taken into account, of which the $2p - 3d$ excitations are the most important. For the atomic structure, the most significant configuration mixings, which conserve the total angular momentum within the $n = 3$ shell (namely $3p^2 + 3s3d$), are included. This approximation is expected to be adequate for analysing the presently observed unresolved absorption feature. A more detailed discussion of the UTA is presented in Behar, Sako, & Kahn ([@behar01]).
Each component is then convolved through the instrument line spread function and fit for the ion column density simultaneously with the black body continuum parameters and the normalization of the powerlaw component. The best-fit black body temperature is $kT \sim 100$ eV with a flux in the $5 -
35$ Å range of $4.0 \times 10^{-3} ~\rm{photons~cm}^{-2} ~\rm{s}^{-1}$. The flux in the powerlaw component is $2.4 \times 10^{-3}
~\rm{photons~cm}^{-2} ~\rm{s}^{-1}$ in the same wavelength range.
The observed widths of the absorption lines, as shown below, are much larger than both the instrument line spread function and the thermal broadening of a gas with $kT \sim 10 ~\rm{eV}$, which is the expected temperature for a photoionized plasma at this level of ionization. With the current statistical quality of the RGS data, however, we are not able to constrain the turbulent velocities $v_{\rm{turb}}$ of the individual ion components. We, therefore, assume a uniform mean turbulent velocity field, keeping in mind that each ion can, in principle, exist in regions of different turbulent velocities. The derived ion column densities, therefore, may be uncertain to some degree, as quantified in the following section.
We obtain a statistically acceptable fit to the RGS data with $\chi^2_r =
1.07$ for 532 degrees of freedom. The continuum parameters inferred from the RGS data are also consistent with those derived from PN and MOS. The intrinsic isotropic luminosities in the 0.3 – 2 keV and 2 – 10 keV regions are $L_X \sim 2 \times 10^{44} ~\rm{erg~s}^{-1}$ and $\sim 5 \times 10^{43}
~\rm{erg~s}^{-1}$ (assuming $H_0 = 65 ~\rm{km~s}^{-1} ~\rm{Mpc}^{-1}$ and $q_0 = 0.5$), respectively, which are lower than both the [*ROSAT*]{} PSPC and [*ASCA*]{} values by a factor of $\sim 5$. The measured ion column densities are listed in Table \[tbl:t1\]. To illustrate the statistical significance of the various components, we also list the changes in $\chi^2$ when each of the components is removed from the model. The best-fit $FW\!H\!M$ turbulent velocity is $v_{\rm{turb}} = 1430^{+360}_{-280}
~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$, which is much larger than the thermal velocity of a photoionized medium. We also find weak evidence of an average bulk outflow velocity shift with $v_{\rm{shift}} = +200^{+170}_{-180} ~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$, where positive velocity denotes a blueshift.
Ion $N_i$ (cm$^{-2}$) $^a$ $\Delta \chi^2$ $^b$ Component$^c$
---------- -------------------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------
C V $(6.3^{+5.2}_{-4.8}) \times 10^{16}$ 4.8 low
C VI $(6.0^{+6.4}_{-3.1}) \times 10^{16}$ 23.7 low
N VI $(2.4^{+1.4}_{-1.0}) \times 10^{16}$ 29.1 low
N VII $(1.3^{+0.8}_{-0.4}) \times 10^{17}$ 109.5 low/high
O VII $(3.7^{+2.7}_{-1.8}) \times 10^{16}$ 24.2 low
O VIII $(9.5^{+8.7}_{-4.7}) \times 10^{16}$ 24.7 high
Ne IX $(1.2^{+0.6}_{-0.5}) \times 10^{18}$ 9.9 high
Ne X $(4.9^{+10}_{-3.2}) \times 10^{17}$ 25.9 high
Fe XVII $(1.7^{+1.6}_{-1.2}) \times 10^{17}$ 23.0 high
Fe XVIII $(6.3^{+2.4}_{-1.9}) \times 10^{17}$ 115.0 high
Fe XIX $(9.7^{+4.8}_{-3.9}) \times 10^{17}$ 166.7 high
Fe XX $(3.0^{+2.8}_{-2.0}) \times 10^{17}$ 39.5 high
Fe VII $(1.5^{+1.5}_{-1.3}) \times 10^{16}$ 9.6 low
Fe VIII $(4.6^{+1.5}_{-1.3}) \times 10^{16}$ 91.8 low
Fe IX $(8.8^{+12}_{-8.7}) \times 10^{15}$ 29.3 low
Fe X $(2.4^{+1.3}_{-1.1}) \times 10^{16}$ 72.4 low
Fe XI $(1.9^{+1.1}_{-0.9}) \times 10^{16}$ 65.3 low
Fe XII $(6.4^{+10}_{-4.4}) \times 10^{16}$ 25.6 low
: \[tbl:t1\] Measured Ion Column Densities
\
$^a$ The turbulent velocities for all of the ions are fixed to the same value. We find a best-fit with $v_{\rm{turb}} = 1430^{+360}_{-280}
~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$ $FW\!H\!M$.\
$^b$ The increase in $\chi^2$ when the ion component is excluded from the best-fit model.\
$^c$ The dominant $\xi$-component responsible for producing the absorption feature (see Figure \[fig:f1\] and text for details).
Implications of the Results of Spectral Fitting
===============================================
For the measured ion column densities listed in Table \[tbl:t1\], many of the strong absorption lines of neon and iron L ions are in the logarithmic region of the curves of growth, which indicates that the derived column densities are highly coupled with the assumed turbulent velocity. Those of K-shell carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen, and iron M-shell ions, however, are in the linear regime, and the derived column densities are not very sensitive to the turbulent velocity. An important point to note is that the observed velocity widths may as well be due to a superposition of multiple, discrete absorption components each of which are optically thin, and are unresolved with the RGS. Such features have been observed in UV absorption line spectra of many Seyfert 1 galaxies (Crenshaw et al. [@crenshaw99], and references therein), some of which show as many as 7 distinct, kinematic components (e.g., Mrk 509; Kriss et al. [@kriss00]). If this is the case, the measured column densities from the neon and iron L lines, which are produced in the logarithmic region of the curve of growth, may be underestimated relative to the true value. The column densities of the He-like species, as well as those of the UTA, are not affected by this, since the total observed values are still in the optically thin regime.
As shown in Table \[tbl:t1\], the detections of absorption lines from and are highly significant. The column densities of the intermediate charge states of , however, are consistent with zero, with an upper limit of $N_i \sim \rm{few}
\times 10^{15} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$ for each of these charge states. This indicates that the line-of-sight material consists of either a multi-phase gas in a single medium, or two (or more) spatially distinct regions. Motivated by this observational fact, we refit the spectrum using the same model, except, we assume that the line-of-sight material consists of two discrete velocity components; (1) the low-ionization-parameter component including , , , , and the M-shell Fe, and (2) the high-ionization-parameter component including , , , , and L-shell Fe. Contrary to our previous fit where the bulk velocities of all the ions were fixed relative to one another, we find that the low-ionization-parameter component is significantly blue-shifted with $v_{\rm{shift,low}} =
+420^{+190}_{-180} ~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$, while the bulk velocity shift in the high-ionization component is consistent with zero ($v_{\rm{shift,high}} =
-20^{+200}_{-330} ~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$). This implies that the low-ionization gas is being accelerated substantially compared to the high-ionization component, as would be expected in a radiatively-driven outflow (Arav & Li [@arav94]). The derived turbulent velocities of both components remain consistent with that of our previous fit ($v_{\rm{turb}} \sim 1500
~\rm{km~s}^{-1}$ $FW\!H\!M$).
From the observed distribution of charge states of M-shell iron, the average ionization parameter, $\xi = L/nr^2$ ($\rm{erg~cm~s}^{-1}$), of the absorbing gas is estimated to be $\log \xi \sim 0$ based on a calculation with the photoionization code XSTAR (Kallman & Krolik [@kallman95]) using the inferred continuum shape for the ionizing spectrum. The width of the distribution in ionization parameter is no larger than $\Delta \log \xi
\sim 1$. The measured iron ion column densities suggest that the corresponding equivalent hydrogen column density is $N_{\rm{H}} \sim (1 - 3)
\times 10^{21} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$ assuming a solar iron abundance. This low-$\xi$ gas accounts for most of the carbon and He-like nitrogen and oxygen absorption lines as well, however, with some indication of lower carbon and nitrogen abundances by a factor of $\sim 2$ and oxygen by a factor of $\sim 3$ relative to the solar iron abundance. The lack of absorption from , however, indicates that substantial amounts of material with ionization parameters in the range $1 \la \log \xi
\la 2$ are not present along the line-of-sight. Whether this is related to the global structure of the circumnuclear medium or a mere coincidence from a superposition of physically distinct regions is not known.
The absorption lines from H-like nitrogen and oxygen, H- and He-like neon, and L-shell iron are produced in a medium with $2.0 \la \log \xi \la 2.5$ and an equivalent hydrogen column density of $N_{\rm{H}} \sim (1 - 4) \times
10^{22} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$, again, assuming a solar iron abundance. The inferred abundances of nitrogen, oxygen, and neon relative to that of iron are consistent with solar values, but are not well-constrained.
For a normal dust-to-gas ratio, the observed reddening of $E(B-V) = 0.3$ in (Wills et al. [@wills92]) corresponds to a hydrogen column density of $N_{\rm{H}} = 1.7 \times 10^{21} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$ (Burstein & Heiles [@burstein78]). This value is significantly lower than the total amount of X-ray absorbing material (low-$\xi$ + high-$\xi$) observed in the present X-ray spectrum. Coincidentally, however, the derived column density of the low-$\xi$ component is very close to that of the optical reddening, although, we cannot conclusively associate the low-$\xi$ X-ray absorber with the dusty torus. The column density of the high-$\xi$ component, on the other hand, is a factor of $\sim 10$ higher.
An interesting point to note is that the $1 \la \log \xi \la 2$ region is [*not*]{} thermally unstable, based on XSTAR calculations described above. On the other hand, the high-$\xi$ region ($2.0 \la \log \xi \la 2.5$) that we observe in the spectrum [*is*]{} thermally unstable. However, complications such as non-solar metal abundances and/or inaccurate ionization and recombination rates may alter the shape of the thermal stability curve significantly, and, hence, the temperature ranges of the unstable regions (Hess, Kahn, & Paerels [@hess97]; Savin et al. [@savin99]).
For the observed X-ray luminosity of $L_X \sim 2.5 \times 10^{44}
~\rm{erg~s}^{-1}$, the high-$\xi$ component with $\log \xi \ga 2.0$ provides the constraint, $n_e r^2 \la 2.5 \times 10^{42} ~\rm{cm}^{-1}$. The measured column density through this medium is $N_H \sim n_e \Delta r \ga
10^{22} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$, where $\Delta r$ is the radial thickness. Assuming that $\Delta r/r < 1$, these constraints combined provide an upper limit in the location of the high-$\xi$ gas of $r_{\rm{high-}\xi} < 2.5 \times
10^{20} ~\rm{cm} \sim 80 ~\rm{pc}$, which is representative of a typical narrow-line region. The correponding gas density in this region is $n_e \ga
40 ~\rm{cm}^{-3}$ with an estimated thickness of $\Delta r \sim 80 ~\rm{pc}
\sim r_{\rm{high-}\xi}$. A similar calculation for the low-$\xi$ component does not provide a useful constraint with $r_{\rm{low-}\xi} < 10^{23}
~\rm{cm} \sim 3 ~\rm{kpc}$, and, therefore, the location of the low-$\xi$ component is not well-determined compared to that of the high-$\xi$ component. If the low-$\xi$ component lies beyond the high-$\xi$ component relative to the central continuum source, the difference in the measured bulk velocity shifts of the two components might indicate that the high-$\xi$ gas is the base of an accelerating outflow. If, on the other hand, the low-$\xi$ absorber is indeed spatially coincident with the torus, in which case $r_{\rm{low-}\xi}$ is likely to be approximately the location of the broad-line region ($r_{\rm{low-}\xi} \sim r_{\rm{BLR}} \sim 1
~\rm{pc}$), the medium is decelerating as a function of radius. Such a behavior has been observed in the UV spectrum of the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 4151 (Crenshaw et al. [@crenshaw00]).
As briefly mentioned earlier, the source during the present [*XMM-Newton*]{} observation was in an unusually low state. However, since the estimated location and density of the absorbing medium are such that the gas does not respond immediately to the observed continuum radiation (i.e., low density gas at large distances), the effect on the physical state of the absorbing medium by a variable illuminating source is not clear. It will be useful to re-observe during a substantially brighter state to see whether the spectrum exhibits any dramatic changes in the absorption structures, and specifically if the oxygen absorption edges detected in the [*ROSAT*]{} and [*ASCA*]{} data (Brandt, Fabian, & Pounds [@brandt96]; Brandt et al. [@brandt97]) are really present during a different state. A detailed comparison of the UV and X-ray absorption spectra will also be interesting, particularly for identifying discrete kinematic components, as well as for constraining the global characteristics and dynamics of the absorbing medium.
Comparisons with Other AGNs
===========================
The absorption spectrum of is qualitatively similar to those obtained with the [*Chandra*]{} transmission grating observations of the Seyfert 1 galaxies NGC 5548 and NGC 3783, which show narrow absorption lines blue-shifted by several hundred km s$^{-1}$. (Kaastra et al. [@kaastra00]; Kaspi et al. [@kaspi00]). The derived ion column densities in these sources, as well as in , are in the range $N_i \sim 10^{16} - 10^{17} ~\rm{cm}^{-2}$, and are not high enough to produce observable absorption edges.
Conceptually, the low-ionization component observed in is similar to the “lukewarm absorber” that explains both the observed optical and X-ray attenuation in NGC 3227 (Kraemer et al. [@kraemer00]). The spectroscopic signatures, however, are very different. In particular, for the column densities derived from the data, the absorption features are dominated by discrete resonance line transitions, mainly in He-like ions and M-shell iron, and not by photoelectric edges as in the model of Kraemer et al. ([@kraemer00]).
As demonstrated in our detailed spectral analysis of , the UTA feature is potentially a powerful diagnostic tool for probing cool absorbing material using high-resolution X-ray observations. If the low-ionization component is indeed associated with the dusty torus as the derived column density suggests, this feature should be detectable in other AGNs where the line-of-sight is partially obscured by the torus.
We thank the referees Niel Brandt and Sarah Gallagher for constructive comments that helped improve the quality of the manuscript. The Columbia University team is supported by NASA. The Laboratory for Space Research Utrecht is supported financially by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Work at LLNL was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by the University of California Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.
Arav, N., & Li, Z.-Y. 1994, ApJ, 427, 700 Bar-Shalom, A., Klapisch, M., Goldstein, W. H., & Oreg, J. 1998, the HULLAC code for atomic physics (unpublished) Behar, E., Sako, M., & Kahn, S. M. 2001, in preparation Beichman, C. A., Soifer, B. T., Helou, G., et al. 1986, ApJ, 308, L1 Boroson, T. A., & Meyers, K. A. 1992, ApJ, 397, 442 Brandt, W. N., Fabian, A. C., & Pounds, K. A. 1996, MNRAS, 278, 326 Brandt, W. N., Mathur, S., Reynolds, C. S., & Elvis, M. 1997, MNRAS, 292, 407 Brinkmann, W., Kawai, N., Ogasaka, Y., & Siebert, J. 1996, A&A, 316, L9 Brinkmann, W., & Siebert, J. 1994, A&A, 285, 812 Brown, G.V., Beiersdorfer, P., Liedahl, D.A., Widmann, K., & Kahn, S.M. 2000, LLNL preprint (UCRL-JC-136647) Burstein, D., & Heiles C. 1978, ApJ, 225, 40 Chenais-Popovics, C., Merdji, H., Missalla, T., et al. 2000, ApJS, 127, 275 Crenshaw, D. M., Kraemer, S. B., Boggess, A., Maran, S. P., Mushotzky, R. F., & Wu, C.-C. 1999, ApJ, 516, 750 Crenshaw, D. M., Kraemer, S. B., Hutchings, J. B., et al. 2000, AJ, 120, 1731 den Herder, J. W., Brinkman, A. C., Kahn, S. M., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, (this issue) Hess, C. J., Kahn, S. M., & Paerels, F. B. S. 1997, ApJ, 478, 94 Jansen, F. A., Lumb, D., Altieri, B., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, (this issue) Kaastra, J. S., Mewe, R., Liedahl, D. A., Komossa, S., & Brinkman, A. C. 2000, A&A, 354, L83 Kallman, T. R., & Krolik, J. H. 1995, XSTAR – A Spectral Analysis Tool, HEASARC (NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt) Kaspi, S., Brandt, W. N., Netzer, et al. 2000, ApJ, 535, L17 Kim, D.-C., Sanders, D. B., Veilleux, S., Mazzarella, J. M., & Soifer, B. T. 1995, ApJS, 98, 129 Kraemer, S. B., George, I. M., Turner, T. J., & Crenshaw, D. M. 2000, ApJ, 535, 53 Kriss, G. A., Green, R. F., Brotherton, M., et al. 2000, ApJ, 538, L17 Mason, K., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, (this issue) Murphy, E. M., Lockman, F. J., Laor, A., & Elvis, M. 1996, ApJS, 105, 369 Savin, D. W., et al. 1999, ApJS, 123, 687 Siebert, J., Komossa, S., & Brinkmann, W. 1999, A&A, 351, 893 Strüder, L., Briel, U., Dennerl, K., et al. 2001, A&A, 365, (this issue) Turner, M. J. L., Abbey, A., Arnaud, M. et al. 2001, A&A, 365 (this issue) Verner, D. A., Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., & Yakovlev, D. G. 1996, ApJ, 465, 487 Walter, R., & Fink, H. H. 1993, A&A, 274, 105 Wills, B. J., Wills, D., Evans, N. J., et al. 1992, ApJ, 400, 96
[^1]: Based on observations obtained with [*XMM-Newton*]{}, an ESA science mission with instruments and contributions directly funded by ESA Member States and the USA (NASA).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A hyperbolic type integro-differential equation with two weakly singular kernels is considered together with mixed homogeneous Dirichlet and non-homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. Existence and uniqueness of the solution is proved by means of Galerkin’s method. Regularity estimates are proved and the limitations of the regularity are discussed. The approach presented here is also used to prove regularity of any order for models with smooth kernels, that arise in the theory of linear viscoelasticity, under the appropriate assumptions on data.'
address: 'Department of Mathematics, University of Kurdistan, P. O. Box 416, Sanandaj, Iran'
author:
- Fardin Saedpanah
bibliography:
- 'Thesis.bib'
date: 'October 24, 2013'
title: 'Well-posedness of an integro-differential equation with positive type kernels modeling fractional order viscoelasticity'
---
Introduction
============
We study the model problem , which is a hyperbolic type integro-differential equation with two weakly singular kernels of Mittag-Leffler type. This problem arises as a model for fractional order viscoelasticity. The fractional order viscoelastic model, that is, the linear viscoelastic model with fractional order operators in the constitutive equations, is capable of describing the behavior of many viscoelastic materials by using only a few parameters.
A perfectly elastic material does not exist since in reality: inelasticity is always present. This inelasticity leads to energy dissipation or damping. Therefore, for a wide class of materials it is not sufficient to use an elastic constitutive model to capture the mechanical behaviour. In order to replace extensive experimental tests by numerical simulations there is a need for an accurate material model. Therefore viscoelastic constitutive models have frequently been used to simulate the time dependent behaviour of polymeric materials. The classical linear viscoelastic models that use integer order time derivatives in the constitutive laws, require an excessive number of parameters to accurately predict observed material behaviour, see e.g., [@AdolfssonEnelundOlsson] and [@RiviereShawWhiteman] for examples and more references. These models describe e.g., polymeric materials such as natural and synthetic rubber, and require a large number of exponential (smooth) kernels to describe the behavior of the materials.
Bagley and Torvik [@BagleyTorvik] used fractional derivatives to construct stress-strain relationships for viscoelastic materials. The advantage of this approach is that very few empirical parameters are required. When this fractional derivative model of viscoelasticity is incorporated directly into the structural equations a time differential equation of non-integer order higher than two is obtained. One consequence of this is that initial conditions of fractional order higher than one are required. The problems with initial conditions of fractional order have been discussed by Enelund and Olsson [@EnelundOlsson], see also references therein. To avoid the difficulties with fractional order initial conditions some alternative formulations of the fractional derivative viscoelastic model are used in structural modeling. The formulation that we use, is based on a convolution integral formulation with weakly singular fractional order kernels of Mittag-Leffler type, see [@Stig4], [@EnelundJosefson], and [@EnelundOlsson]. For other formulations, that involves fractional integral operators rather than fractional derivative operators, or uses internal variables, see [@EnelundFenanderOlsson], [@EnelundLesieutre] and [@EnelundMahlerRunessonJosefson].
Another formulations of fractional derivative viscoelastic model can be in terms of so-called diffusive representation. It is a different approach, from the convolution integral formulation that is presented here, and it was introduced for numerical simulation of complex dynamics in [@MontsenyAudounetMbodge]. Based on diffusive representation of the fractional integral/differential operators, for links between these concepts see [@Matignon1998], the output solution is represented in terms of a so-called diffusive symbol and a state function, that is a solution of an ordinary differential equation in time. The state function is called the diffusive representation of the input. Diffusive realizations of the fractional integral/differential operators, using the Laplace transform of their kernels, avoids the hereditary behavior of such operators. This means that, for time domain discretization methods, we need only the previous time step to update the integral at each time step. For more references and applications of this method see [@HaddarMatignon], [@DeuMatignon] and references therein. The fractional order kernels are the only mean to get a correct representation for the storage and loss moduli, and to have well-posed identification problem for many viscoelastic materials. Important properties of such kernels are integrability and completely monotonicity, that (as a consequence of dissipation) implies to be positive type. In fact, these kernels interpolate between smooth (exponential) kernels and weakly singular kernels, that are singular at origin but integrable on finite time intervals, i.e., belong to $L_{1,loc}({\mathbb R}^+)$. A chief example is $\beta(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\frac{1}{t^{1-\alpha}},\ \alpha \in (0,1)$. For more details and examples see [@CiambellaPaoloneVidoli] and references therein. This is the reason for introducing kernels of Mittag-Leffler type or fractional operators. In [@AdolfssonEnelundOlsson] and [@EnelundOlsson] it is shown that the classical viscoelastic model based on exponential kernels can describe the same viscoelastic behaviour as the fractional model if the number of kernels tend to infinity.
In fractional order viscoelastic models the whole strain history must be saved and included in each time step that is due to the non-locality of the fractional order integral/differential operators. The most commonly used algorithms for this integration are based on Lubich convolution quadrature [@Lubich] for fractional order operators, see also [@LopezLubichSchadle] for an improved version. For examples of the application of this approch to overcome the problem with the growing amount of data, that has to be stored and used in time stepping methods, see [@Stig4], [@LubichSloanThomee] and [@McLeanThomeeWahlbin]. For analysis and numerical solution of integro-differential equations and related problems, from the extensive literature, see e.g., [@StigFardin], [@McLeanThomee2010], [@RiviereShawWhiteman], and their references.
Existence, uniqueness, and regularity of the solution of models with exponential kernels can be adapted from, e.g., [@Dafermos], where an abstract Volterra equation, as an abstract model for equations of linear viscoelasticity, has been considered. See also [@Fichera1979] for another paper dealing with well-posedness of problems in linear viscoelasticity with smooth kernels. Existence, uniqueness and regularity of a parabolic type integro-differential equation has been studied in [@McLeanThomee] by means of Fourier series. One may also see [@DeschFasanga], where the theory of analytic semigroups is used in terms of interpolation spaces to solve a boundary value problem in linear viscoelasticity. Well-posedness of an integro-differential equation, a model from dynamic linear viscoelasticity with exponential kernels and first order spatial operator in the convolution integral, has been studied in [@McLaughlinThomasYoon], by means of Galerkin approximation method. However, the mixed homogeneous Dirichlet and non-homogeneous Neumann boundary condition, that is important for practitioners, has not been considered.
In a previous work [@StigFardin], well-posedness and regularity of the problem , which is a simplified form (synchronous viscoelasticity) of the model problem , was studied in the framework of the semigroup of linear operators. The drawback of the framework is that this does not admit non-homogeneous Neumann boundary condition, while in practice mixed homogeneous Dirichlet and non-homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions are of special interest.
Here we consider the model problem , which is a hyperbolic type integro-differential equation with two weakly singular kernels of Mittag-Leffler type, and it is the convolution integral formulation of the constitutive equation system . The mixed homogeneous Dirichlet and non-homogeneous Neumann boundary condition has been considered, and we investigate existence, uniqueness and regularity of the solution of the model problem by means of the Galerkin approximation method. We also extend the presented approach so that regularity of any order of the solution for the models with smooth kernels can be proved.
In the sequel, in $\S2$ we describe the construction of the model problem . In $\S3$ we define a weak (generalized) solution and, using Galerkin’s method, we prove existence and uniqueness of the weak solution of the problem. Finally, in $\S4$ we study regularity of the solution and limitations for higher regularity. We also show that higher regularity of any order of the solution of models with smooth kernels can be achieved.
Fractional order viscoelasticity
================================
Let $\sigma_{ij}$, $\epsilon_{ij}$ and $u_i$ denote, respectively, the usual stress tensor, strain tensor and displacement vector. We recall that the linear strain tensor is defined by, $$\begin{aligned}
\epsilon_{ij}
= \frac12 \Big(
\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial x_j}
+ \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial x_i} \Big) .\end{aligned}$$ We recall that the simplest fractional derivative model of viscoelasticity, so-called fractional Zener model, is $$\label{Zenermodel}
\sigma(t) + \tau^{\alpha} D_t^{\alpha}\sigma(t)
= E_\infty \epsilon(t)
+ E\tau^{\alpha} D_t^{\alpha}\epsilon(t),$$ where $\tau$ is the relaxation time, $\alpha$ is the fractional order of differentiation, and $E$, $E_\infty$ are the instantaneous (unrelaxed) and long-time (relaxed) modulus, respectively. This model has been shown to describe the actual weak frequency dependence, of the complex modulus, for rather a wide class of engineering materials, see [@BagleyTorvik], [@EnelundOlsson] and [@Pritz1996] for more details.
With the decompositions $$\begin{aligned}
s_{ij}=\sigma_{ij}-\tfrac13 \sigma_{kk}\delta_{ij}, \quad
e_{ij}=\epsilon_{ij}-\tfrac13 \epsilon_{kk}\delta_{ij},\end{aligned}$$ the constitutive equations, fractional Zener models, are formulated as, see [@EnelundJosefson], $$\label{constitutiveequation}
\begin{split}
s_{ij}(t) &+ \tau_1^{\alpha_1} D_t^{\alpha_1}s_{ij}(t)
= 2G_\infty e_{ij}(t) + 2G\tau_1^{\alpha_1} D_t^{\alpha_1}e_{ij}(t),\\
\sigma_{kk}(t) &+ \tau_2^{\alpha_2} D_t^{\alpha_2}\sigma_{kk}(t)
= 3K_\infty \epsilon_{kk}(t)
+ 3K\tau_2^{\alpha_2} D_t^{\alpha_2}\epsilon_{kk}(t),
\end{split}$$ with initial conditions $$\begin{aligned}
s_{ij}(0+)=2Ge_{ij}(0+), \quad
\sigma_{kk}(0+)=3K\epsilon_{kk}(0+),\end{aligned}$$ meaning that the initial response follows Hooke’s elastic law. Here $G,\,K$ are the instantaneous (unrelaxed) shear and bulk modulus, and $G_\infty,\,K_\infty$ are the long-time (relaxed) shear and bulk modulus, respectively. Note that we have two relaxation times, $\tau_1,\tau_2>0$, and fractional orders of differentiation, $\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2\in(0,1)$, where the fractional order derivative is defined by, [@Podlubny], $$\begin{aligned}
D_t^\alpha f(t)
= D_t D_t^{-(1-\alpha)} f(t)
= D_t \frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\alpha)} \int_0^t (t-s)^{-\alpha}f(s)\,ds .\end{aligned}$$ The constitutive equations can be solved for $\sigma$ by means of Laplace transformation, [@EnelundOlsson]: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned}
s_{ij}(t)&=2G\Big(e_{ij}(t)
- \frac {G-G_\infty}G \int_0^t \theta_1(t-s)e_{ij}(s) \,ds \Big), \\
\sigma_{kk}(t) &=3K\Big( \epsilon_{kk}(t)
- \frac {K-K_\infty}K \int_0^t \theta_2(t-s)\epsilon_{kk}(s)
\,ds\Big),
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ where, for $i=1,2$, $$\begin{aligned}
\theta_i(t) = - \frac{d}{dt} E_{\alpha_i}
\Big(-\Big(\frac{t}{\tau_i}\Big)^{\alpha_i}\Big),\quad
E_{\alpha_i}(z)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{z^n}{\Gamma(1+n\alpha_i)},\end{aligned}$$ and $E_{\alpha_i}$ is the Mittag-Leffler function of order $\alpha_i$, [@Bateman]. Then we define parameters $\gamma_i$, and the Lamé constants $\mu$, $\lambda$, $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_1=\frac {G-G_\infty}G,
\quad \gamma_2 = \frac {K-K_\infty}K,
\quad \mu = G , \quad \lambda = K-\tfrac23G.\end{aligned}$$ We recall that, due to dissipation, we need the assumtions, for $\alpha_i \in (0,1),\ i=1,2$, $$K>K_\infty>0, \quad G>G_\infty>0, \quad \tau_i>0,$$ and therefore we have $0<\gamma_i<1,\ i=1,2$, see [@BagleyTorvik1986], and also [@AdolfssonEnelundOlsson], [@EnelundJosefson] for examples.
We also define $\beta_i=\gamma_i\theta_i$, and the constitutive equations become $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\sigma_{ij}(t)
&=\Big(2\mu\epsilon_{ij}(t)+\lambda\epsilon_{kk}(t)\delta_{ij} \Big)
-2\mu\int_0^t\!\beta_1(t-s)
\Big(\epsilon_{ij}(s)-\tfrac13 \epsilon_{kk}(s)\delta_{ij}
\Big)\,ds\\
&\quad -\frac{3\lambda+2\mu}{3}
\int_0^t\!\beta_2(t-s)\epsilon_{kk}(s)\delta_{ij}\,ds.
\end{split} \end{aligned}$$ The kernels are weakly singular, i.e., singular at the origin but integrable, for $i=1,\,2$: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{beta}
\begin{split}
\beta_i(t)&=-\gamma_i \frac{d}{dt}E_{\alpha_i}
\Big(-\Big(\frac{t}{\tau_i}\Big)^{\alpha_i}\Big)
=\gamma_i\frac{\alpha_i}{\tau_i} \Big(\frac{t}{\tau_i}\Big)^{-1+\alpha_i}
E_{\alpha_i}' \Big(-\Big(\frac{t}{\tau_i}\Big)^{\alpha_i}\Big)\\
&\approx C t^{-1+\alpha_i}, \ \text{ $t\to 0$} ,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ and we note the properties $$\begin{aligned}
\label{betaproperties}
\begin{aligned}
\beta_i(t)&\ge 0, \\
\|\beta_i\|_{L_1({\mathbb R}^+)}&=\int_0^\infty\!
\beta_i(t)\,dt
=\gamma_i \Big( E_{\alpha_i} (0)- E_{\alpha_i}(\infty)\Big)=\gamma_i <1.
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
The equations of motion are $$\begin{aligned}
\label{motion}
\begin{aligned}
&\rho u_{i,tt}-\sigma_{ij,j} =f_i , \quad &&\text{in } \Omega, \\
&u_i=0 , \quad &&\text{on } \Gamma_\text{D}, \\
&\sigma_{ij}n_j=g_i , \quad &&\text{on } \Gamma_\text{N},
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ where $u$ is the displacement vector, $\rho$ is the (constant) mass density, $f$ and $g$ represent, respectively, the volume and surface loads. We let $\Omega \subset\mathbb{R}^d, \, d=2,3$, be a bounded polygonal domain with boundary $\Gamma_\text{D}\cup\Gamma_\text{N}=\partial\Omega,\,
\Gamma_\text{D}\cap\Gamma_\text{N}=\varnothing$ and $\operatorname{meas}(\Gamma_\text{D})\neq 0$. We set $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Ai}
\begin{split}
(Au)_i&=-\big(2\mu\epsilon_{ij}(u)
+\lambda\epsilon_{kk}(u)\delta_{ij}\big)_{\!,j}\,,\\
(A_1u)_i&=-2\mu\big(\epsilon_{ij}(u)
-\tfrac13\epsilon_{kk}(u)\delta_{ij}\big)_{\!,j}\,,\\
(A_2u)_i&=-\frac{3\lambda+2\mu}{3}
\big(\epsilon_{kk}(u)\delta_{ij}\big)_{\!,j}\,,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ and clearly we have $A=A_1+A_2$. Now, we write the equations of motion in the strong form, (we denote time derivatives with ’$\cdot$’), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{strongform}
\begin{aligned}
&\rho \ddot u(x,t)+Au(x,t)\\
&\qquad-\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s)A_iu(x,s)\,ds=f(x,t)
\quad&& \textrm{in} \;\,\Omega\times (0,T),\\
&u(x,t)=0 \quad&& \textrm{on}\;\Gamma_\text{D}\times (0,T),\\
&\sigma(u;x,t)\cdot n=g(x,t)
\quad&&\textrm{on}\;\Gamma_\text{N}\times (0,T),\\
&u(x,0)=u^0(x)\quad&&\textrm{in}\;\,\Omega,\\
&\dot u(x,0)=v^0(x)\quad&&\textrm{in}\;\,\Omega.
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
If we make the simplifying assumption (synchronous viscoelasticity), that is, when all elastic modulus at each material point have the same relaxation behavior: $$\begin{aligned}
\quad \alpha=\alpha_1=\alpha_2,
\quad \tau=\tau_1=\tau_2,\quad \theta=\theta_1=\theta_2,\end{aligned}$$ we may define $\gamma=\gamma_1=\gamma_2$, so that $\beta=\beta_1=\beta_2$. Then the strong form of the equations of motion is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{strongform2}
\begin{aligned}
\rho \ddot u(x,t)
&+Au(x,t)
-\int_0^t\!\beta(t-s)Au(x,s)\,ds=f(x,t)
\qquad \textrm{in} \;\,\Omega\times (0,T),
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ together with the boundary and initial conditions in . We note that is the strong form of the equation of motion of the simplest fractional model of viscoelasticity , in the convolution integral formulation. And we note that is also valid for small deformations, that is true deviatoric and bulk parts.
Well-posedness and regularity of the simplified problem was studied in [@StigFardin], in the framework of the semigroup of linear operators. The drawback of the framework is that this does not admit non-homogeneous Neumann boundary condition. More details and examples of the simplified problem can be found in [@AdolfssonEnelund2003], [@Stig3], [@Stig4], [@EnelundJosefson], [@EnelundMahlerRunessonJosefson], [@EnelundOlsson], and [@SchmidtGaul], e.g., bar, beam and plain starin in 2D can be found in [@EnelundJosefson], [@EnelundMahlerRunessonJosefson], and [@EnelundOlsson].
Existence and uniqueness
========================
In this section we prove existence and uniqueness of a weak solution of using Galerkin’s method, in a similar way for hyperbolic PDE’s in [@DautrayLions], [@Evans]. To this end, we first formulate the weak form of the model problem . Then we introduce the Galerkin approximation of a weak solution of in a classical way, and we obtain a priori estimates for approximate solutions. These will be used to construct a weak solution, and then uniqueness will be verified.
Weak formulation
----------------
We define the bilinear form (with the usual summation convention) $$a(u,v)=\int_{\Omega}\!\big(
2\mu\epsilon_{ij}(u)\epsilon_{ij}(v)
+\lambda\epsilon_{ii}(u)\epsilon_{jj}(v)\big)\,dx,
\quad \forall u,v\in V,$$ which is well-known to be coercive. In a similar way, corresponding to $A_i,\ i=1,\ 2$, the bilinear forms $a_i(u,v)$ are defined. We introduce the function spaces $H=L_2(\Omega)^d,\,H_{\Gamma_{\text N}}=L_2(\Gamma_{\text N})^d,\,$ and $V=\{v\in H^1(\Omega)^d:v\!\!\mid_{\Gamma_{\text D}}=0\}$. We denote the norms in $H$ and $H_{\Gamma_{\text N}}$ by $\|\cdot\|$ and $\|\cdot\|_{\Gamma_{\text N}}$, respectively, and we equip $V$ with the inner product $a(\cdot,\cdot)$ and norm $\|v\|_V^2=a(v,v)$. We note that, for $v\in V$, $$\label{ai}
a_i(v,v)\le \|v\|_V^2.$$
Now we define a weak solution to be a function $u=u(x,t)$ that satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\label{weaksolution1}
&u\in L_2((0,T);V),\quad \dot u\in L_2((0,T);H),
\quad \ddot u\in L_2((0,T);V^*),\\ \label{weaksolution2}
&\rho \langle \ddot u(t),v\rangle + a(u(t),v)
-\sum_{i=1}^2 \int_0^t\! \beta_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), v) \,ds \\
&\nonumber\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad= (f(t),v) + (g(t),v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}},
\quad \forall v \in V ,\,\,\text{a.e.}\,\,t\in (0,T),\\
\label{weaksolution3}
&u(0)=u^0,\quad \dot u(0)=v^0.\end{aligned}$$ Here $(g(t),v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}=\int_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\!g(t)\cdot v\,dS$, and $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ denotes the pairing of $V^*$ and $V$. We note that implies, by a classical result for Sobolev spaces, that $u\in {\mathcal C}([0,T];H),\,\dot u\in{\mathcal C}([0,T];V^*)$ so that the initial conditions make sense for $u^0\in H,\,v^0\in V^*$.
Galerkin approximations
-----------------------
Let $\{(\lambda_j,{\varphi}_j)\}_{j=1}^\infty$ be the eigenpairs of the weak eigenvalue problem $$\label{weakeigenvalue}
a({\varphi},v)=\lambda({\varphi},v),\quad \forall v\in V.$$ It is known that $\{{\varphi}_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ can be chosen to be an ON-basis in $H$ and an orthogonal basis for $V$.
Now, for a fixed positive integer $m\in{\mathbb N}$, we seek a function of the form $$\label{u_m}
u_m(t)=\sum_{j=1}^m d_j(t){\varphi}_j$$ to satisfy $$\label{weakGalerkin}
\begin{split}
\rho (\ddot u_m(t),{\varphi}_k&) + a(u_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
-\sum_{i=1}^2 \int_0^t\! \beta_i(t-s) a_i(u_m(s), {\varphi}_k)\,ds\\
&= (f(t),{\varphi}_k) + (g(t),{\varphi}_k)_{\Gamma_\text{N}},
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T),
\end{split}$$ with initial conditions $$\label{weakGalerkininitial}
u_m(0)=\sum_{j=1}^m(u^0,{\varphi}_j){\varphi}_j,
\quad \dot u_m(0)=\sum_{j=1}^m(v^0,{\varphi}_j){\varphi}_j.$$
For each $m\in {\mathbb N}$, there exists a unique function $u_m$ of the form satisfying -.
Using and the fact that $\{{\varphi}_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ is an ON-basis for $H$ and a solution of the eigenvalue problem , we obtain from that, $$\label{SystemweakGalerkin}
\begin{split}
\rho \ddot d_k(t)+\lambda_k d_k(t) &- \sum_{j=1}^m \sum_{i=1}^2
a_i({\varphi}_j,{\varphi}_k) (\beta_i*d_j)(t)\\
&= f_k(t) + g_k(t),
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T),
\end{split}$$ where $*$ denotes the convolution, and $f_k(t)=(f(t),{\varphi}_k),\,g_k(t)=(g(t),{\varphi}_k)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}$. This is a linear system of second order ODE’s with initial conditions $$\label{SystemweakGalerkininitial}
d_k(0) = (u^0,{\varphi}_k),\quad \dot d_k(0) = (v^0,{\varphi}_k),
\quad k=1,\dots,m.$$ The Laplace transform can be used, for example, to find the unique solution of the system.
We note that, the Laplace transform of the Mittag-Leffler function is, see e.g., [@Podlubny], $${\mathcal L}(E_\alpha(a t^\alpha))=\frac{s^{\alpha-1} }{s^\alpha - a}\,,
\quad {\rm Re}(s) > |a|^{1/\alpha},$$ and therefore, for the kernels $\beta_i,\ i=1,2$, defined in , we have $$\begin{split}
\hat{\beta}_i(s)
&={\mathcal L}(\beta_i(t))
=-\gamma_i s {\mathcal L}(E_{\alpha_i}(-\tau_i^{-\alpha_i}t^{\alpha_i}))
+\gamma_i E_{\alpha_i}(0)\\
&=-\gamma_i s \frac{s^{\alpha_i-1} }
{s^{\alpha_i}+\tau_i^{-\alpha_i}}+\gamma_i
=\gamma_i - \gamma_i \frac{s^{\alpha_i} }
{s^{\alpha_i}+\tau_i^{-\alpha_i}}\\
&=\frac{\gamma_i}{(\tau_i s)^{\alpha_i} +1}<1\ ,
\quad {\rm Re}(s) > \tau_i^{-1} .
\end{split}$$
Now taking the Laplace transform of we get (we use an over-hat for the Laplace transform), $$\label{SystemLaplaceTransform}
\begin{split}
(s^2\rho+\lambda_k)\hat d_k(s)
&-\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{i=1}^2 a_i({\varphi}_j,{\varphi}_k)
\frac{\gamma_i}{(\tau_i s)^{\alpha_i} +1}\hat d_j(s)\\
&=\hat f_k(s)+\hat g_k(s)+s\rho d_k(0)+\rho \dot d_k(0),\\
& \qquad k=1,\dots,m,\ {\rm Re}(s) > \frac{1}{\min \{\tau_1,\tau_2\}},
\end{split}$$ that can be written in the matrix form $$Q \hat D =\hat F + P.$$ Here $$\begin{split}
&Q(s)=(Q_{j,k}(s))_{j,k=1}^m
=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\rho s^2 +\lambda_k
-\sum_{i=1}^2a_i({\varphi}_k,{\varphi}_j)\frac{\gamma_i}{(\tau_i s)^{\alpha_i} +1},
& j=k,\\
-\sum_{i=1}^2a_i({\varphi}_k,{\varphi}_j)\frac{\gamma_i}{(\tau_i s)^{\alpha_i} +1},
&j\neq k,
\end{array}\right.\\
&\hat D(s)=(\hat d_k(s))_{k=1}^m, \quad
\hat F(s)=(\hat f_k(s)+\hat g_k(s))_{k=1}^m, \quad
P(s) =(s\rho d_k(0)+\rho\dot d_k(0))_{k=1}^m,
\end{split}$$ and we note that the entries of matrix $A$ are analytic.
For the extreme cases $\alpha_i=0,1,\ i=1,2$, components of $\hat D=Q^{-1}(\hat F+P)$ are proper rational functions, and it is well-known that the inverse Laplace transform is uniquely computable, using partial fractions expansion. Therefore $\alpha_1,\alpha_2\in(0,1)$ interpolates between these two cases, for which the inverse Laplace transform is uniquely computable. Indeed, having $\{s_j\}_{ j=1}^J$ finite poles for $\hat D=Q^{-1}(\hat F+P)$, we denote $$\overline a=\max \Big\{\frac{1}{\min \{\tau_1,\tau_2\}},
{\rm Re}(s_j), \dots,{\rm Re}(s_J) \Big\}, \quad
\underline a=\min \big\{{\rm Re}(s_j), \dots,{\rm Re}(s_J) \big\}.$$ Therefore $Q^{-1}(\hat F+P)$ is analytic for ${\rm Re}(s)>\overline a$, and the inverse Laplace transform is uniquely computable, [@Folland Theorem 8.5], and for the contour $\underline a \leq {\rm Re}(s) \leq \overline a$ one can use the residue theorem.
Hence, there is a unique solution for the linear system , and this completes the proof.
For our analysis below to manipulate the non-homogeneous Neumann boundary condition, recalling and , we define the functions $$\begin{aligned}
\xi_i(t)=\gamma_i-\int_0^t\!\beta_i(s)\,ds
=\int_t^\infty\!\beta_i(s)\,ds
=\gamma_i E_{\alpha_i}(t),\quad i=1,\,2,\end{aligned}$$ and it is easy to see that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{xiproperties}
\begin{split}
D_t\xi_i(t)=-\beta_i(t)<0,\quad
\xi_i(0)=\gamma_i,\quad \lim_{t\to\infty}\xi_i(t)=0,\quad
0<\xi_i(t)\le\gamma_i.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Besides, $\xi_i$ are completely monotonic functions, that is, $$\begin{aligned}
(-1)^jD_t^j\xi_i(t)\ge 0,\quad t\in (0,\infty),\,j\in{\mathbb N},\end{aligned}$$ since the Mittag-Leffler functions $E_{\alpha_i},\,\alpha_i\in[0,1]$ are completely monotonic. Consequently, an important property of $\xi_i,i=1,\,2$, is that, they are positive type kernels, that is, they are continuous and, for any $T\ge 0$, satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\label{positivetype}
\int_0^T\!\int_0^t\!\xi_i(t-s)\phi(t)\phi(s)\,ds\,dt\ge 0,
\quad \forall\phi\in {\mathcal C}([0,T]).\end{aligned}$$ For more details on these concepts and their properties see, e.g., [@Bateman] and [@Widder].
Our plan is to send $m\to \infty$ and prove existence of a weak solution of -. To this end, we first need some a priori estimates that are independent of $m$, that is given in the next theorem.
If $u^0\in V,\,v^0\in H,\,g\in W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}}),\,
f\in L_2((0,T);H)$, there is a constant $C=C(\Omega, \gamma_1, \gamma_2,\rho,T)$ such that, $$\label{aprioriestimate}
\begin{split}
\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}
&+ \|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}
+ \|\ddot u_m\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}\\
&\le C \big\{ \|u^0\|_V+ \|v^0\|
+ \|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}
+ \|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}\big\} .
\end{split}$$
We organize our proof in $2$ steps.
1\. First, we prove the estimate for $u_m$ and $\dot u_m$, that is based on a standard energy method. Since $\beta_i(t-s)=D_s\xi_i(t-s)$ and $\xi_i(0)=\gamma_i$ , by , we first write , after partial integration in time, as $$ \begin{split}
\rho (\ddot u_m(t),{\varphi}_k) &+ a(u_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
-\sum_{i=1}^2 \gamma_i a_i(u_m(t),{\varphi}_k)\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^2 \int_0^t\!\xi_i(t-s) a_i(\dot u_m(s),{\varphi}_k)\,ds \\
&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!= (f(t),{\varphi}_k) + (g(t),{\varphi}_k)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\\
&-\sum_{i=1}^2 \xi_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),{\varphi}_k) ,
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T).
\end{split}$$ Then multiplying by $\dot d_k(t)$, summing over $k=1,\dots,m$, and integrating with respect to $t$, we have $$\begin{split}
\rho \|\dot u_m(t)\|^2 + &(1-\bar{\gamma})\|u_m(t)\|_V^2
+2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\int_0^r\!\xi_i(r-s)
a_i(\dot u_m(s),\dot u_m(r))\,ds\,dr\\
&\le \rho\|\dot u_m(0)\|^2 + (1-\underline{\gamma})\|u_m(0)\|_V^2\\
&\quad +2\int_0^t\!(f(r),\dot u_m(r))\, dr
+2\int_0^t\! (g(r),\dot u_m(r))_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\,dr\\
&\quad-2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!
\xi_i(r)a_i(u_m(0),\dot u_m(r))\,dr,
\end{split}$$ where $\bar \gamma = \max\{\gamma_1,\,\gamma_2\}$ and $\underline \gamma = \min\{\gamma_1,\,\gamma_2\}$. We note that $0< \underline \gamma, \bar\gamma <1$. Since $\xi_i,\,i=1,\,2$ are positive type kernels, recalling , the third term of the left hand side is non-negative. Then integration by parts in the last two terms at the right side yields $$\begin{split}
\rho\|\dot u_m(t)\|^2 &+(1- \bar{\gamma})\|u_m(t)\|_V^2\\
&\le \rho\|\dot u_m(0)\|^2 +(1- \underline{\gamma})\|u_m(0)\|_V^2
+2\int_0^t\!(f(r),\dot u_m(r))\, dr\\
&\quad -2\int_0^t\!(\dot g(r),u_m(r))_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\,dr
+2(g(t),u_m(t))_{\Gamma_\text{N}}
-2(g(0),u_m(0))_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\\
&\quad -2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(r)a_i(u_m(0),u_{m}(r))\,dr\\
&\quad -2\sum_{i=1}^2\xi_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),u_{m}(t))
+2\sum_{i=1}^2\xi_i(0)a_i(u_m(0),u_{m}(0)).
\end{split}$$ This, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the trace theorem, $\|\beta_i\|_{L_1(\mathbb{R}^+)}=\gamma_i$, $\xi_i(t)\le \xi_i(0)=\gamma_i$, and , implies $$\begin{split}
\rho\|&\dot u_m(t)\|^2 +(1- \bar{\gamma})\|u_m(t)\|_V^2\\
&\le \rho\|\dot u_m(0)\|^2 + (1-\underline{\gamma})\|u_m(0)\|_V^2\\
&\quad +2/C_1\max_{0\le r\le t}\|\dot u_m(r)\|^2
+C_1\Big(\int_0^t\!\|f(r)\|\,dr\Big)^2\\
&\quad +2C_{\rm Trace}/C_2\max_{0\le r\le t}\| u_{m}(r)\|_V^2
+2C_{\rm Trace}C_2\Big(\int_0^t\!\|
\dot g(r)\|_{H^{\Gamma_\text{N}}}\Big)^2\\
&\quad +2C_{\rm Trace}/C_3\| u_{m}(t)\|_V^2
+2C_{\rm Trace}C_3\|g(t)\|_{H_{\Gamma_\text{N}}}^2\\
&\quad +2C_{\rm Trace}/C_4\| u_{m}(0)\|_V^2
+2C_{\rm Trace}C_4\| g(0)\|_{H_{\Gamma_\text{N}}}^2\\
&\quad +2/C_5\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2 \gamma_i\Big)\| u_{m}(0)\|_V^2
+2C_5\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)
\max_{0\le r\le t}\| u_{m}(r)\|_V^2\\
&\quad +2/C_6\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\| u_{m}(0)\|_V^2
+2C_6\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\| u_{m}(t)\|_V^2
+2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\| u_{m}(0)\|_V^2 .
\end{split}$$ Hence, considering the facts that $C_{\rm Trace}=C(\Omega)$, $\|\dot u_m(0)\|\le\|v^0\|$, and $\|u_m(0)\|_V\le \|u^0\|_V$, for some constant $C=C(\Omega,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\rho, T)$, we have $$\begin{split}
\|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
&+\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2\\
&\le C \big\{\|v^0\|^2+\|u^0\|_V^2
+\|g\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2\\
&\qquad\quad
+\|f\|_{L_1((0,T);H)}^2
+\|\dot g\|_{L_1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2
\big\}.
\end{split}$$ This, and the facts that $\|g\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}\le C
\|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}$, by Sobolev inequality, and $\|f\|_{L_1((0,T);H)}\le C\|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}$, imply $$\label{apriori1}
\begin{split}
\|\dot u_m&\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
+\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2\\
&\le C \big\{\|v^0\|^2+\|u^0\|_V^2
+\|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2
+\|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}^2 \big\}.
\end{split}$$
2\. Now we need to find a bound for $\ddot u_m$, that is by duality with a suitable decomposition of the test functions $v\in V$. For any fixed $v\in V$ with $\|v\|_V\le 1$, we write $v=v^1+v^2$, where $v^1\in \operatorname{span}\{{\varphi}_j\}_{j=1}^m,\,v^2\in \operatorname{span}(\{{\varphi}_j\}_{j=1}^m)^\perp$. We note that $\|v^1\|_V \le 1$. Then from we obtain, $$\begin{split}
\rho\langle \ddot u_m(t),v\rangle = \rho(\ddot u_m(t),v^1)
&= (f(t),v^1)+(g(t),v^1)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}-a(u_m(t),v^1)\\
&\quad +\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s)a_i(u_m(s),v^1)\,ds,
\end{split}$$ that, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the trace theorem, and , implies $$|\langle \ddot u_m(t),v\rangle|
\le \frac{1}{\rho} \Big(
\|f(t)\|+C_{\rm Trace}\|g(t)\|+\|u_m(t)\|_V
+\max_{0 \le s \le t} \|u_m(s)\|_V \sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i
\Big).$$ This, using , in a standard way implies $$\begin{split}
\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}^2
&\le C\big\{ \|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}^2
+\|g\|_{L_2((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2\\
&\quad\quad+\|v^0\|^2+\|u^0\|_V^2
+\|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2
\big\}.
\end{split}$$ Therefore, for some constant $C=C(\Omega,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\rho, T)$, $$\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}^2
\le C\big\{ \|v^0\|^2+\|u^0\|_V^2
+\|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}^2
+\|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}^2
\big\}.$$ This and imply the estimate , and the proof is complete.
We note that Lemma 1 and Theorem 1 are also applied to the simplified model problem in Remark 1. That is, there exists a unique function $u_m$ of the form satisfying $$\begin{split}
\rho (\ddot u_m(t),{\varphi}_k&) + a(u_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
-\int_0^t\! \beta(t-s) a(u_m(s), {\varphi}_k)\,ds\\
&= (f(t),{\varphi}_k) + (g(t),{\varphi}_k)_{\Gamma_\text{N}},
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T),
\end{split}$$ with initial conditions . Moreover, the a priori estimate still holds with $C=C(\Omega, \gamma, \rho,T)$.
Existence and uniqueness of the weak solution
---------------------------------------------
First we use Theorem 1, and pass to limits $m \to \infty$, to prove existence a weak solution of , that is a solution of –. Then we prove uniqueness in Theorem 3.
If $u^0\in V,\,v^0\in H,\,g\in W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}}),\,
f\in L_2((0,T);H)$, there exists a weak solution of .
We need to show that there is a solution of -, that is a weak solution of . We organize our proof in 4 steps.
1\. First we note that the estimate does not depend on $m$, so we have $$\begin{split}
\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}
&+ \|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}
+ \|\ddot u_m\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}\\
&\le K=K(\Omega,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,T,u^0,v^0,f,g) .
\end{split}$$ This means that the sequences $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\dot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\ddot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ are bounded, $$\label{boundedness}
\begin{split}
&\{u_m\}_1^\infty \text{ is bounded in }
L_\infty((0,T);V)\subset L_2((0,T);V),\\
&\{\dot u_m\}_1^\infty \text{ is bounded in }
L_\infty((0,T);H)\subset L_2((0,T);H),\\
&\{\ddot u_m\}_1^\infty \text{ is bounded in }
L_2((0,T);V^*).
\end{split}$$ 2. Now we prove that the sequence $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ passes to a limit that satisfies . From and a classical result in functional analysis, we conclude that the sequences $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\dot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\ddot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ are weakly precompact. That is, there are subsequences of $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\dot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\ddot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{weakconvergence}
\begin{aligned}
&u_l \rightharpoonup u&&\text{in}\quad L_2((0,T);V),\\
&\dot u_l \rightharpoonup \dot u&&\text{in}\quad L_2((0,T);H),\\
&\ddot u_l \rightharpoonup \ddot u&&\text{in}\quad L_2((0,T);V^*),
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ where the index $l$ is a replacement of the label of the subsequences and ’$\rightharpoonup$’ denotes weak convergence. Consequently, the limit function $u$ satisfies . So it remains to verify and .
3\. To show we fix a positive integer $N$ and we choose $v\in{\mathcal C}([0,T];V)$ of the form $$\label{v1}
v(t)=\sum_{j=1}^N h_j(t){\varphi}_j.$$ Then we take $l\ge N$ and by we have $$\label{weakGalerkinSubseq}
\begin{split}
\int_0^T\Big(\rho\langle \ddot u_l,v\rangle
+a(u_l,v)-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(t-s)&a_i(u_l(s),v)\,ds\Big)\,dt\\
&=\int_0^T\!\big((f,v)+(g,v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\big)\,dt.
\end{split}$$ This, by , implies in the limit $$\label{weakGalerkinSubseqLimit}
\begin{split}
\int_0^T\Big(\rho\langle \ddot u,v\rangle
+a(u,v)-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(t-s)&a_i(u(s),v)\,ds\Big)\,dt\\
&=\int_0^T\!\big((f,v)+(g,v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\big)\,dt.
\end{split}$$ Since functions of the form are dense in $L_2((0,T);V)$, this equality then holds for all functions $v\in L_2((0,T);V)$, and further it implies .
4\. Finally, we need to show that $u$ satisfies the initial conditions . Let $v\in{\mathcal C}^2([0,T];V)$ be any function with $v(T)=\dot v(T)=0$. Then by partial integration in we have $$\begin{split}
\int_0^T\Big(\rho\langle u_{l},\ddot v\rangle&+a(u_l,v)
-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(t-s)a_i(u_l(s),v)\,ds\Big)\,dt\\
&=\int_0^T\!\big((f,v)+(g,v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\big)\,dt
-\rho(u_l(0),\dot v(0))+\rho(\dot u_l(0),v(0)) ,
\end{split}$$ so that, recalling and , in the limit we conclude, $$\begin{split}
\int_0^T\Big(\rho\langle u,\ddot v\rangle&+a(u,v)
-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s)a_i(u(s),v)\,ds\Big)\,dt\\
&=\int_0^T\!\big((f,v)+(g,v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\big)\,dt
-\rho(u^0,\dot v(0))+\rho(v^0,v(0)) .
\end{split}$$ On the other hand integration by parts in gives, $$\begin{split}
\int_0^T\Big(\rho\langle u,\ddot v\rangle&+a(u,v)
-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s)a_i(u(s),v)\,ds\Big)\,dt\\
&=\int_0^T\!\big((f,v)+(g,v)_{\Gamma_\text{N}}\big)\,dt
-\rho(u(0),\dot v(0))+\rho(v(0),v(0)) .
\end{split}$$ Compairing the last two identities we conclude , since $v(0),\,\dot v(0)$ are arbitrary.
Hence $u$ satisfies -, that is $u$ is a weak solution of . The proof is now complete.
If $u^0\in V,\,v^0\in H,\,g\in W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}}),\,
f\in L_2((0,T);H)$, then the weak solution of is unique.
To prove uniqueness, it is enough to show that $u=0$ is the solution of – for $u^0=v^0=f=g=0$. Let us fix $r\in [0,T]$ and define $$v(t)=\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&\int_t^r\!u(\omega)\, d\omega&&0\le t\le r,\\
&0&&r\le t\le T.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ We note that $$\label{vproperties}
v(t)\in V,\quad v(r)=0,\quad \dot v(t)=-u(t).$$ Then inserting $v$ in and integrating with respect to $t$, we have $$\label{weaksolutionintegral}
\int_0^r\!\big(\rho \langle \ddot u,v\rangle + a(u,v)\big)\,dt
-\sum_{i=1}^2 \int_0^r\!\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), v(t)) \,ds\,dt
=0.$$ For the second term, recalling $-\beta_i(t)=D_t\xi_i(t),\ i=1,2$ from , we obtain $$\begin{split}
-\int_0^r\!\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), v(t)) \,ds\,dt
&=\int_0^r\!\int_s^r\!D_t\xi_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), v(t)) \,dt\,ds\\
&=\int_0^r\!\xi_i(r-s)a_i(u(s),v(r))\,ds\\
&\quad -\int_0^r\!\xi_i(0)a_i(u(s),v(s))\,ds\\
&\quad-\int_0^r\!\int_s^r\!
\xi_i(t-s) a_i(u(s),\dot v(t)) \,dt\,ds\\
&=-\gamma_i\int_0^r\!a_i(u(s),v(s))\,ds\\
&\quad+\int_0^r\!\int_0^t\!\xi_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), u(t)) \,ds\,dt,
\end{split}$$ where we changed the order of integrals and we used integration by parts, $\xi_i(0)=\gamma_i$ from , and $v(r)=0$ from . Therefore integration by parts in the first term of yields $$\begin{split}
\int_0^r\!\big(-\rho(\dot u,\dot v)+a(u,v)\big)\,dt
&-\sum_{i=1}^{2}\gamma_i\int_0^r\! a_i(u,v)\,dt \\
&+\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^r\!\int_0^t\!
\xi_i(t-s) a_i(u(s), u(t)) \,ds\,dt = 0.
\end{split}$$ This, using , implies $$\begin{split}
\rho\|u(r)\|^2-\rho\|u(0)\|^2
&-\|v(r)\|_V^2+\|v(0)\|_V^2
+\sum_{i=1}^{2}
\gamma_i \Big(a_i(v(r),v(r))
-a_i(v(0),v(0))\Big)\\
&+2\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_0^r\!\int_0^t\!\xi_i(t-s) a_i(u(s),u(t))\,ds\,dt=0.
\end{split}$$ Consequently, recalling , $v(r)=0$, $u(0)=0$, $0<\bar\gamma=\max\{\gamma_1,\gamma_2\}< 1$, and the fact that $a_i(w,w) \geq 0$, we have $$\rho\|u(r)\|^2+(1-\bar\gamma)\|v(0)\|_V^2\le 0,$$ that implies $u=0$ a.e., and this completes the proof.
Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 also hold for the simplified problem , see Remark 1 and Remark 2. That is, with the assumptions in Theorem 2, there exists a unique weak solution for the simplified problem.
Regularity
==========
Here we study the regularity of the unique weak solution of , that is, a solution of –. We explain the limitations for higher regularity in Remark 4. We also prove higher regularity of any order of the solution of models with smooth kernels in Theorem 4.
If $u^0\in V, v^0\in H, g\in W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})$, and $f\in L_2((0,T);H)$, then for the unique solution $u$ of – we have $$\label{regularity1}
u\in L_\infty((0,T);V), \quad \dot u\in L_\infty((0,T);H),
\quad \ddot u\in L_2((0,T);V^*).$$ Moreover we have the estimate $$\label{estimate1}
\begin{split}
\|u\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}
&+ \|\dot u\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}
+ \|\ddot u\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}\\
&\le C \big\{ \|u^0\|_V+ \|v^0\|
+ \|g\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H_{\Gamma_\text{N}})}
+ \|f\|_{L_2((0,T);H)}\big\} .
\end{split}$$
It is known that if $u_m\rightharpoonup u$, then $$\|u\|\le \lim_{m\to \infty} \inf \|u_m\|.$$ Then, by and the a priori estimates , we conclude and .
We note that, using Remark 3, Corollary 1 applies also to the simplified problem .
It is known from the theory of the elliptic operators, that global higher spatial regularity can not be obtained with mixed boundary conditions. Therefore we specialize to the homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition, that is $\Gamma_{\text N}=\varnothing$, and assume that the polygonal domain $\Omega$ is convex. We recall the usual Sobolev spaces $H^r=H^r(\Omega)$ and we note that here $V=H_0^1(\Omega)$. We then use the extension of the operator $A$ to an abstract operator with ${\mathcal D}(A)=H^2(\Omega)^d\cap V$ such that $a(u,v)=(Au,v)$ for sufficiently smooth $u,v$. We note that, the elliptic regularity holds, that is, $$\label{ellipticregularity}
\|u\|_{H^2}\le C\|Au\|,\quad u\in H^2(\Omega)^d\cap V.$$
We assume that $\Gamma_{\text N}=\varnothing$, and $$\label{betacondition}
\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t \!\beta_i(s)\ ds <1 \ \textrm{or}\ \int_0^t \! \max_{i=1,2} \beta_i(s)\ ds <\frac{1}{2}.$$ If $u^0\in H^2,\,v^0\in V$, and $\dot f\in L_2((0,T);H)$, then for the unique solution $u$ of - we have $$\label{regularity2}
\begin{split}
&u\in L_\infty((0,T);H^2),
\quad \dot u\in L_\infty((0,T);V),\\
&\ddot u\in L_\infty((0,T);H),
\quad \dddot u\in L_2((0,T);V^*).
\end{split}$$ Moreover we have the estimate $$\label{estimate2}
\begin{split}
\|u\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H^2)}
&+ \|\dot u\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}
+ \|\ddot u\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}
+ \|\dddot u\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}\\
&\le C \big\{ \|u^0\|_{H^2}+ \|v^0\|_V
+ \|f\|_{H^1((0,T);H)}\big\} .
\end{split}$$
We need to show that estimate holds for the sequence $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, and its time derivatives. Then, similar to the proof of Corollary 1, in the limit we conclude and . We organize our proof in 3 steps.
1\. First we find a bound for the sequences $\{\dot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, $\{\ddot u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ in $L_\infty((0,T);V)$ and $L_\infty((0,T);H)$, respectively. Differentiating with respect to time, with notation $\underline{v}=\dot v$, we have $$\label{weakGalerkin2}
\begin{split}
\rho (\ddot {\underline u}_m(t)&,{\varphi}_k) + a({\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
- \sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\! \beta_i(t-s) a_i({\underline u}_m(s), {\varphi}_k)\,ds\\
&= ({\underline f}(t),{\varphi}_k) +\sum_{i=1}^2\beta_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),{\varphi}_k),
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T),
\end{split}$$ with the initial conditions $$\label{weakGalerkininitial2}
\begin{split}
&{\underline u}_m(0)=\dot u_m(0)=\sum_{j=1}^m(v^0,{\varphi}_j){\varphi}_j,\\
&\dot {\underline u}_m(0)=\ddot u_m(0)
=\sum_{j=1}^m\big(f(0)-Au_m(0),{\varphi}_j\big){\varphi}_j.
\end{split}$$ Then, using $\beta_i(t-s)=D_s\xi_i(t-s)$ from and partial integration in time, we have $$\begin{split}
\rho (\ddot {\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
&+ a({\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k) - \sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_ia_i({\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k)\\
&+ \sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\! \xi_i(t-s) a_i(\dot {\underline u}_m(s), {\varphi}_k)\,ds\\
&= ({\underline f}(t),{\varphi}_k)
+\sum_{i=1}^2\beta_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),{\varphi}_k)\\
&\quad-\sum_{i=1}^2\xi_i(t)a({\underline u}_m(0),{\varphi}_k),
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T).
\end{split}$$ Now, multiplying by $\ddot d_k(t)$, summing $k=1,\,\dots,\,m$, and integration with respect to $t$, we have $$\begin{split}
\rho\|\dot {\underline u}_m(t)\|^2
&+(1-\bar\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(t)\|_V^2\\
&+2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\int_0^r\!\xi_i(r-s)
a_i(\dot {\underline u}_m(s),\dot {\underline u}_m(r))\,ds\,dr\\
&\le \rho\|\dot {\underline u}_m(0)\|^2
+(1-\underline\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(0)\|_V^2\\
&\quad+2\int_0^t\!({\underline f}(r),\dot {\underline u}_m(r))\,dr
+ 2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(r)a_i(u_m(0),\dot {\underline u}_m(r))\,dr\\
&\quad-2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t
\xi_i(r)a_i({\underline u}_m(0),\dot{\underline u}_m(r))\ dr,
\end{split}$$ where we recall that $\xi_i(0)=\gamma_i$, $\bar\gamma=\max\{\gamma_1,\gamma_2\}$, and $\underline\gamma=\min\{\gamma_1,\gamma_2\}$. Then, recalling the fact that $\xi_i$ are positive definite and integration by parts in the last term, we obtain $$\begin{split}
\rho\|\dot {\underline u}_m(t)\|^2
&+(1-\bar\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(t)\|_V^2\\
&\le \rho\|\dot {\underline u}_m(0)\|^2
+(1-\underline\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(0)\|_V^2\\
&\quad+2\int_0^t\!({\underline f}(r),\dot {\underline u}_m(r))\,dr
+ 2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!
\beta_i(r)a_i(u_m(0),\dot {\underline u}_m(r))\,dr\\
&\quad-2\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t
\beta_i(r)a_i({\underline u}_m(0),{\underline u}_m(r))\ dr\\
&\quad-2\sum_{i=1}^2\xi_i(t)a_i({\underline u}_m(0),{\underline u}_m(t))
+2\sum_{i=1}^2\xi_i(0)a_i({\underline u}_m(0),{\underline u}_m(0)),
\end{split}$$ that, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, $\|\beta_i\|_{L_1({\mathbb R}^+)}=\gamma_i$, $\xi_i(t)\le \xi_i(0)=\gamma_i$, and , implies $$\begin{split}
\rho\|&\dot {\underline u}_m(t)\|^2
+(1-\bar\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(t)\|_V^2\\
&\le \rho\|\dot {\underline u}_m(0)\|^2 + (1-\underline\gamma)\|{\underline u}_m(0)\|_V^2\\
&\quad +2/C_1\max_{0\le r\le t}\|\dot {\underline u}_m(r)\|^2
+C_1\Big(\int_0^t\!\|{\underline f}(r)\|\,dr\Big)^2\\
&\quad +2/C_2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\|u_m(0)\|_{H^2}^2
+2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big) C_2\max_{0\le r\le t}\|\dot{\underline u}_{m}(r)\|^2 \\
&\quad +2/C_3\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\| {\underline u}_{m}(0)\|_V^2
+2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big) C_3 \max_{0\le r\le t}\|{\underline u}_{m}(r)\|_V^2\\
&\quad+2/C_4\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\|{\underline u}_{m}(0)\|_V^2
+2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big) C_4 \|{\underline u}_m(t)\|_V^2
+2\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\gamma_i\Big)\|{\underline u}_m(0)\|_V^2.
\end{split}$$ This implies, for some constant $C=C(\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\rho,T)$, $$\begin{split}
\|\dot {\underline u}_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
&+\|{\underline u}_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2\\
&\le C\big\{
\|\dot {\underline u}_m(0)\|^2 + \|{\underline u}_m(0)\|_V^2
+\|u_m(0)\|_{H^2}^2
+\|{\underline f}\|_{L_1((0,T);H)}^2\big\}.
\end{split}$$ Then recalling ${\underline u}=\dot u$, the initial data from , and using $$\|u_m(0)\|_{H^2}\le \|u^0\|_{H^2},\quad
\|\dot u_m(0)\|_V\le \|v^0\|_V,$$ we have $$\label{regularity:eq1}
\begin{split}
\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
&+\|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2\\
&\le C\big\{
\|u^0\|_{H^2}^2 + \|v^0\|_V^2
+\|f(0)\|^2 + \|{\underline f}\|_{L_1((0,T);H)}^2\big\}.
\end{split}$$
2\. We now find a bound for $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ in $L_\infty((0,T);H^2)$. We recall the eigenvalue problem with eigenpairs $\{(\lambda_j,{\varphi}_j)\}_{j=1}^\infty$. Then we multiply by $\lambda_k d_k(t)$ and add for $k=1,\,\dots,\,m$ to obtain $$\label{ineq0}
a(u_m,Au_m)=(f-\rho\ddot u_m,Au_m)
+\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\beta_i(t-s)a_i(u_m(s),Au_m(t))\,ds.$$ This, using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and , implies $$\label{ineq}
\begin{split}
\|Au_m(t)\|^2
&\le \frac{2}{\epsilon}
\Big(\|f(t)\|^2+\rho^2\|\ddot u_m(t)\|^2\Big)
+\epsilon\|Au_m(t)\|^2\\
&\quad +\Big(\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\!\beta_i(s)\ ds\Big)\max_{0\le s \le t}\|Au_m(s)\|^2,
\end{split}$$ that, by elliptic regularity and assumption , gives us $$\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H^2)}^2
\le C\Big(\|f\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
+\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2\Big).$$ From this and we conclude $$\begin{split}
\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
&+\|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2
+\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H^2)}^2\\
&\le C\big\{
\|u^0\|_{H^2}^2 + \|v^0\|_V^2
+\|f\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
+ \|{\underline f}\|_{L_1((0,T);H)}^2\big\},
\end{split}$$ that using $\|f\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}\le C \|f\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H)}$, by Sobolev inequality, we have $$\begin{split}
\|\ddot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H)}^2
&+\|\dot u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);V)}^2
+\|u_m\|_{L_\infty((0,T);H^2)}^2\\
&\le C\big\{
\|u^0\|_{H^2}^2 + \|v^0\|_V^2
+\|f\|_{W_1^1((0,T);H)}^2 \big\}\\
&\le C\big\{
\|u^0\|_{H^2}^2 + \|v^0\|_V^2
+\|f\|_{H^1((0,T);H)}^2 \big\}.
\end{split}$$
3\. Finally from , similar to step 2 of the proof of Theorem 1, we obtain $$ \begin{split}
\|\dddot u_m\|_{L_2((0,T);V^*)}^2
&\le C\big\{
\|u^0\|_{H^2}^2 + \|v^0\|_V^2
+\|f\|_{H^1((0,T);H)}^2 \big\}.
\end{split}$$ The last two estimates then, in the limit, imply and the desired estimate . The proof is now complete.
If we continue differentiating in time to investigate more regularity, we obtain $$ \begin{split}
\rho (\dddot {\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k&) + a(\dot {\underline u}_m(t),{\varphi}_k)
- \sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\! \beta_i(t-s) a_i(\dot {\underline u}_m(s), {\varphi}_k)\,ds\\
&= (\ddot f(t),{\varphi}_k) +\sum_{i=1}^2\dot \beta_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),{\varphi}_k)\\
&\quad+\sum_{i=1}^2\beta_i(t)a_i({\underline u}_m(0),{\varphi}_k),
\quad k=1,\,\dots,\,m ,\,t\in (0,T),
\end{split}$$ Further, from $\dot \beta_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),{\varphi}_k),\ i=1,2$, we get $\dot \beta_i(t)a_i(u_m(0),\ddot {\underline u}_m(t))$, but the $\dot\beta_i$ are not integrable. Besides, after integration in time, we can not use partial integration to transfer one time derivative from $\dot\beta_i$ to $\ddot {\underline u}_m(t)$, since $\beta_i$ is singular at $t=0$. This means that we can not get more regularity with weakly singular kernels $\beta_i$. This also indicates that with smoother kernel we can get higher regularity in case of homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition under the appropriate assumption on the data, that is, more regularity and compatibility conditions.
For the simplified problem , the inequality is $$ \begin{split}
\|Au_m(t)\|^2
&\le \frac{2}{\epsilon}
\Big(\|f(t)\|^2+\rho^2\|\ddot u_m(t)\|^2\Big)
+\epsilon\|Au_m(t)\|^2\\
&\quad +\Big(\int_0^t\!\beta(s)\ ds\Big)\max_{0\le s \le t}\|Au_m(s)\|^2.
\end{split}$$ Hence, the assumption can be ignored, since $\int_0^t\!\beta(s)\ ds<\gamma<1$. That is, Theorem 3 applies also to the simplified problem , ignoring the assumption .
We recall the definition of the operators $A,A_1$ and $A_2$ from . If the solution $u$ is regular such that its second order partial derivatives are comutative, then the operator $A^{1/2}$ is comutative with the operators $A_1^{1/2},A_2^{1/2}$. Here, the operator $A^l\ (l\in \mathbb{R})$ is defined by, see e.g., [@Thomee_Book] $$A^l v=\sum_{k=1}^\infty \lambda_k^l (v,{\varphi}_k){\varphi}_k,$$ where $\{(\lambda_k,{\varphi}_k)\}_{k=1}^\infty$ are the eigenpairs of the operator $A$, and in a similar way $A_1^l$ and $A_2^l$ are defined. In this case the assumption is replaced by $$\int_0^t \! \max_{i=1,2}\beta_i(s)\ ds <1,$$ since in we have $$\begin{split}
\sum_{i=1}^2\int_0^t\! \beta_i(t-s)a_i(u_m(s),Au_m(t))\ ds
&\le \int_0^t\! \max_{i=1,2}\beta_i(t-s)a(u_m(s),Au_m(t))\ ds\\
&\le \Big(\int_0^t\! \max_{i=1,2}\beta_i(t-s)\ ds\Big)
\max_{0\le s\le t}\|Au_m(s)\|^2,
\end{split}$$ where we used the fact that $$\begin{split}
a_i(v,Av)
&=(A^{1/2}A_i^{1/2}A_i^{1/2}v,A^{1/2}v)\\
&=(A_i^{1/2}A^{1/2}A_i^{1/2}v,A^{1/2}v)=a_i(A^{1/2}v,A^{1/2}v)\ge 0.
\end{split}$$
In the next theorem we state regularity of any order of the solution of models with smooth kernels. The proof is by induction and simillar to the proof of Theorem 4, and we omit the details.
We assume that $\Gamma_{\text N}=\varnothing$, and condition holds. Assume $(r=0,1,\dots)$ $$\begin{aligned}
&u^0\in H^{r+1},\quad v^0\in H^r,&\\
&\frac{d^k f}{dt^k}\in L_2((0,T);H^{r-k}),&\textrm{for}\ \ k=0,\dots,r, \\
& \ \beta_i \in W^{r-1}_1(0,T),& \textrm{if} \ \ r \geq 2,
\end{aligned}$$ and the $r^{\textrm{th}}$-order compatibility conditions $$\begin{aligned}
&u^0_0:=u^0\in V,
\quad u^0_1:=v^0,&\\
&u^0_2:=\frac{1}{\rho}(f(0)-Au^0)\in V,&\textrm{if}\ \ r=2\\
&u^0_r:=\frac{1}{\rho}
\Big(
\frac{d^{r-2}}{{dt^{r-2}}}f(0)-Au^0_{r-2}
+\sum_{j=0}^{r-3}\sum_{i=1}^2\frac{d^j}{dt^j}
\beta_i(0)A_iu^0_{r-3-j}
\Big) \in V,&\textrm{if}\ \ r\ge 3.
\end{aligned}$$ Then for the unique solution $u$ of - we have $$\frac{d^k}{dt^k} u \in L_\infty ((0,T);H^{r+1-k})
\quad (k=0,\dots,r+1),$$ and we have the estimate $$\sum_{k=0}^{r+1}
\Big\|\frac{d^k u}{dt^k}\Big\|_{L_\infty ((0,T);H^{r+1-k})}
\le C \bigg(
\sum_{k=0}^r
\Big\|\frac{d^k f}{dt^k}\Big\|_{L_2((0,T);H^{r-k})}
+\|u^0\|_{H^{r+1}}+\|v^0\|_{H^r} \bigg).$$
We note that, with $\beta_i \in W^{r-1}_1(0,T)$ we have $\beta_i \in {\mathcal C}^{r-2}[0,T]$ by Sobolev inequality. Therefore $u^0_r$ in the compatibility conditions is well-defined.
We also note that Remark 5 holds for Theorem 5, too. Remark 6 can be applied to Theorem 5, provided the solution $u$ is smooth enough such that the operator $A^{\frac{r+1}{2}}$ is comutative with the operators $A_i^{1/2},\ i=1,2$, that is, when $(r+2)$-th order partial derivatives of the solution $u$ are comutative.
**Acknowledgment.** I would like thank Dr. Milena Racheva and Prof. Mikael Enelund for fruitful discussion on fractional order viscoelasticity. I also thank Prof. Stig Larsson and the anonymous referees for constructive comments.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Let $B$ be a Möbius band and $f:B \to \mathbb{R}$ be a Morse map taking a constant value on $\partial B$, and $\mathcal{S}(f,\partial B)$ be the group of diffeomorphisms $h$ of $B$ fixed on $\partial B$ and preserving $f$ in the sense that $f\circ h = f$. Under certain assumptions on $f$ we compute the group $\pi_0\mathcal{S}(f,\partial B)$ of isotopy classes of such diffeomorphisms. In fact, those computations hold for functions $f:B\to\mathbb{R}$ whose germs at critical points are smoothly equivalent to homogeneous polynomials $\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}$ without multiple factors.
Together with previous results of the second author this allows to compute similar groups for certain classes of smooth functions $f:N\to\mathbb{R}$ on non-orientable surfaces $N$.
address: 'Department of Algebra and Topology, Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine, Tereshchenkivska str. 3, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine'
author:
- 'Iryna Kuznietsova, Sergiy Maksymenko'
title: 'Homotopy properties of smooth functions on the M[ö]{}bius band'
---
Main result
===========
Let ${{\Mman}}$ be a smooth compact surface, i.e. a 2-dimensional manifold, which can be disconnected, non-orientable, and have a non-empty boundary, and $\Pman$ be either a real line $\bR$ or a circle $S^1$. Then the group $\Diff({{\Mman}})$ of $\Cinfty$-diffeomorphisms of ${{\Mman}}$ acts from the right on the space of smooth maps $\Cinfty({{\Mman}},\Pman)$ defined by the following rule: the result of the action of a diffeomorphism $\dif\in \Diff({{\Mman}})$ on $\func\in\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ is the composition $f\circ h$. Then for each $\func\in\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ one can define the *stabilizer* of $f$ $$\Stabilizer{\func}=\{ \dif\in \Diff({{\Mman}})\ |\ \func\circ\dif=\func \}$$ and its *orbit* $$\Orbit{\func}=\{\func\circ\dif \mid \dif\in \Diff({{\Mman}})\}$$ with respect to the above action.
More generally, denote by $\Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman)$ the group of diffeomorphisms of ${{\Mman}}$ fixed on a closed subset $\Xman\subset{{\Mman}}$. Let also $$\begin{aligned}
\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman} &= {\Stabilizer{\func}}\cap\Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman) &
& \text{and}&
\Orbit{\func,\Xman} &= \{\func\circ\dif \mid \dif\in \Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman)\}.\end{aligned}$$ We will endow $\Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman)$ and $\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ with Whitney $C^\infty$-topologies and their subspaces $\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman}$ and $\Orbit{\func,\Xman}$ with induced ones. Then they yield certain topologies on the stabilizers and orbits of maps $\func\in \Cinfty({{\Mman}},\Pman)$. Let also $\DiffId({{\Mman}},\Xman)$ and $\StabilizerId{\func,\Xman}$ be the identity path components of $\Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman)$ and $\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman}$, and ${\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman)}$ be the path component of $\Orbit{\func,\Xman}$ containing $\func$. If $\Xman=\varnothing$, then we will omit $\Xman$ from notation.
In the present paper we continue study of the homotopy types of $\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman}$ and $\Orbit{\func,\Xman}$, see below for references and the history of the problem. Our main results, Theorems \[th:unique\_cr\_level\] and \[th:pi0S\_struct\], concern with the group $\pi_0\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman}$ for the case when ${{\Mman}}$ is a Möbius band, $\Xman=\partial{{\Mman}}$, and $\func:{{\Mman}}\to\Pman$ belongs to the following space of maps ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$.
\[def:classF\] Let ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ be the subset of $\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ consisting of maps $\func:{{\Mman}}\to\Pman$ having the following properties:
1. \[enum:classF:const\_by\_bd\] the map $\func$ takes constant values at each connected component of $\partial{{\Mman}}$ and has no critical points on it;
2. \[enum:classF:loc\_equ\_poly\] for every critical point $z$ of $\func$ the germ of $\func$ at $z$ is $\Cinfty$ equivalent to some homogeneous polynomial $v\colon \bR^2 \to \bR$ without multiple factors.
A map $\func\in\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ will be called , if it satisfies condition \[enum:classF:const\_by\_bd\] and all its critical points are non-degenerate. Denote by $\Morse{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman}$ the space of all Morse maps. A Morse map $\func$ is , if it takes distinct values at distinct critical points.
Since the polynomial $\pm x^2 \pm y^2$ is homogeneous and has no multiple factors, it follows from Morse lemma that $$\Morse{{{\Mman}}}{\Pman} \subset {\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}.$$ Also notice that every $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ has only isolated critical points. A structure of level set foliations near critical points of $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ is illustrated in Figure \[fig:isol\_crit\_pt\]. A critical point of $\func\in{\mathcal{F}(\Mman,\Pman)}$ which is not a local extreme will be called a .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Topological structure of level-sets of maps from ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ near critical points[]{data-label="fig:isol_crit_pt"}](fol_loc_extr_0 "fig:"){height="1.5cm"} ![Topological structure of level-sets of maps from ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ near critical points[]{data-label="fig:isol_crit_pt"}](fol_saddle_1 "fig:"){height="1.5cm"} ![Topological structure of level-sets of maps from ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ near critical points[]{data-label="fig:isol_crit_pt"}](fol_saddle_2 "fig:"){height="1.5cm"} ![Topological structure of level-sets of maps from ${\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ near critical points[]{data-label="fig:isol_crit_pt"}](fol_saddle_3 "fig:"){height="1.5cm"}
local extreme saddles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let $\func\in {\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, $c\in\bR$, and $\Kman$ be a connected component of the level-set $\func^{-1}(c)$. Then $\Kman$ will be called whenever it contains no critical points, and otherwise. A connected component $\Uman$ of $\func^{-1}[c-\varepsilon, c+\varepsilon]$ containing $\Kman$ will be called an of $\Kman$ if $\Uman\setminus\Kman$ contains no critical points and does not intersect $\partial{{\Mman}}$.
Let $\Uman=\Uman_1 \sqcup \Uman_2 \sqcup \dots \sqcup \Uman_k$ be a disjoint union of connected one- and two-dimensional submanifolds of ${{\Mman}}$. We will say that $\Uman$ is an submanifold if for each $i=1,\ldots,k$ the following conditions hold:
1. if $\dim\Uman_i = 1$, then $\Uman_i$ is a regular connected component of some level-set $\func^{-1}(c)$, $c\in\bR$;
2. if $\dim\Uman_i = 2$, then the connected components of the boundary $\partial\Uman_i$ are regular connected components of some level-sets of $\func$.
In particular, an $\func$-regular neighborhood is an $\func$-adopted . Evidently, if $\Uman$ is adopted subsurface, then the restriction $\func|_{\Uman}$ belongs to the space ${\mathcal{F}(\Uman,\Pman)}$.
Denote $$\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Xman} = \Stabilizer{\func} \cap\DiffId({{\Mman}},\Xman).$$ The following statement collects known information about the homotopy types of stabilizers and orbits of $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$.
\[th:stab\_orb\_full\_info\] Let ${{\Mman}}$ be a connected compact surface, $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, and $\Xman$ be a union of finitely many connected components of some level-sets of $\func$ and some critical points of $\func$. Then the following statements hold.
1. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Serre\] The map $p:\Diff({{\Mman}},\Xman)\to\Orbit{\func,\Xman}$ defined by $p(\dif) = \func\circ\dif$ is a locally trivial principal $\Stabilizer{\func,\Xman}$-fibration. In particular, the restriction $p:\DiffId({{\Mman}},\Xman)\to{\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman)}$ is a locally trivial principal $\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Xman}$-fibration, [@Sergeraert:ASENS:1972], [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006].
2. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Sidf\] The group $\StabilizerId{\func,\Xman}$ is homotopy equivalent to the circle if and only if the following condition holds:
- ${{\Mman}}$ is orientable, $\chi({{\Mman}})\geq0$, $\Xman$ is a collection of at most $\chi({{\Mman}})$ critical points of $\func$, and each critical point of $\func$ is a .
Otherwise, $\StabilizerId{\func,\Xman}$ is contractible, and in this case
1. \[enum:Of:S2\_min\_max\] if $\Mman=S^2$, $\Xman=\varnothing$, and $\func$ is Morse having exactly two critical points (minimum and maximum), then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to $S^2$;
2. \[enum:Of:S2\_RP2\] otherwise, if $\Mman=S^2$ or $\bR{P}^2$, and $\Xman=\varnothing$, then $\pi_k{\Orb_{\func}(\func)} \cong \pi_k S^3$ for $k\geq2$;
3. \[enum:Of:aspherical\] otherwise, $\pi_k{\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman)} = 0$ for $k\geq2$, [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006], [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010].
3. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Sid\_contr\] Suppose $\StabilizerId{\func,\Xman}$ is contractible. $$\label{equ:exact_seq_for_pi1OfX}
1 \to \pi_1\DiffId({{\Mman}},\Xman) \xrightarrow{~p~} \pi_1\Orbit{\func,\Xman} \to \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Xman} \to 1.$$ If $\chi({{\Mman}}) < |\Xman|$, the group $\DiffId({{\Mman}},\Xman)$ is contractible as well, and yields an isomorphism $$\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman)} \cong \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Xman},$$ see [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006], [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010].
4. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Off\_V\] ${\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman)} = {\Orb_{\func}(\func,\Xman \cup \Vman)}$ for any union of boundary components $\Vman$ of ${{\Mman}}$, [@Maksymenko:UMZ:ENG:2012].
5. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Of\_braid\] If $\func$ is Morse and has exactly $n$ critical points, then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to a certain covering space of the $n$-th configuration space of ${{\Mman}}$, which in turn is homotopy equivalent to some (possibly non-compact) $(2n-1)$-dimensional CW-complex. In particular, $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is a subgroup of the $n$-th braid group $\mathcal{B}_{n}({{\Mman}})$ of ${{\Mman}}$, [@Maksymenko:TrMath:2008].
6. \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Of\_generic\] Suppose $\func$ is . If ${{\Mman}}=S^2$ and $\func$ has exactly two critical points being local extremes, then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to $S^2$. Otherwise, if ${{\Mman}}=S^2$ or $\PrjPlane$, then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to $\SO(3) \times (S^1)^k$ for some $k\geq0$. In all other cases ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to $(S^1)^k$ for some $k\geq0$, [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006].
7. \[enum:th:orb\_full\_info\] Suppose ${{\Mman}}$ is orientable, $\func\in\Morse{{{\Mman}}}{\bR}$, and $\chi({{\Mman}}) < |\Fix{\StabilizerIsotId{\func}}|$ (which holds e.g. if $\chi({{\Mman}})<0$ or if $\func$ is generic and has at least one saddle critical point). Then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ has the homotopy type of the quotient $(S^1)^k/ {G}$ of $(S^1)^k$ by a free action of some finite group ${G}$ if ${{\Mman}}\not=S^2$, and the homotopy type of $((S^1)^k/{G}) \times \SO(3)$ if ${{\Mman}}=S^2$, [@Kudryavtseva:SpecMF:VMU:2012], [@Kudryavtseva:MathNotes:2012], [@Kudryavtseva:MatSb:ENG:2013], and also [@Kudryavtseva:ENG:DAN2016] for extensions to functions with prescribed local singularities of $A_{\mu}$-types, $\mu\in\bN$.
Results in \[enum:th:orb\_full\_info\] are obtained by E. Kudryavtseva.
Notice that in the case \[enum:Of:aspherical\], e.g. when if ${{\Mman}}$ is distinct from $2$-sphere and projective plane, then ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is , and so its homotopy type is completely determined by the fundamental group $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$.
If $\func$ is generic, then by \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Of\_generic\] ${\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is homotopy equivalent to some torus $(S^1)^k$, whence $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)} = \bZ^k$ is free abelian.
Suppose ${{\Mman}}$ is orientable and differs from $S^2$. Then by \[enum:th:orb\_full\_info\] we have a certain free action of a finite group ${G}$ on the torus $(S^1)^k$. Hence the quotient map $q:(S^1)^k \to (S^1)^k/{G}$ is a locally covering map, whence we have the following short exact sequence: $$1 \to \pi_1 (S^1)^k \to \pi_1 (S^1)^k /{G} \to {G} \to 1,$$ which due to \[enum:th:orb\_full\_info\] can be rewritten as follows: $$1 \to \bZ^k \to \pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)} \to {G} \to 1.$$ This sequence was first discovered in [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Eq. (1.6)]. In particular, it implies that $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is a group, i.e. contains a free abelian normal subgroup of finite index. Moreover, due to \[enum:th:stab\_orb\_full\_info:Of\_braid\] $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is also a subgroup of a certain braid group $\mathcal{B}_{n}({{\Mman}})$ of ${{\Mman}}$. Since $\mathcal{B}_{n}({{\Mman}})$ has no elements of finite order, so does $\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$, and therefore it is a group.
To describe further known results, for every $\func$-adopted connected subsurface $\Xman \subset {{\Mman}}$ let $${\mathcal{P}_{\func}(\Xman)} := \pi_1{\Orb_{\func|_{\Xman}}(\func|_{\Xman})}.$$ be the fundamental group of the orbit of the restriction of $\func$ to $\Xman$. In particular, if either $\partial{{\Mman}}$ is non-empty or $\chi({{\Mman}})<0$, then we get from Theorem \[th:stab\_orb\_full\_info\] the following isomorphisms: $$\label{equ:pi0stab_pi1orb}
{\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})} := \pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}
\ \stackrel{\ref{enum:th:stab_orb_full_info:Off_V}}{\cong} \
\pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func,\partial{{\Mman}})}
\ \stackrel{\ref{enum:th:stab_orb_full_info:Sid_contr}}{\cong} \
\pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func, \partial{{\Mman}}}.$$
The following statement summarizes several results about ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$.
\[th:Stabf\_reduction\] [[@Maksymenko:MFAT:2010], [@MaksymenkoFeshchenko:UMZ:ENG:2014], [@MaksymenkoFeshchenko:MS:2015], [@MaksymenkoFeshchenko:MFAT:2015], [@Feshchenko:Zb:2015], [@Feshchenko:MFAT:2016].]{} Let ${{\Mman}}$ be a compact surface. Then for each $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ there exist mutually disjoint $\func$-adopted subsuraces ${{\Yman}_{1}},\ldots,{{\Yman}_{n}} \subset{{\Mman}}$ having the following properties.
1. \[enum:PM:chi\_neg\] If $\chi({{\Mman}})<0$, then each ${{\Yman}_{i}}$ is either a $2$-disk or an annulus or a Möbius band, and $${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})} \cong \prod_{i=1}^{n} {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{i}})}.$$
2. \[enum:PM:torus\] Suppose ${{\Mman}}= \Torus$ is a $2$-torus.
1. If the Kronrod-Reeb graph ${\Gamma(\func)}$ of $\func$ (see §\[sect:KRGraph\] for definition) is a tree, then each ${{\Yman}_{i}}$ is a $2$-disk, and $${\mathcal{P}_{\func}(\Torus)} \cong \bigl( \prod_{k=1}^{n} {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{k}})} \bigr)\wrm{a,b} \bZ^2.$$ for some $a,b\geq1$.
2. Otherwise, ${\Gamma(\func)}$ contains a unique cycle, $n=1$, ${{\Yman}_{1}}$ is an annulus, and $${\mathcal{P}_{\func}(\Torus)} \cong {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{1}})} \wrm{k} \bZ$$ for some $k\geq1$.
Here $A\wrm{a,b}\bZ^2$ and $A\wrm{k}\bZ$ are products of certain types, which are not essential for our considerations. Notice that in this theorem ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ and ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{i}})}$ can be replaced by either of the groups of type . On the other hand, ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}(\Torus)} = \pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)}$ is not the same as $\pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func}$ since $\pi_1\Diff(\Torus)\cong \bZ^2$ and due to we have the following short exact sequence: $1 \to \bZ^2 \to \pi_1{\Orb_{\func}(\func)} \to \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func} \to 1.$
Theorem \[th:Stabf\_reduction\] shows that for most surfaces computation of ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ reduces to the cases of $2$-disk, annulus and Möbius band. Structure of ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ for ${{\Mman}}$ being $2$-disk and annulus is completely described in [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014]. The remained open cases are $2$-sphere and all non-orientable surfaces.
Our aim is to describe the structure of ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ for the case when ${{\Mman}}$ is a Möbius band and under certain restrictions on $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$.
\[th:unique\_cr\_level\] Let ${{B}}$ be a Möbius band and ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{B}},\Pman)}$. There exists a unique critical component ${K}$ of some level-set of ${{\func}}$ with the following property: if ${{\Wman}}$ is an ${{\func}}$-regular neighborhood of ${K}$ and ${{\Yman}_{0}}, {{\Yman}_{1}}, \dots, {{\Yman}_{n}}$ are all the connected components of $\overline{{{B}}\setminus{{\Wman}}}$ enumerated so that $\partial{{B}}\subset{{\Yman}_{0}}$, then ${{\Yman}_{0}}$ is an annulus $S^1\times[0,1]$, and each ${{\Yman}_{k}}$, $k=1,\ldots,n$, is a $2$-disk. In particular, $$\begin{aligned}
{{h}}({K})&={K}, &
{{h}}({{\Yman}_{0}})&={{\Yman}_{0}}, &
{{h}}\bigl(\mathop{\cup}\limits_{k=1}^{n}{{\Yman}_{k}}\bigr) &= \mathop{\cup}\limits_{k=1}^{n}{{\Yman}_{k}},\end{aligned}$$ for each ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}}}$.
Let ${\mathbf{Y}}=\{{{\Yman}_{1}}, \dots, {{\Yman}_{n}}\}$ be the family of all connected components of $\overline{{{B}}\setminus{{\Wman}}}$ being $2$-disks as in Theorem \[th:unique\_cr\_level\]. Since $\mathop{\cup}\limits_{k=1}^{n}{{\Yman}_{k}}$ is invariant with respect to $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$, we have a natural action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ on ${\mathbf{Y}}$ by permutations.
Let us fix an orientation of each ${{\Yman}_{k}}$, $k=1,\ldots,n$, and put ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}= {\mathbf{Y}}\times\{\pm 1\}$. Then the action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ on ${\mathbf{Y}}$ extends to an action on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ defined by the following rule: if $\dif\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ and ${{\Yman}_{k}}\in{\mathbf{Y}}$, then $\dif({{\Yman}_{k}},+1)=(\dif({{\Yman}_{k}}),\delta)$ and $\dif({{\Yman}_{k}},-1)=(\dif({{\Yman}_{k}}),-\delta)$, where $$\delta=
\begin{cases}
+1, & \text{if the restriction $\dif|_{{{\Yman}_{k}}}: {{\Yman}_{k}} \to \dif({{\Yman}_{k}})$ preserves orientation}, \\
-1, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}$$ Let ${\Qman_{\func}}$ be the normal subgroup of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ consisting of diffeomorphisms preserving each ${{\Yman}_{k}}$ with its orientation. In other words, ${\Qman_{\func}}$ is the kernel of non-effectiveness of the action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$. Hence the action of the quotient $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ is effective. However the induced action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\mathbf{Y}}$ is not in general effective.
\[th:pi0S\_struct\] The quotient group $\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$, and we have an isomorphism $$\label{equ:Qf_struct}
\pi_0{\Qman_{\func}}\, \cong \, \bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{i}})}.$$ In particular, if $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}} = {\Qman_{\func}}$, then we have an isomorphism: $$\label{equ:pi0SfdM_triv_act}
{\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{B}})} \, \cong \, \bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{i}})}.$$
The case when the group $\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ is non-trivial will be considered in another paper.
Due to \[enum:PM:chi\_neg\] of Theorem \[th:Stabf\_reduction\] a knowledge of ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{B}})}$ will allow to compute ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ for all non-orientable surfaces with $\chi({{\Mman}})<0$. Together with results of [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014], describing algebraic structure of ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ for ${{\Mman}}$ being $2$-disk and annulus, this will give a complete description of the groups ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Mman}})}$ for all compact surfaces except for $2$-sphere, projective plane, and Klein bottle. Also during the proof of Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\] we will get more detailed information about ${\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{B}})}$.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Critical level sets of certain functions on the Möbius band[]{data-label="fig:examples_func_mb"}](ex_func_0 "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![Critical level sets of certain functions on the Möbius band[]{data-label="fig:examples_func_mb"}](ex_func_1 "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
(a) (b)
![Critical level sets of certain functions on the Möbius band[]{data-label="fig:examples_func_mb"}](ex_func_2 "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![Critical level sets of certain functions on the Möbius band[]{data-label="fig:examples_func_mb"}](ex_func_3 "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
(c) (d)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples {#examples .unnumbered}
--------
Let ${{A}}= S^1\times[0,1]$ be an annulus, $\xi(\phi,t) = (\phi+\pi, 1-t)$ be the involution without fixed points and changing orientation of ${{A}}$, so ${{B}}= {{A}}/\xi$ is a Möbius band, and $p:{{A}}\to{{B}}$ is an orientable double covering of ${{B}}$. Figure \[fig:examples\_func\_mb\] contains examples of critical components ${K}$ level-sets of Morse functions ${{\func}}:{{B}}\to\bR$ described by Theorem \[th:unique\_cr\_level\] and their preimages in ${{A}}$. In order to simplify the illustration we denote by ${{\Yman}_{i}}$ the connected components of ${{B}}\setminus{K}$ (not of ${{B}}\setminus{{\Wman}}$ as in Theorem \[th:unique\_cr\_level\]), and by ${{\Xman}_{i}}'$ and ${{\Xman}_{i}}''$ connected components of $p^{-1}({{\Yman}_{i}})$ for $i\geq1$.
1. There exists ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ such that ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{1}})={{\Yman}_{1}}$ and it reverses orientation of ${{\Yman}_{i}}$. Then $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}\cong \bZ_2$ and it generated by the isotopy class of ${{h}}$. Moreover, the action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ is transitive.
2. In this case $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}\cong \bZ_4$ is generated by the isotopy class of ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ such that ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{1}})={{\Yman}_{2}}$, ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{2}})={{\Yman}_{1}}$ and ${{h}}^2$ reverses orientations of both ${{\Yman}_{1}}$ and ${{\Yman}_{2}}$. Now the action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ is transitive as well.
3. Evidently, each ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ preserves each ${{\Yman}_{i}}$, $i=1,2,3$, with its orientation. This means that $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}={\Qman_{\func}}$, so the group $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ is trivial.
4. Now $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}\cong \bZ_2$ is generated by the isotopy class of ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
{{h}}({{\Yman}_{1}},+)&=({{\Yman}_{1}},-), &
{{h}}({{\Yman}_{2}},+)&=({{\Yman}_{2}},-), &
{{h}}({{\Yman}_{3}})&=({{\Yman}_{4}}), &
{{h}}({{\Yman}_{4}})&=({{\Yman}_{3}}).\end{aligned}$$
Structure of the paper {#structure-of-the-paper .unnumbered}
----------------------
In §\[sect:KRGraph\] we recall the notion of the Kronrod-Reeb graph of a map $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, and in §\[sect:th:1\] prove of Theorem \[th:unique\_cr\_level\]. §\[sect:diff\_non\_or\] contains certain results about relations of diffeomorphism groups of a non-orientable manifold and its double covering. In §\[sect:ham\_vh\] we recall the notion of a Hamiltonian like flow for a function on an orientable surface. In §\[sect:FolStab\_Grp\] we introduce several subgroups of $\Stabilizer{\func}$ and prove Theorem \[th:hom\_equ\] allowing to “simplify” diffeomorphisms from the stabilizer of $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$. These results extend [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 §3 & §7] to non-orientable case. §\[sect:func\_on\_annulus\] describes the relation between the groups $\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ and $\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ for functions on the annulus ${{A}}=S^1\times[0,1]$, see Lemma \[lm:cyl:rel\_StStIsotId\]. In §\[sect:th:2\] we prove Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\].
Kronrod-Reeb graph {#sect:KRGraph}
==================
Let $\Mman$ be a compact surface. Given $\func\in{\mathcal{F}(\Mman,\Pman)}$ consider the partition of $\Mman$ into connected components of level sets of $\func$. Let also ${\Gamma(\func)}$ be the set of elements of that partition and $p:\Mman\to{\Gamma(\func)}$ be the quotient map. Endow ${\Gamma(\func)}$ with the corresponding quotient topology, so a subset $W\subset{\Gamma(\func)}$ is open if and only if $p^{-1}(W)$ is open in $\Mman$.
Since $\func$ takes constant values on connected components of $\partial\Mman$ and has only finitely many critical points, it follows that ${\Gamma(\func)}$ is a “topological graph”, i.e. a one-dimensional CW-complex. It is also called the *Kronrod-Reeb graph* or simply the *graph* of $\func$.
The following statement is well known for Morse maps, and can easily be extended to maps $\Mman\to\Pman$ with isolated critical points and taking constant values at each connected component of $\partial\Mman$.
[cf. [@Rezende_Ledesma_ManzoliNeto_Vago:TA:2018 Corollary 3.8].]{} Let $\func\in{\mathcal{F}(\Mman,\Pman)}$. Then the quotient mapping $p:\Mman\to{\Gamma(\func)}$ induces an epimorphism $p_{*}:H_1(\Mman,\partial\Mman,\bZ)\to H_1({\Gamma(\func)},\bZ)$ between the corresponding *integer* homology groups.
One easily shows that there exists a continuous map $s:{\Gamma(\func)}\to\Mman$ such that $p \circ s$ is homotopic to $\id_{{\Gamma(\func)}}$, so $s$ is a “*homotopical section*” of the map $p:\Mman\to{\Gamma(\func)}$. Hence we get the following commutative diagram $$\xymatrix{
& H_1(\Mman,\bZ) \ar[rd]^{p_{*}} \\
H_1({\Gamma(\func)},\bZ) \ar[ru]^{s_{*}} \ar[rr]^{\id} && H_1({\Gamma(\func)},\bZ)
}$$ implying surjectivity of $p_*$.
\[cor:KRgraph\_tree\] Let $\Mman$ be either a $2$-sphere or a projective plane with $k\geq0$ holes. Then for each $\func\in{\mathcal{F}(\Mman,\Pman)}$ the homomorphism $p_{*}$ is zero, whence the Kronrod-Reeb graph ${\Gamma(\func)}$ of $\func$ is a tree.
Notice that for such surfaces the homomorphism $i_{*}:H_1(\partial\Mman,\bZ) \to H_1(\Mman,\bZ)$ induced by the inclusion $i:\partial\Mman \subset \Mman$ is surjective. Since $\func$ takes constant values at boundary components of $\Mman$, it follows that $p_{*} \circ i_{*}=0$, whence $p_{*}$ is zero epimorphism. Therefore $H_1({\Gamma(\func)},\bZ)=0$ and so ${\Gamma(\func)}$ is a tree.
Proof of Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\] {#sect:th:1}
====================================
Let ${{B}}$ be a Möbius band, ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{B}},\Pman)}$, and ${\Gamma(\func)}$ be the Kronrod-Reeb graph of ${{\func}}$ being due to Corollary \[cor:KRgraph\_tree\] a tree. We have to find a connected component ${K}$ of some level set of ${{\func}}$ satisfying statement of Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\].
Recall that up to an isotopy and changing of orientation there are exactly two classes of two-sided simple closed curves on Möbius strip:
1. a curve isotopic to $\partial{{B}}$ and dividing ${{B}}$ into an annulus and a M[ö]{}bius strip;
2. a null-homotopic curve dividing ${{B}}$ into a $2$-disk and a M[ö]{}bius strip with a hole.
In particular, each regular component $\gamma$ of each level-set of ${{\func}}$ is a two-sided simple closed curve in ${{B}}$, and so it has one of the above types [$(\mathcal{B})$]{} or [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}. Notice that $p(\gamma)$ is an internal point of some open edge $e$ of ${\Gamma(\func)}$. If $\gamma'$ is another regular component of some level set such that $p(\gamma')\in e$, then $\gamma'$ is isotopic to $\gamma$, and therefore it has the same type [$(\mathcal{B})$]{} or [$(\mathcal{N})$]{} as $\gamma$. Hence one can associate to each edge $e$ of ${\Gamma(\func)}$ the type [$(\mathcal{B})$]{} or [$(\mathcal{N})$]{} being the type of $p^{-1}(w)$, where $w$ is any point in $e$.
Therefore Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\] can be reformulated as follows: *there exists a unique vertex $v\in{\Gamma(\func)}$ having exactly one incident [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edge*. Then ${K}= p^{-1}(v)$.
For the proof we need the following lemma. Denote by $v_{0} = p(\partial{{B}})$ the vertex of ${\Gamma(\func)}$ corresponding to the boundary of ${{B}}$.
\[lm:prof\_ab\_edges\]
1. \[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:bd\] A vertex $v\in{\Gamma(\func)}$ can not have more than two incident [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edges.
2. \[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:null\] Let $e$ be an open [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}-edge, $w\in e$ be a point, and $T_w$ be a connected component of ${\Gamma(\func)}\setminus w$ that does not contain $v_{0}$. Then every edge in $T_{w}$ is of type [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}as well.
\[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:bd\] Let $p^{-1}(v)$ be the critical component of some level set of ${{\func}}$ corresponding to $v$, $e_1,\ldots,e_m$ be all the [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edges incident to $v$, $\gamma_i$, $i=1,\ldots,m$ be a connected component of a level-set of ${{\func}}$ corresponding to some point of $e_i$, $Q = {{B}}\setminus \cup_{i=1}^{m} \gamma_i$, and $Q_0, Q_1, \ldots, Q_k$ be all the connected components of $Q$. One can assume that $p^{-1}(v) \subset Q_0$, whence $\cup_{i=1}^{m}\gamma_{i} \subset \overline{Q_0}$ as well.
Now by assumption any two curves $\gamma_i$ and $\gamma_j$ are disjoint, not null homotopic, and isotopic each other. Hence they bound an annulus $C_{ij}$ in ${{B}}$ with $\partial C_{ij} = \gamma_i \cup \gamma_j$.
Assume now that $m\geq3$, so we have at least three annulus $C_{12}$, $C_{13}$ and $C_{23}$. Then their union $Z = C_{12} \cup C_{13} \cup C_{23}$ is connected.
If the interiors of those annulus were mutually disjoint, then $$\begin{aligned}
(C_{12}\setminus\gamma_1) \cap C_{23} &= \gamma_2 \not=\varnothing, &
(C_{13}\setminus\gamma_1) \cap C_{23} &= \gamma_3 \not=\varnothing,\end{aligned}$$ whence $$Z \setminus \gamma_1 = (C_{12}\setminus\gamma_1) \cup C_{23} \cup (C_{13}\setminus\gamma_1)$$ would be connected which contradicts to the property that ${{B}}\setminus\gamma_1$ is disconnected.
Hence, renumbering indexes if necessary, one can assume that $C_{12} \subset C_{13}$, and so $\gamma_2\subset \Int{C_{13}}$. But $\gamma_2 \subset \overline{Q_0}$ as well, whence $$Q_0 \subset C_{13} \setminus (\gamma_1\cup\gamma_2\cup\gamma_3) = \Int{C_{12}} \cup \Int{C_{23}},$$ and therefore $Q_0$ is contained either in $\Int{C_{12}}$ or in $\Int{C_{23}}$. Assume for definiteness that $Q_0 \subset \Int{C_{12}}$. Then $\overline{Q_0} \subset C_{12} \subset {{B}}\setminus\gamma_3$ which contradict to the assumption that $\cup_{i=1}^{m}\gamma_{i} \subset \overline{Q_0}$. Hence $m\leq 2$.
\[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:null\] Notice that $p^{-1}(T_{w})$ is an open disk. Hence if $e' \subset T_w$ is an open edge and $w'\in e'$ is a point, then the curve $p^{-1}(w)$ bounds in $p^{-1}(T_{w})$ a disk, and so $e'$ is of type [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}.
Now we can finish Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\].
First we show that such a vertex $v$ exists. Let $v_{0} = p(\partial{{B}})$, and $e_0=(v_0,v_1)$ be a unique edge of ${\Gamma(\func)}$ incident to $v_0$, where $v_1$ is another vertex of $e_0$. Evidently, $e_0$ is of type [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}. If there is no other [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edges incident to $v_1$ except for $e_0$, then $v=v_1$ is the required vertex.
Otherwise, due to \[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:bd\] of Lemma \[lm:prof\_ab\_edges\] exists a unique [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edge $e_1=(v_1,v_2)$ incident to $v_1$ and distinct from $e_0$. Applying the same arguments to $e_1$ and so on we will stop (due to the finiteness of ${\Gamma(\func)}$) at a unique path $$\pi: e_0=(v_0,v_1), e_1=(v_1,v_2),\ldots,e_m=(v_m,v)$$ of mutually distinct [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edges such that its end vertex $v$ has a unique [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edge.
Let us prove a uniqueness $v$. Let $v'$ be a vertex of ${\Gamma(\func)}$ distinct from $v$ and $k$ be the number of [$(\mathcal{B})$]{}-edges incident to $v'$. We should prove that $k=0$ or $2$. If $v'\in \pi$, then by the construction $k=2$.
We claim that $k=0$ for all other vertices. Indeed, let $T$ be the connected component of the complement ${\Gamma(\func)}\setminus \pi$ containing $v'$. Then $T$ is a subtree having with the path $\pi$ a unique common vertex, say $v_i$. Let $e'=(v_i,v'_i)$ be a unique edge belonging to $T$. Then by the construction $e'$ is of type [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}, whence by \[enum:prof\_ab\_edges:null\] of Lemma \[lm:prof\_ab\_edges\] all other edges of $T$ are also of type [$(\mathcal{N})$]{}. In particular, so are all edges incident to $v'$, whence $k=0$.
Diffeomorphisms of non-orientable manifolds {#sect:diff_non_or}
===========================================
Let ${{\Nman}}$ be a smooth non-orientable connected manifold of dimension ${{\color{WildStrawberry}m}}$, $p\colon {{\Mman}}\to{{\Nman}}$ be the oriented double covering of ${{\Nman}}$, and $\xi\colon {{\Mman}}\to {{\Mman}}$ be the corresponding $\Cinfty$ diffeomorphism without fixed points generating the group $\bZ_2$ of covering transformations, that is $\xi^2=\id_{{{\Mman}}}$ and $p\circ\xi= p$.
A diffeomorphism $\tdif\in\Diff({{\Mman}})$ will be called if it commutes with $\xi$, that is $\tdif\circ\xi=\xi\circ\tdif$. Denote by $\tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}})$ the group of all symmetric diffeomorphisms of ${{\Mman}}$ fixed on a closed subset ${{\Xman}}\subset{{\Mman}}$ and by $\tDiffId({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}})$ the identity path component of $\tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}})$. If ${{\Xman}}$ is empty, we will just omit it from notation.
The aim of this section is to find precise relations between the groups $\Diff({{\Nman}})$ and $\tDiff({{\Mman}})$, see Lemma \[lm:DM\_tDtM\_relations\] below.
\[lm:cov:path\_comp\_of\_preimage\] Let ${{\Yman}}\subset \Nman$ be a path connected subset. Then its preimage ${{\Xman}}=p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$ is either path connected or consists of two disjoint path components which are interchanged by $\xi$.
One easily deduces from path lifting axiom for the covering map $p:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Nman}}$, that $p({{\Xman}})={{\Yman}}$ for every path component ${{\Xman}}'$ of ${{\Xman}}$. Hence for every point ${{y}}\in{{\Yman}}$ its inverse image $p^{-1}({{y}})$ intersects each path component of ${{\Xman}}$. But $p^{-1}({{y}})$ consists of two points, say ${{x}}$ and $\xi({{x}})$, whence ${{\Xman}}$ must consist of either one or two path components. Moreover, if ${{\Xman}}$ has two path components ${{\Xman}}'$ and ${{\Xman}}''$ such that ${{x}}\in{{\Xman}}'$ and $\xi({{x}})\in{{\Xman}}''$, then $\xi$ interchanges ${{x}}$ and $\xi({{x}})$ as well as path components ${{\Xman}}'$ and ${{\Xman}}''$.
\[lm:DM\_tDtM\_relations\] Each ${{q}}\in \tDiff({{\Mman}})$ yields a diffeomorphism ${{h}}\in\Diff({{\Nman}})$ such that $p\circ{{q}}= {{h}}\circ p$, and the correspondence ${{q}}\mapsto{{h}}$ is a continuous epimorphism $\rho: \tDiff({{\Mman}})\to \Diff({{\Nman}})$ with kernel $\ker(\rho) = \{\id_{{{\Mman}}}, \xi\} \cong \bZ_2$. Moreover, $\rho$ yields an isomorphism of $\tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$ onto $\Diff({{\Nman}})$, so we get the following commutative diagram whose rows are exact and all vertical arrows are isomorphisms: $$\label{equ:tDtM_z2_tDpltM}
\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
\ \bZ_2 \ \ar@{^{(}->}[rr]^-{i \,\mapsto\, (i,\id_{{{\Mman}}})} \ar[d]^-{i \,\mapsto\, \xi^i}_-{\cong} &&
\ \bZ_2\times \tDiffPl({{\Mman}}) \ \ar@{->>}[rr]^-{(i,{{q}}) \,\mapsto\, {{q}}}
\ar[d]^-{(i,{{q}}) \,\mapsto\, \xi^i \circ {{q}}}_-{\cong} &&
\ \tDiffPl({{\Mman}}) \ \ar@/^3pt/[d]^-{\rho} \\
\ \langle \xi \rangle \ \ar@{^{(}->}[rr] &&
\ \tDiff({{\Mman}}) \ \ar@{->>}[rr]^-{\rho} &&
\ \Diff({{\Nman}}) \ar@/^3pt/[u]^-{s} \
}
\end{aligned}$$ where $s$ is the inverse to $\rho$.
Moreover, $s$ also induces the isomorphisms described below.
1. \[enum:s\_iso:DMX\] For every subset ${{\Yman}}\subset {{\Nman}}$ we have an isomorphism $$\label{equ:s_DidMX_tDidtMtX}
s\colon \DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) \cong \tDiffId({{\Mman}}, p^{-1}({{\Yman}})).$$
2. \[enum:s\_iso:DidMX\] Suppose ${{\Yman}}\subset {{\Nman}}$ is a subset such that for every path component ${{\Yman}}'$ of ${{\Yman}}$ and ${{q}}\in\tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$ the restrictions $${{q}}|_{p^{-1}({{\Yman}}')},\, \xi|_{p^{-1}({{\Yman}}')}\colon \, p^{-1}({{\Yman}}') \to {{\Mman}}$$ are , that is they take distinct values at some point. Then we also have an isomorphism $$\label{equ:s_DMX_tDtMtX}
s\colon \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) \cong \tDiff({{\Mman}}, p^{-1}({{\Yman}})).$$ For instance, this hold if ${{\Yman}}$ is an ${{\color{WildStrawberry}m}}$-dimensional submanifold or a $({{\color{WildStrawberry}m}}-1)$-dimensional submanifold, but does not hold when ${{\Yman}}$ is a finite subset.
Let ${{q}}\in\tDiff({{\Mman}})$ and ${{h}}= \rho({{q}}) \in\Diff({{\Nman}})$. Then $\rho^{-1}({{h}})$ consists of two diffeomorphisms ${{q}}$ and $\xi\circ{{q}}$ one of which preserves orientation, and another one reverses it. Denote by $s({{h}})$ those one which preserves orientation. Then the correspondence ${{h}}\mapsto s({{h}})$ is a continuous homomorphism $s:\Diff({{\Nman}}) \to \tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$ satisfying $\rho\circ s = \id_{\Diff({{\Nman}})}$. Since by definition $\xi$ commutes with all $\tDiff({{\Mman}})$ and generates the kernel of $\rho$, we get the desired diagram .
\[enum:s\_iso:DMX\] First notice that $\tDiffId({{\Mman}})$ is also the identity path component of $\tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$. Hence $\rho$ induces an isomorphism of $\tDiffId({{\Mman}})$ onto the path component $\DiffId({{\Nman}})$ of $\Diff({{\Nman}})$, and so we get the inverse isomorphism $s\colon \DiffId({{\Nman}}) \cong \tDiffId({{\Mman}})$ coinciding with for the case ${{\Yman}}=\varnothing$.
Suppose now that ${{\Yman}}\subset {{\Nman}}$ is a non-empty subset and let ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$. Evidently, $\rho\bigl( \tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}}) \bigr) \subset \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})$, that is if ${{h}}\in\tDiff({{\Mman}})$ is fixed on ${{\Xman}}$, then $\rho({{q}})$ is fixed on ${{\Yman}}$. Hence $$\rho\bigl( \tDiffId({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}}) \bigr) \subset \DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}).$$
Conversely, let ${{h}}\in \DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})$, so there is an isotopy $H:{{\Nman}}\times [0,1]\to{{\Nman}}$ such that $H_0=\id_{{{\Nman}}}$, $H_1={{h}}$, and each $H_t$ is fixed on ${{\Yman}}$. Since $p$ is a covering map, $H$ lifts to a unique isotopy $\cov{H}:{{\Mman}}\times[0,1]\to{{\Mman}}$ such that $\cov{H}_0=\id_{{{\Mman}}}$ and $\rho(\cov{H}_t)=H_t$. In particular, $\cov{H}_t\in\tDiffId({{\Mman}}) \subset \tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$, and so $\cov{H}_t = s(H_t)$.
It remains to show that each $\cov{H}_t$ is fixed on ${{\Xman}}$, which will imply that $$s(\DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})) \subset \tDiffId({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}})$$ and give the isomorphism \[enum:s\_iso:DMX\]. Let ${{x}}\in{{\Xman}}$ and ${{y}}=p({{x}}) \in {{\Yman}}$. Since $H(x\times [0,1]) = {{y}}$, it follows that $\cov{H}({{x}}\times [0,1]) \subset p^{-1}({{y}}) = \{{{x}}, \xi({{x}})\}$. But the latter set is discrete and $\cov{H}({{x}},0) = {{x}}$, whence $\cov{H}({{x}}\times [0,1])={{x}}$ as well. Thus $\cov{H}_t$ is fixed on ${{\Xman}}$.
\[enum:s\_iso:DidMX\] Let ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$, so the restriction $p:{{\Xman}}\to {{\Yman}}$ is a double covering map. As noted above $\rho\bigl( \tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}}) \bigr) \subset \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})$, and so we should only check that $$\label{equ:s_mX_tDtMtX}
s\bigl(\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})\bigr) \subset \tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}}).$$
a\) Suppose ${{\Yman}}$ is path connected and let ${{h}}\in \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})$ and ${{q}}= s({{h}}) \in \tDiffPl({{\Mman}})$. To prove we should check that ${{q}}$ is fixed on ${{\Xman}}$.
Since ${{h}}$ is fixed on ${{\Yman}}$, it follows that ${{q}}({{x}}) \in \{ {{x}}, \xi({{x}})\}$ for all ${{x}}\in{{\Xman}}$. By assumption ${{h}}|_{{{\Xman}}} \not= \xi|_{{{\Xman}}}$, so there exists a point ${{x}}\in{{\Xman}}$ such that ${{q}}({{x}})\not=\xi({{x}})$, and so ${{q}}({{x}}) = {{x}}$. Let ${{\Xman}}'$ be the path component of ${{\Xman}}$ containing ${{x}}$. Then ${{q}}({{\Xman}}')={{\Xman}}'$ and the restriction ${{q}}|_{{{\Xman}}'}:{{\Xman}}' \to {{\Xman}}'$ is a unique lifting of the identity map $\id_{{{\Yman}}}:{{\Yman}}\to{{\Yman}}$ for the covering map $p|_{{{\Xman}}}: {{\Xman}}\to {{\Yman}}$ having the property that ${{q}}({{x}})= {{x}}$. Hence ${{q}}|_{{{\Xman}}}$ is the identity, i.e. ${{q}}$ is fixed on ${{\Xman}}'$.
Furthermore, suppose there exists another path component ${{\Xman}}''$ of ${{\Xman}}$. Then by Lemma \[lm:cov:path\_comp\_of\_preimage\] $\xi({{\Xman}}') = {{\Xman}}''$ and $\xi({{x}})\in{{\Xman}}''$. Since ${{q}}({{\Xman}}')={{\Xman}}'$, it follows that ${{q}}({{\Xman}}'')={{\Xman}}''$ and therefore ${{q}}(\xi({{x}})) = \xi({{x}})$. Hence ${{q}}$ has a fixed point in ${{\Xman}}''$, and so it is fixed on ${{\Xman}}''$ as well. In other words $s({{h}}) = {{q}}\in \tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}})$, which proves for the case when ${{\Yman}}$ is path connected.
b\) Now suppose ${{\Yman}}$ is not path connected, and let $\{ {{\Yman}}_i\}_{i\in\Lambda}$ the collection of all path components of ${{\Yman}}$, so ${{\Yman}}= \mathop{\cup}\limits_{i\in\Lambda}{{\Yman}}_i$. Then by a) $$s\bigl(\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}_{i})\bigr) = \tDiff({{\Mman}},p^{-1}({{\Yman}}_i)), \qquad i\in\Lambda.$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
s\bigl(\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}})\bigr) &=
s\bigl(\Diff({{\Nman}},\mathop{\cup}\limits_{i\in\Lambda}{{\Yman}}_i)\bigr) =
s\bigl(\mathop{\cap}\limits_{i\in\Lambda} \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}_i)\bigr) =
\mathop{\cap}\limits_{i\in\Lambda} s\bigl( \Diff({{\Mman}},{{\Yman}}_i)\bigr) = \\
&= \mathop{\cap}\limits_{i\in\Lambda} \tDiff({{\Mman}},p^{-1}({{\Yman}}_i)\bigr) =
\tDiff({{\Mman}}, \mathop{\cup}\limits_{i\in\Lambda} p^{-1}({{\Yman}}_i)\bigr) =
\tDiff({{\Mman}}, p^{-1}({{\Yman}})\bigr).\end{aligned}$$ Lemma is proved.
\[lm:SttSt\] Let ${{\func}}:{{\Nman}}\to\Pman$ be a $\Cinfty$, ${{g}}= {{\func}}\circ p:{{\Mman}}\to\Pman$, $$\begin{aligned}
\Stabilizer{{{\func}}} &:= \{ {{h}}\in\Diff({{\Nman}}) \mid {{\func}}\circ{{h}}= {{\func}}\}, &
\tStabilizer{{{g}}} &:= \{ {{q}}\in\tDiff({{\Nman}}) \mid {{g}}\circ{{q}}= {{g}}\}.\end{aligned}$$ The following statements hold true.
1. \[enum:Stab\_tStab\] $\rho(\tStabilizer{{{g}})} = \Stabilizer{{{\func}}}$ and $\rho^{-1}(\Stabilizer{{{\func}}}) = \tStabilizer{{{g}}}$;
2. \[enum:SfX\_tStftX\] Suppose $\dim{{\Nman}}=2$, ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Nman}},\Pman)}$, and let ${{\Yman}}$ be an ${{\func}}$-adopted submanifold. Then $s$ induces an isomorphism $$\label{equ:s_iso_Stabs}
s: \Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} \cong\tStabilizer{{{g}},p^{-1}({{\Yman}})}.$$
Let ${{q}}\in\tDiff({{\Mman}})$ and ${{h}}=\rho({{q}})\in\Diff({{\Nman}})$, so $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ:h_th_diffs}
{{q}}\circ\xi&=\xi\circ {{q}}, &
p\circ {{q}}&={{h}}\circ p, &
{{g}}&={{\func}}\circ p.\end{aligned}$$ We have to show that ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}}}$ if and only if ${{q}}\in\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$, i.e. we need to deduce from an equivalence of the following relations: $$\begin{aligned}
{{\func}}\circ{{h}}&={{\func}}, &
{{g}}\circ{{q}}&={{g}}.\end{aligned}$$ Let ${{x}}\in{{\Mman}}$ and ${{y}}=p({{x}})$. If ${{g}}\circ{{q}}({{x}})={{g}}({{x}})$, then $${{\func}}\circ{{h}}({{y}}) =
{{\func}}\circ{{h}}\circ p({{y}}) =
{{\func}}\circ p \circ {{q}}({{x}}) =
{{g}}\circ {{q}}({{x}}) =
{{g}}({{x}}) =
{{\func}}\circ p({{x}}) ={{\func}}({{y}}).$$ Conversely, if ${{\func}}\circ{{h}}({{y}})={{\func}}({{y}})$, then $${{g}}\circ{{q}}({{x}}) =
{{\func}}\circ p \circ {{q}}({{x}}) =
{{\func}}\circ {{h}}\circ p({{x}}) =
{{\func}}\circ p({{x}}) =
{{g}}({{x}}).$$
\[enum:SfX\_tStftX\] Denote ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$. Since ${{\Xman}}$ is an ${{g}}$-adopted submanifold, one easily checks that $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Xman}}} \subset \DiffPl({{\Mman}})$. Hence by \[enum:Stab\_tStab\] and Lemma \[lm:DM\_tDtM\_relations\] $\rho$ injectively maps $\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Xman}}}$ into $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$.
Conversely, it follows from \[enum:Stab\_tStab\] that $s(\Stabilizer{{{\func}}})\subset \tStabilizer{{{g}}}$. Therefore we get from statement \[enum:s\_iso:DidMX\] of Lemma \[lm:DM\_tDtM\_relations\] that $$\begin{aligned}
s\bigl( \Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} \bigr) &=
s\bigl( \Stabilizer{{{\func}}}\cap\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) \bigr) \subset
\tStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap \tDiff({{\Mman}},{{\Xman}}) =
\tStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Xman}}}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $\rho\circ s = \id_{\DiffPl({{\Mman}})}$, it follows that $s$ isomorphically maps $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$ onto $\tStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Xman}}}$.
Hamiltonian like flows for ${{g}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$. {#sect:ham_vh}
====================================================================
Let ${{\Mman}}$ be an orientable compact surface.
\[def:ham\_like\_vf\] Let ${{g}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ and $\fSing$ be the set of critical points of ${{g}}$. A smooth vector field ${F}$ on ${{\Mman}}$ will be called for ${{g}}$ if the following conditions hold true.
1. \[enum:hf:crpt\] ${F}(z)=0$ if and only if $z$ is a critical point of ${{g}}$.
2. \[enum:hf:pres\_func\] ${F}({{g}})\equiv0$ everywhere on ${{\Mman}}$, that is ${{g}}$ is constant along orbits of ${F}$.
3. \[enum:hf:local\_form\] Let $z$ be a critical point of ${{g}}$. Then there exists a local representation of ${{g}}$ at $z$ as a homogeneous polynomial $v:(\bR^2,0)\to(\bR,0)$ without multiple factors (as in Definition \[def:classF\]) such that in the same coordinates $(x,y)$ near the origin $0$ in $\bR^2$ we have that ${F}= -v'_{y}\,\tfrac{\partial}{\partial x} + v'_{x}\,\tfrac{\partial}{\partial y}$.
It follows from \[enum:hf:crpt\] and Definition \[def:classF\] that every orbit of ${F}$ is of one of the following types:
- a critical point of ${{g}}$;
- a regular component of some level set of ${{g}}$, and so it is a closed orbit of ${F}$;
- a connected component of the sets ${K}\setminus\fSing$, where ${K}$ runs over all critical components of level-sets of ${{g}}$.
By [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Lemma 5.1] or [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010 Lemma 16] for every ${{g}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$ there exists a Hamiltonian like vector field. For the proof take the Hamiltonian vector field ${F}$ for ${{g}}$ with respect to any symplectic form ${\omega}$ on ${{\Mman}}$, and then properly change ${F}$ near each critical point of ${{g}}$ in accordance with \[enum:hf:local\_form\] of Definition \[def:ham\_like\_vf\].
Let ${F}$ be a Hamiltonian like vector field for ${{g}}$. Since ${{g}}$ takes constant values on boundary components of ${{\Mman}}$, it follows that ${F}$ is tangent to $\partial{{\Mman}}$ and therefore it generates a flow ${\mathbf{F}}:{{\Mman}}\times \bR\to {{\Mman}}$ which will also be called for ${{g}}$.
For each smooth function $\alpha:{{\Mman}}\to\bR$ let ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Mman}}$ be the map defined by $$\label{equ:shift_via_alpha}
{\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}(x) = {\mathbf{F}}(x,\alpha(x)), \qquad x\in{{\Mman}}.$$ We will call ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$ the via the function $\alpha$, and $\alpha$ will in turn be called a for ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$.
Evidently, condition \[enum:hf:pres\_func\] of Definition \[def:ham\_like\_vf\] is equivalent to the assumption that $${{g}}\circ{\mathbf{F}}_t = {{g}}$$ for all $t\in\bR$, that is ${\mathbf{F}}_t\in\Stabilizer{{{g}}}$.
More generally, since ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$ leaves invariant each orbit of ${\mathbf{F}}$, we see that ${{g}}\circ{\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}={{g}}$ for every function $\alpha\in\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\bR}$. In particular, ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$ is a if and only if ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha} \in \Stabilizer{{{g}}}$. Moreover, in this case ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha} \in \StabilizerId{{{g}}}$ and $\{{\mathbf{F}}_{t\alpha}\}_{t\in[0,1]}$ is an isotopy between $\id_{{{\Mman}}}$ and ${\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$.
Denote by ${F}(\alpha)$ the Lie derivative of $\alpha$ with respect to ${F}$ and let $$\label{equ:shift_funcs_for_diff}
{{\Theta({F})}}= \{ \alpha\in\Ci{{{\Mman}}}{\bR} \mid 1+{F}(\alpha)>-0 \}.$$
\[th:charact\_Stabf\][[@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Theorem 1.3], [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010 Theorem 3].]{} Let ${{g}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, ${\mathbf{F}}:{{\Mman}}\times\bR\to{{\Mman}}$ be the flow generated by some Hamiltonian vector field ${F}$, and ${\varphi_{{F}}}:{{\Theta({F})}}\to \StabilizerId{{{g}}}$ be the map defined by ${\varphi_{{F}}}(\alpha) = {\mathbf{F}}_{\alpha}$. If ${{g}}$ has at least one or a , then ${\varphi_{{F}}}$ is a with respect to $C^{\infty}$ topologies and $\StabilizerId{{{g}}}$ is contractible (because ${{\Theta({F})}}$ is convex).
Otherwise, there exists $\theta\in{{\Theta({F})}}$ such that ${\varphi_{{F}}}$ can be represented as a composition $${\varphi_{{F}}}: {{\Theta({F})}}\xrightarrow{~\text{quotient}~}
{{\Theta({F})}}/\{n\theta\}_{n\in\bZ} \xrightarrow{~\text{homeomorphism}~}
\StabilizerId{{{g}}}$$ of the quotient map by the closed discrete subgroup $Z = \{n\theta\}_{n\in\bZ}$ of ${{\Theta({F})}}$ and a homeomorphism of the quotient of ${{\Theta({F})}}$ by $Z$ onto $\StabilizerId{{{g}}}$. In particular, ${\varphi_{{F}}}$ is an infinite cyclic covering map and $\StabilizerId{{{g}}}$ is homotopy equivalent to the circle.
Groups $\FolStabilizer{{{\func}}}$ {#sect:FolStab_Grp}
==================================
For ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Nman}},\Pman)}$ let $\FolStabilizer{{{\func}}}$ be the subgroup of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}}}$ consisting of diffeomorphisms ${{h}}$ of ${{\Nman}}$ having the following two properties:
1. ${{h}}$ leaves invariant every connected component of each level-set of ${{\func}}$;
2. if $z$ is a of ${{\func}}$, so, in particular, ${{h}}(z)=z$, then the tangent map $T_{z}{{h}}: T_z{{\Nman}}\to T_z{{\Nman}}$ is the identity.
For a closed subset ${{\Yman}}$ of ${{\Nman}}$ define the following three groups: $$\begin{aligned}
\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) &:= \{{{h}}\in\Diff({{\Nman}}) \mid {{h}}\ \text{is fixed on} \ {{\Yman}}\}, \\
{\Diff_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}}({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) &:= \{{{h}}\in\Diff({{\Nman}}) \mid {{h}}\ \text{is fixed on some neighborhood of} \ {{\Yman}}\}, \\
\DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) &:= \{{{h}}\in\Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}) \mid {{h}}\ \text{is isotopic to $\id_{{{\Nman}}}$ rel. ${{\Yman}}$} \}.\end{aligned}$$ Define also their intersections with $\FolStabilizer{{{\func}}}$ and $\Stabilizer{{{\func}}}$ as follows: $$\label{equ:subgroups_of_fStabX}
\begin{aligned}
\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}&:= \FolStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), & \ \qquad\
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} &:= \Stabilizer{{{\func}}}\cap \Diff({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), \\
\FolStabilizerNbh{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}&:= \FolStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap {\Diff_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}}({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), & \
{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})} &:= \Stabilizer{{{\func}}}\cap {\Diff_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}}({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), \\
\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}&:= \FolStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap \DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), & \
\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} &:= \Stabilizer{{{\func}}}\cap \DiffId({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), \\
\FolStabilizerNbhIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}&:= \FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}} \cap {\Diff_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}}({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}), & \
{\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})} &:= \StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}}\cap {\Diff_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}}({{\Nman}},{{\Yman}}),
\end{aligned}$$ where we follow the notation convention that ${{\Yman}}$ is omitted if it is empty. In particular, $\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}}=\FolStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap \DiffIdM$. The following lemma can be proved similarly to [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 3.4] and we leave its proof for the reader.
\[lm:Lf\_Sf\][cf. [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 3.4].]{} All the groups in are normal subgroups of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$.
The groups $\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$, $\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$, $\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$ are unions of path components of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$. In particular, $\StabilizerId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$ is the identity path component of each of these groups.
Similarly, the groups $\FolStabilizerNbhIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$, $\FolStabilizerNbh{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$, and ${\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})}$ are also unions of path components of ${\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})}$.
It follows that $\pi_0\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$ can be regarded as a normal subgroup of $\pi_0\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$. Moreover, if ${{\func}}$ , then the corresponding quotient $$\begin{aligned}
\GrpKR{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}
&:=\dfrac{\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}{\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}} =
\Bigl. \frac{\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}{\StabilizerId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}} \Bigr/
\frac{\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}{\StabilizerId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}
= \dfrac{\pi_0\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}{\pi_0\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}.\end{aligned}$$ can be interpreted as the group of automorphisms of the Kronrod-Reeb graph of ${{\func}}$ induced by diffeomorphisms from $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$, see e.g. [@Kronrod:UMN:1950], [@Reeb:ASI:1952], [@BolsinovFomenko:ENG:2004], [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010]. If ${{\func}}$ has degenerate local extremes, then there is a similar interpretation of $\GrpKR{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}$ but one should modify Kronrod-Reeb graph of ${{\func}}$ by gluing additional edges to each vertex corresponding to each degenerate local extreme, see for details [@Maksymenko:ProcIM:ENG:2010]. Similarly, one can define $$\begin{aligned}
\GrpKRIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} &=
\dfrac{\pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}{\pi_0\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}, &
\GrpKRNbh{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} &=
\dfrac{\pi_0{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})}}{\pi_0\FolStabilizerNbh{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}, &
\GrpKRNbhIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} &=
\dfrac{\pi_0{\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})}}{\pi_0\FolStabilizerNbhIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}}.
$$
Our aim is to prove the following statement extending [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Corollary 7.2] to non-orientable case and deduce from it several useful results.
\[th:hom\_equ\] [cf. [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Corollary 6.1], [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Corollary 7.2].]{} Let ${{\Nman}}$ be a compact surface, ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Nman}},\Pman)}$, ${{\Yman}}\subset{{\Nman}}$ be a compact ${{\func}}$-adopted submanifold, and ${\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}}$ be an ${{\func}}$-regular neighborhood of ${{\Yman}}$. Then the following inclusions are homotopy equivalences: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ:SfNX_SfnbX_SfX}
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}}} \ \subset \
{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})} \ \subset \
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}, \\
\label{equ:SprfNX_SprfnbX_SprfX}
\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}}} \ \subset \
{\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},{{\Yman}})} \ \subset \
\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}, \\
\label{equ:DeltafNX_DeltafnbX_DeltafX}
\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}}} \ \subset \
\FolStabilizerNbh{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} \ \subset \
\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}, \\
\label{equ:DeltaPrfNX_DeltaPrfnbX_DeltaPrfX}
\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}}} \ \subset \
\FolStabilizerNbhIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}} \ \subset \
\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}},{{\Yman}}}.\end{aligned}$$
The case when ${{\Nman}}$ is orientable is proved in [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014]. So our aim is to extend it to the case when ${{\Nman}}$ is non-orientable. In fact the proof is an adaptation of [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 7.1] similar to [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Lemma 4.14] and therefore we only indicate the principal arguments.
Also notice that similarly to [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Corollary 7.2] it suffices to prove that the inclusions are homotopy equivalences, so they induce bijections between the path components of the corresponding groups, and the inclusions of the corresponding path components are homotopy equivalences.
Indeed, notice that the groups in are intersections of the corresponding groups from with the path component $\DiffId({{\Nman}})$ of the larger group $\Diff({{\Nman}})$. If a path component $\mathcal{K}$ of any group in intersects $\DiffId({{\Nman}})$, then $\mathcal{K}$ is contained in $\DiffId({{\Nman}})$. Hence the inclusions yield bijections between the path components of the corresponding groups, and due to the inclusions of path components are homotopy equivalences.
The deduction that and are homotopy equivalences is similar.
Thus assume that ${{\Nman}}$ is a non-orientable connected compact surface. Consider its oriented double covering $p\colon {{\Mman}}\to{{\Nman}}$, and let $\xi\colon {{\Mman}}\to {{\Mman}}$ be the corresponding $\Cinfty$ diffeomorphism without fixed points generating the group $\bZ_2$ of covering transformations, that is $\xi^2=\id_{{{\Mman}}}$ and $p\circ\xi= p$.
Denote ${{g}}= {{\func}}\circ p: {{\Mman}}\to\Pman$, ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$, and ${\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}= p^{-1}({\Uman_{{{\Yman}}}})$. Then ${{g}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, ${{\Yman}}\subset{{\Nman}}$ is a compact ${{g}}$-adopted submanifold of ${{\Mman}}$, and ${\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}$ is a ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood of ${{\Xman}}$.
Fix a Hamiltonian like vector field ${F}$ for ${{g}}$ on ${{\Mman}}$ and let ${\mathbf{F}}:{{\Mman}}\times\bR\to{{\Mman}}$ be the flow generated by ${F}$.
Let $\xi^{*}{F}= T\xi^{-1} \circ {F}\circ \xi:{{\Mman}}\to T{{\Mman}}$ be the vector field on ${{\Mman}}$ induced by $\xi$ from ${F}$. Then one can always assume, see [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Lemma 5.1 (2)], that ${F}$ is also with respect to $\xi$ in the sense that $\xi^{*}{F}= -{F}$, whence $$\label{equ:skew_symm_flow}
\xi \circ {\mathbf{F}}_t = {\mathbf{F}}_{-t} \circ \xi$$ for all $t\in\bR$. Indeed, it is necessary to replace ${F}$ with $\frac{1}{2}({F}+ \xi^*{F})$ and properly change it near critical points of $\func$ in order to preserve property \[enum:hf:local\_form\] of Definition \[def:ham\_like\_vf\].
\[lm:deform\_in\_stab\] [cf. [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 Lemma 4.14], [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 7.1].]{} Let $\mathcal{A}\subset\Stabilizer{{{g}}}$ be a subset and $\gamma\colon\mathcal{A}\to \Cinfty({{\Xman}},\bR)$ be a continuous map such that $$\label{equ:gamma_shift_func}
{{q}}(x) = {\mathbf{F}}(x, \gamma({{q}})(x))$$ for all ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}$ and $x\in{{\Xman}}$. Then for any pair $\Uman\subset{{\Vman}}$ of ${{g}}$-regular neighborhoods of ${{\Xman}}$ such that $\overline{\Uman}\subset \Int{{{\Vman}}}$, there exists a continuous map $\beta\colon\mathcal{A}\to {{\Theta({F})}}\subset \Cinfty({{\Mman}},\bR)$, see , satisfying the following conditions.
1. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_ext\_gamma\] For each ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}$ the function $\beta({{q}})$ extends $\gamma({{q}})$ to all ${{\Mman}}$, satisfies relation on $\Uman$, and vanishes on $\overline{{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}}$, that is
- $\beta({{q}}) = \gamma({{q}})$ on ${{\Xman}}$,
- ${{q}}(x)={\mathbf{F}}(x, \beta({{q}})(x))$ for all $x\in\Uman$,
- $\beta({{q}})=0$ on $\overline{{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}}$.
2. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:idW\_has\_zero\_beta\] If $\gamma({{q}})=0$ and ${{q}}$ is fixed on some ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood $\Uman' \subset \Uman$, then $\beta({{q}})\equiv0$ on $\Uman'$ as well.
3. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:homotopy\] The homotopy $H\colon \mathcal{A} \times I\to\Stabilizer{{{g}}}$ defined by $$H({{q}},t)=({\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})})^{-1}\circ {{q}}$$ has the following properties:
1. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:homotopy:a\] $H_0=\id_{\mathcal{A}}$ and $H_1(\mathcal{A})\subset\Stabilizer{{{g}},\Uman}$, so it deforms $\mathcal{A}$ in $\Stabilizer{{{g}}}$ into $\Stabilizer{{{g}},\Uman}$;
2. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:homotopy:b\] if $\gamma({{q}})\equiv0$ and ${{q}}$ is fixed on some ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood $\Uman' \subset \Uman$, then $H_t({{q}})$ is fixed on $\Uman'$ for all $t\in[0,1]$ as well.
Suppose in addition that ${F}$ is skew-symmetric, that is $\xi^{*}{F}=-{F}$, and either of the following conditions hold:
1. \[enum:skewsym:saddles\] every connected component of ${{\Xman}}$ contains a critical point of ${{g}}$ being not a ;
2. \[enum:skewsym:gamma\_is\_zero\] $\gamma({{q}})\equiv0$ for all ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$.
Then one can assume that
1. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_skew\_symm\] $\beta({{q}})\circ\xi=-\beta({{q}})$ for each ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$;
2. \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:skew\_symm\_Hinv\] $H\bigl( (\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}})\times I \bigr)\subset\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$, that is the set of $\xi$-symmetric diffeomorphisms remains invariant with respect to the homotopy $H$.
Statements \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_ext\_gamma\]-\[enum:deform\_in\_stab:homotopy\] constitute [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 7.1]. So we should verify statements \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_skew\_symm\] and \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:skew\_symm\_Hinv\] concerning skew-symmetric diffeomorphisms.
Let us briefly recall the idea of proof. Since ${\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}$ is a ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood of ${{\Xman}}$, for each ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}$ the function $\gamma({{q}})\colon{{\Xman}}\to\bR$ uniquely extends to a $\Cinfty$ function $\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\colon{{\Vman}}\to\bR$ such that holds on ${{\Vman}}$, that is ${{q}}(x)={\mathbf{F}}(x,\cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x))$ for all $x\in{{\Vman}}$. Moreover, the correspondence ${{q}}\to \,\cov{\gamma}({{q}})$ is a continuous map $\,\cov{\gamma}\colon\mathcal{A}\to \Cinfty({{\Vman}},\bR)$.
Fix a $\Cinfty$ function $\mu\colon {{\Mman}}\to [0,1]$ with the following properties:
- $\mu=0$ on some neighborhood of $\overline{{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}}$;
- $\mu=1$ on some neighborhood of $\overline{\Uman}$;
- ${F}(\mu)=0$, that is $\mu$ take constant values along orbits of ${F}$.
Then the required map $\beta\colon\mathcal{A}\to \Cinfty({{\Mman}},\bR)$ can be defined by $$\label{equ:beta_map}
\beta({{q}})(x)=
\begin{cases}
\cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x)\cdot \mu(x), &\text{for} \ x\in {{\Vman}},\\
0, & \text{for} \ x\in{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}.
\end{cases}$$
Suppose now that ${F}$ is skew-symmetric with respect to $\xi$. We will show below that in this case $$\label{equ:-g_xi__g}
-\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi = \cov{\gamma}({{q}}),$$ for all ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$.
Assuming that holds let us complete the proof of Lemma \[lm:deform\_in\_stab\]. Since $\Uman$ and ${{\Vman}}$ are invariant with respect to $\xi$, and $\xi$ maps orbits of ${F}$ onto orbits, one can replace the function $\mu$ with $\frac{1}{2}(\mu + \mu\circ \xi)$ not violating the above conditions on $\mu$ and thus additionally assume that $$\label{equ:mu_xi__mu}
\mu\circ \xi = \mu.$$ Now if we define $\beta$ by the same formula then conditions \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_skew\_symm\] and \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:skew\_symm\_Hinv\] will hold true.
\[enum:deform\_in\_stab:beta\_skew\_symm\] If ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$ and $x\in{{\Vman}}$, then $$\beta({{q}})\circ\xi(x) =
\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi(x) \cdot \mu \circ\xi(x)
\stackrel{\eqref{equ:-g_xi__g}, \, \eqref{equ:mu_xi__mu}}{=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=\!=}
-\cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x) \cdot \mu(x) =
-\beta({{q}})(x).$$ On the other hand, if $x\in{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}$, then $\xi(x)\in{{\Mman}}\setminus{{\Vman}}$ as well, and so $$\beta({{q}})(x) = \beta({{q}})\circ\xi(x) = 0.$$
\[enum:deform\_in\_stab:skew\_symm\_Hinv\] Notice that for each ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}\cap\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$ and $t\in[0,1]$ we have that $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})} \circ \xi(x) &=
{\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})\circ\xi(x)} (\xi(x)) \stackrel{\eqref{equ:skew_symm_flow}}{=\!=\!=}
\xi\circ {\mathbf{F}}_{-t\beta({{q}})\circ\xi(x)}(x) \stackrel{\ref{enum:deform_in_stab:beta_skew_symm}}{=\!=} \\
&=\xi\circ {\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})(x)}(x) =
\xi\circ {\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})}(x).\end{aligned}$$ This means that the map ${\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})}$ belongs to $\tStabilizer{{{g}}}$, whence $H({{q}},t)=({\mathbf{F}}_{t\beta({{q}})})^{-1}\circ {{q}}\in \tStabilizer{{{g}}}$ as well.
Thus it remains to prove . Let ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A} \cap \tStabilizer{{{g}}}$, so $$\begin{aligned}
{{q}}\circ\xi&=\xi\circ{{q}}, &
{{q}}(x) &= {\mathbf{F}}(x,\cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x))\end{aligned}$$ for all $x\in{{\Vman}}$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
{{q}}\circ \xi(x) \ &= \
{\mathbf{F}}\bigr(\xi(x), \cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi(x) \bigr) \ = \
{\mathbf{F}}_{\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ \xi(x)} \circ \xi(x) \
\stackrel{\eqref{equ:skew_symm_flow}}{=\!=\!=} \
\xi\circ {\mathbf{F}}_{ -\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi(x) }(x).
\\
\xi\circ{{q}}(x) \ &= \
\xi \circ {\mathbf{F}}\bigr(x, \cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x) \bigr) \ = \ \xi\circ {\mathbf{F}}_{\cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x)} (x).\end{aligned}$$ Hence $${\mathbf{F}}_{ -\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi(x) }(x)
= {\mathbf{F}}_{ \cov{\gamma}({{q}})(x)} (x) = {{q}}(x)$$ for all $x\in{{\Vman}}$. In other words, $-\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi$ and $\cov{\gamma}({{q}})$ are shift functions for ${{q}}$ on ${{\Vman}}$.
\[enum:skewsym:saddles\] Suppose that each connected component $\Yman$ of ${{\Xman}}$ contains either a degenerate local extreme or a saddle critical point of ${{g}}$. Then the shift map on ${{\Vman}}_{\Yman}$ is injective, that is any two shift functions for ${{q}}$ on ${{\Vman}}_{\Yman}$ must coincide. Hence $-\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi$ and $\cov{\gamma}({{q}})$ coincide on all of ${{\Vman}}$.
\[enum:skewsym:gamma\_is\_zero\] If $\gamma({{q}})\equiv0$ on all of ${{\Xman}}$, then $\gamma({{q}}) = -\gamma({{q}})\circ\xi = 0$ on ${{\Xman}}$ as well since $\xi({{\Xman}})={{\Xman}}$. Moreover, as ${{\Vman}}$ is a ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood of ${{\Xman}}$, ${{\Xman}}$ intersects interiors of all connected components of ${{\Vman}}$. It then follows from [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 6.1(ii)] that $-\cov{\gamma}({{q}})\circ\xi$ and $\cov{\gamma}({{q}})$ coincide on all of ${{\Vman}}$. Lemma \[lm:deform\_in\_stab\] is completed.
Now we can prove that the inclusions are homotopy equivalences. Due to the statement \[enum:SfX\_tStftX\] of Lemma \[lm:SttSt\] we can identify groups in with their “symmetric” variants, and so it suffices to show that the following inclusions are homotopy equivalences: $$\label{equ:t_SfNX_SfnbX_SfX}
\tStabilizer{{{g}},{\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}} \ \subset \
\tStabilizerNbh{{{g}},{{\Xman}}} \ \subset \
\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Xman}}}.$$
Let ${{\Vman}}$ be any ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood of ${\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}$, $\mathcal{A} = \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Xman}}}$, and $\gamma:\mathcal{A} \to \Cinfty({{\Xman}},\bR)$ be a constant map into the zero function. Then for each $x\in{{\Xman}}$ and ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}$ we have that $${\mathbf{F}}(x,\gamma({{q}})(x)) = {\mathbf{F}}(x,0) = x = {{q}}(x).$$ Hence by \[enum:deform\_in\_stab:skew\_symm\_Hinv\] of Lemma \[lm:deform\_in\_stab\] there exists a homotopy $H:\mathcal{A}\times I \to \Stabilizer{{{g}}}$ such that
- $H_0=\id_{\mathcal{A}}$ and $H_1(\mathcal{A}) \subset \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}}$;
- if ${{q}}\in\mathcal{A}$ is fixed on some ${{g}}$-regular neighborhood of ${{\Xman}}$ contained in ${\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}$, then so is $H_t({{q}})$ for all $t\in[0,1]$;
In other words, $H$ is a deformation of $\mathcal{A} = \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Xman}}}$ into $\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}}$ which leaves invariant $\tStabilizer{{{g}},{\Uman_{{{\Xman}}}}}$, and $\tStabilizerNbh{{{g}},{{\Xman}}}$. Hence the inclusions and therefore are homotopy equivalences.
Simplification of diffeomorphisms preserving a function by isotopy {#simplification-of-diffeomorphisms-preserving-a-function-by-isotopy .unnumbered}
------------------------------------------------------------------
Let ${{\Nman}}$ be a non-orientable compact connected surface, $p:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Nman}}$ be the orientable double covering, and $\xi:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Mman}}$ be an involution without fixed points generating the group $\bZ_2$ of covering transformations. Let also ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Nman}},\Pman)}$ and ${{g}}= {{\func}}\circ p \in {\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$. Since ${{\Mman}}$ is orientable, one can construct a skew-symmetric Hamiltonian like flow ${\mathbf{F}}$ on ${{\Mman}}$ for ${{g}}$.
Let ${{\Yman}}\subset{{\Nman}}$ be a connected ${{\func}}$-adopted subsurface and ${{\Wman}}\subset{{\Nman}}$ be an ${{\func}}$-adopted submanifold. Denote ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$ and ${{\Vman}}= p^{-1}({{\Wman}})$.
Let also $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}}$ the subset of $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}}$ consisting of diffeomorphisms ${{q}}$ admitting a $\Cinfty$ function $\alpha_{{{q}}}:{{\Xman}}\to\bR$ with the following properties:
1. ${{q}}(x) = {\mathbf{F}}(x,\alpha_{{{q}}}(x))$ for all $x\in\Xman$;
2. $\alpha_{{{q}}}=0$ on ${{\Xman}}\cap{{\Vman}}$.
Denote $$\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}}:= \Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}} \cap \tDiff({{\Mman}}).$$ Evidently, we have the following inclusion: $$\label{equ:}
\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}} \ \subset \ \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}; {{\Xman}}},$$ since for each ${{q}}\in\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}}$ one can set $\alpha_{{{q}}}\equiv 0$ on ${{\Xman}}$.
Using isomorphism $s$ from put $$\begin{aligned}
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}} & := s^{-1}\bigl( \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}} \bigr), &
\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}} & := \FolStabilizer{{{\func}}} \cap \Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}}.\end{aligned}$$
Then we obviously have the following inclusions: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ:inclusions_DfVX_SfVX}
\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}}\cup{{\Yman}}} &\subset \FolStabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}},
&
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}}\cup{{\Yman}}} &\subset \Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}}\end{aligned}$$
\[cor:SX\_Sidf\][cf. [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Corollary 7.3].]{} Let ${{\Nman}}$ be a compact surface (orientable or not), ${{\func}}\in{\mathcal{F}({{\Nman}},\Pman)}$, ${{\Wman}}$ be an ${{\func}}$-adapted submanifold, and ${{\Yman}}$ be a connected ${{\func}}$-adapted subsurface containing at least one saddle critical point of ${{\func}}$. Then the inclusions are homotopy equivalences.
Since $\FolStabilizer{{{\func}}}$ consists of path components of $\Stabilizer{\func}$, it suffices to show only that the second inclusion is a homotopy equivalence.
For orientable ${{\Nman}}$ this statement coincides with [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Corollary 7.3]. Let us briefly recall the main steps of its proof. Since ${{\Yman}}$ is connected and contains saddle critical points of ${{\func}}$, one can show that for every ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}}$ the function $\alpha_{{{h}}}$ is unique and the correspondence ${{h}}\mapsto\alpha_{{{h}}}$ is a continuous map $\gamma:\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}} \to \Cinfty({{\Yman}},\bR)$. Then a deformation of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}}$ into $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}}\cup{{\Yman}}}$ can be deduced from [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 7.1] which is the same as Lemma \[lm:deform\_in\_stab\].
Suppose ${{\Nman}}$ is non-orientable. Let $p:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Nman}}$ be the orientable double covering, and $\xi:{{\Mman}}\to{{\Mman}}$ be an involution without fixed points generating the group $\bZ_2$ of covering transformations, ${{g}}= {{\func}}\circ p \in {\mathcal{F}({{\Mman}},\Pman)}$, and ${F}$ be a skew-symmetric Hamiltonian like vector field for ${{g}}$ on ${{\Mman}}$. Denote ${{\Xman}}= p^{-1}({{\Yman}})$ and ${{\Vman}}= p^{-1}({{\Wman}})$. Then, by the orientable case, the inclusion $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}} \subset \Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}}$ is a homotopy equivalence. Moreover, by \[enum:skewsym:saddles\] and \[enum:skewsym:gamma\_is\_zero\] of Lemma \[lm:deform\_in\_stab\] the deformation of $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}}$ to $\Stabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}}$ preserves $\xi$-symmetric diffeomorphisms, which implies that the inclusion $\tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}} \subset \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}}$ is a homotopy equivalence as well.
Finally, we have isomorphisms of topological groups : $$\begin{aligned}
&s:\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}}\cup{{\Yman}}} \to \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}}\cup{{\Xman}}}, &
&s:\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}} \to \tStabilizer{{{g}},{{\Vman}};{{\Xman}}},\end{aligned}$$ whence the inclusion $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}}\cup{{\Yman}}} \subset \Stabilizer{{{\func}},{{\Wman}};{{\Yman}}}$ is a homotopy equivalence as well.
Functions on annulus {#sect:func_on_annulus}
====================
\[lm:cyl:rel\_StStIsotId\] Let ${{A}}= S^1\times[0,1]$ and $\func\in{\mathcal{F}({{A}},\Pman)}$. Then we have the following commutative diagram $$\label{equ:iso:i0StfdC}
\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix{
0 \ar[r] & \pi_0\FolStabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \ar[rr]^-{j} \ar[d]_-{\cong} &&
\pi_0\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{A}}} \ar[d]^-{\psi}_-{\cong} \ar[r] &
\GrpKR{{{\func}},\partial{{A}}} \ar[d]_-{\cong} \ar[r] & 0 \\
0 \ar[r] & \bZ \times \pi_0\FolStabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}} \ar@{^(->}[rr]^-{\id_{\bZ} \times j} &&
\bZ \times \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}} \ar[r] &
\GrpKRIsotId{{{\func}},\partial{{A}}} \ar[r] & 0
}
\end{aligned}$$ in which $j$ is induced by the inclusion $\FolStabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \subset\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$, the rows are exact, and vertical arrows are isomorphisms.
Let $\Uman$ be an $\func$-regular neighborhood of $\partial{{A}}$. Then one can construct a Dehn twist $\tau:{{A}}\to{{A}}$ along $S^1\times0$ supported in $\Uman$ and preserving $\func$, that is $\tau\in\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$, see e.g. [@Maksymenko:AGAG:2006 §6].
It is well known that the mapping class group $\pi_0\Diff({{A}},\partial{{A}})$ is freely generated by the isotopy class of $\tau$, so we have the following sequence of homomorphisms $$\alpha\colon
\Diff({{A}},\partial{{A}}) \xrightarrow{~~~~}
\frac{\Diff({{A}},\partial{{A}})}{\DiffId({{A}},\partial{{A}})} \equiv \pi_0\Diff({{A}},\partial{{A}})
\xrightarrow{~~\cong~~} \bZ,$$ where the first arrow is a natural homomorphism into the mapping class group of ${{A}}$ rel. $\partial{{A}}$ associating to each $\dif\in\Diff({{A}},\partial{{A}})$ its isotopy class, and the last arrow is an isomorphism. One can also assume that $q(\tau) = 1$. Hence the restriction of $\alpha$ to $\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$: $$\beta = \alpha|_{ \Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}}: \Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \to \bZ$$ is surjective. Moreover, $$\ker(\beta) = \Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \cap \ker(\alpha) =
\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \cap \DiffId({{A}},\partial{{A}}) =:
\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}}.$$ Hence we have the following short exact sequence: $$\label{equ:short_seq_cyl}
1 \to \StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}}
\to \Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \xrightarrow{~~\beta~~} \bZ \to 1,$$ and $\beta$ admits a right inverse $\sigma:\bZ\to\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ defined by $\sigma(k) = \tau^k$, i.e. $\beta\circ\sigma=\id_{\bZ}$.
Due to there is an isomorphism induced by the natural inclusion: $$\pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Uman} \cong \pi_0 \StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}},$$ whence reduces to the following exact sequence: $$1 \to \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Uman}
\to \pi_0\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}} \xrightarrow{~~\hat{\beta}~~} \bZ \to 1,$$ in which $\hat{\beta}$ admits a right inverse $\hat{\sigma}:\bZ\to\pi_0\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ given by $\hat{\sigma}(k) = [\tau]^k$, $k\in\bZ$.
Since $\tau$ is supported in $\Uman$, it follows that $\tau$ commutes with each $\dif\in\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Uman}$. Therefore the subgroups $\pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\Uman}$ and $\langle [\tau] \rangle \cong\bZ$ mutually commute and generate all the group $\pi_0\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$. Hence an isomorphism can be defined by $$\psi([\dif]) = \bigl(\beta(\dif), [\dif \circ \tau^{-\beta(\dif)}] \bigr),$$ for $\dif\in\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$.
Regarding $\pi_0\FolStabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ as a subgroup of $\pi_0\Stabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$, one easily checks that $\psi$ maps $\pi_0\FolStabilizer{\func,\partial{{A}}}$ onto $\bZ \times \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{\func,\partial{{A}}}$, whence left and right vertical arrows in are isomorphisms.
Proof of Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\] {#sect:th:2}
====================================
By Theorem \[th:unique\_cr\_level\] there exists a unique a critical component ${K}$ of some level-set of ${{\func}}$ such that if ${{\Wman}}$ is an ${{\func}}$-regular neighborhood of ${K}$, and ${{\Yman}_{0}}, {{\Yman}_{1}}, \dots, {{\Yman}_{n}}$ are all the connected components of $\overline{{{B}}\setminus{{\Wman}}}$ enumerated so that $\partial{{B}}\subset{{\Yman}_{0}}$, then ${{\Yman}_{0}}$ is an annulus $S^1\times[0,1]$, each ${{\Yman}_{k}}$, $k=1,\ldots,n$, is a $2$-disk, see Figure \[fig:func\_mb\_2crpt\].
![[]{data-label="fig:func_mb_2crpt"}](exmp_func_cyl_mb_2crpt){height="3cm"}
There is also a natural action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}= \{{{\Yman}_{1}}, \dots, {{\Yman}_{n}}\} \times\{\pm 1\}$.
Proof that $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ freely acts on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$. {#proof-that-stabilizerfuncpartialbqman_func-freely-acts-on-hatmathbfy. .unnumbered}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us glue $\partial{{B}}$ with a $2$-disk and denote the obtained surface (being therefore a projective plane) with $\hat{B}$. Let also $\hat{Y}_i$, $i=0,1,\ldots,n$, be the connected component of $\hat{B}\setminus{K}$ containing ${{\Yman}_{i}}$. Then we have a CW-partition $\Xi$ of $\hat{B}$ whose $0$-cells are critical points of ${{\func}}$ belonging to ${K}$, $1$-cells are connected components of the complement ${K}\setminus\fSing$, and $2$-cells are $\{ \hat{Y}_i \}_{i=0,\ldots,n}$.
Notice that each ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}$ extends to a unique $\hat{{{h}}}$ of $\hat{B}$ fixed on $\hat{B}\setminus{{B}}$. Moreover, since ${{h}}({K})={K}$, it also follows that $\hat{{{h}}}$ is $\Xi$-cellular, i.e. it induces a permutation of cells of $\Xi$.
Suppose $\hat{{{h}}}(e)=e$ for some cell $e$ of $\Xi$. If either
- $\dim e = 0$ or
- $\dim e = 1,2$ and $\hat{{{h}}}$ preserves its orientation
then we will say that $e$ is . In particular, $\hat{{{h}}}$ has a $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant cell $\hat{Y}_0$.
Since $\hat{{{h}}}$ is also isotopic to $\id_{\hat{B}}$, its Lefschetz number $L(\hat{{{h}}}) = \chi(\hat{B}) = 1$. Then it follows from [@Maksymenko:MFAT:2010 Corollary 5.6] that
- either the number of $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant cells of $\Xi$ is $\chi(\hat{B})=1$, or
- all cells of $\Xi$ are $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant.
Suppose ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{i}},+)=({{\Yman}_{i}},+)$ for some $i\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$. Then $\hat{Y}_i$ is $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant, and so $\hat{{{h}}}$ has at least $2 > 1$ $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant cells. Hence all cells of $\Xi$ are $\hat{{{h}}}^{+}$-invariant, which implies that ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{j}},+)=({{\Yman}_{j}},+)$ for all other $j\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$. This means that the action of $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}}/{\Qman_{\func}}$ on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ is free.
To construct isomorphism we need the following two lemmas.
\[lm:Gf\_SfdM\_W\] ${\Qman_{\func}}= \Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}}$.
Let ${{h}}\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}};{{\Wman}}}$. Then Corollary \[cor:SX\_Sidf\] implies that ${{h}}$ is isotopic in $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}};{{\Wman}}}$ to a diffeomorphism ${{h}}'\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}}}$. Hence ${{h}}$ and ${{h}}'$ act on ${\hat{{\mathbf{Y}}}}$ in the same way. But ${{h}}'$ is fixed on ${{\Wman}}$, and so on $\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}$ for all $i=1,\ldots,k$. Whence ${{h}}'$ leaves invariant each ${{\Yman}_{i}}$ and preserves its orientation, that is ${{h}}'\in{\Qman_{\func}}$. Therefore so does $\dif$, and thus $\dif\in{\Qman_{\func}}$ as well, i.e. $\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}} \subset {\Qman_{\func}}$.
Conversely, let ${{h}}\in{\Qman_{\func}}$, $p:{{A}}\to{{B}}$ be the oriented double covering of ${{B}}$, and ${{q}}= s({{h}}) \in \tStabilizer{{{g}},\partial{{A}}}$ be a unique lifting of ${{h}}$ fixed on $\partial{{A}}$. Then for each $i=1,\ldots,n$ the preimage $p^{-1}({{\Yman}_{i}})$ consists of two connected components ${{\Xman}_{i}}'$ and ${{\Xman}_{i}}''$, see Figure \[fig:func\_mb\_2crpt\]. The assumption that ${{h}}({{\Yman}_{i}})={{\Yman}_{i}}$ and ${{h}}$ preserves orientation of ${{\Yman}_{i}}$ means that ${{q}}$ leaves invariant both ${{\Xman}_{i}}'$ and ${{\Xman}_{i}}''$ and preserves their orientations. Hence by [@Maksymenko:DefFuncI:2014 Lemma 7.4], ${{q}}$ has a unique shift function $\alpha_{{{q}}}:p^{-1}({{\Wman}}) \to \bR$. In other words, ${{q}}\in\tStabilizer{{{g}},\partial{{A}};p^{-1}({{\Wman}})}$, whence by definition ${{h}}=s^{-1}({{q}}) = \rho({{q}})\in\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}};{{\Wman}}}$.
\[lm:pi0StfdM\_U\] There exists a commutative diagram $$\xymatrix{
\pi_0\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}} \ar[rrr]^-{j} \ar[d]^-{\cong} &&&
\pi_0\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}} \ar[d]^-{\psi}_-{\cong} \\
\bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} \pi_0\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}} \ar[rrr]^-{\id_{\bZ} \times j_0\times \cdots \times j_n} &&&
\bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}}
}$$ where $j, j_0,\ldots,j_n$ are induced by natural inclusions and the vertical arrows are isomorphisms. In particular, we get an isomorphism : $$\pi_0{\Qman_{\func}}\cong \pi_0 \Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}} \cong
\bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} \pi_0\StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}} =
\bZ \times \prod_{i=0}^{n} {\mathcal{P}_{\func}({{\Yman}_{i}})}.$$
As $j$ is a monomorphism, it suffices to construct an isomorphism $\psi$ inducing left arrow. Due to Theorem \[th:hom\_equ\] and Corollary \[cor:SX\_Sidf\] the following inclusions are homotopy equivalences: $$\begin{gathered}
{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}})}
\ \subset \
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}}}
\ \subset \
\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}};{{\Wman}}},\end{gathered}$$ whence we need to compute the group $\pi_0 {\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}})}$ instead. Further notice that there is a natural isomorphism $$\begin{aligned}
&\alpha:
{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}})} \ \to \
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} {\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})}, &
\alpha({{h}}) &= \bigl( {{h}}|_{{{\Yman}_{0}}}, \ldots, {{h}}|_{{{\Yman}_{n}}} \bigr),\end{aligned}$$ for ${{h}}\in{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}})}$ inducing isomorphism of the corresponding $\pi_0$-groups: $$\begin{aligned}
\pi_0{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}},\partial{{B}}\cup{{\Wman}})} &\cong
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} \pi_0{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})}.\end{aligned}$$ Since ${{\Yman}_{0}}$ is an annulus, we get from Lemma \[lm:cyl:rel\_StStIsotId\] that $$\pi_0{\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{0}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{0}})} \ \cong \
\bZ \times \pi_0{\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{0}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{0}})}. $$ Moreover, ${\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})} = {\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})}$ for all others $2$-disks ${{\Yman}_{i}}$, $i=1,\ldots,n$, and so $$\pi_0 {\Stab_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})} =
\pi_0 {\Stab'_{{{\mathrm{nb}}}}({{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}})} \cong
\pi_0 \StabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\,\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}}.$$ This gives the required isomorphism $\psi$.
It remains to note that $\psi$ maps $\pi_0\FolStabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}}$ (regarded a subgroup of $\pi_0\Stabilizer{{{\func}},\partial{{B}}; {{\Wman}}}$) onto $\bZ \times \prod\limits_{i=0}^{n} \pi_0\FolStabilizerIsotId{{{\func}}|_{{{\Yman}_{i}}},\partial{{\Yman}_{i}}}$. We leave the details to the reader.
Theorem \[th:pi0S\_struct\] is completed.
[10]{}
A. V. Bolsinov and A. T. Fomenko. . Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2004. Geometry, topology, classification, Translated from the 1999 Russian original.
Ketty A. de Rezende, Guido G. E. Ledesma, Oziride Manzoli-Neto, and Gioia M. Vago. Lyapunov graphs for circle valued functions. , 245:62–91, 2018.
B. Feshchenko. Actions of finite groups and smooth functions on surfaces. , 22(3):210–219, 2016.
B. G. Feshchenko. Deformation of smooth functions on $2$-torus whose [K]{}ronrod-[R]{}eeb graphs is a tree. In [*Topology of maps of low-dimensional manifolds*]{}, volume 12 of [*Pr. Inst. Mat. Nats. Akad. Nauk Ukr. Mat. Zastos.*]{}, pages 204–219. Natsīonal. Akad. Nauk Ukraïni, Īnst. Mat., Kiev, 2015.
A. S. Kronrod. On functions of two variables. , 5(1(35)):24–134, 1950.
E. A. Kudryavtseva. Special framed [M]{}orse functions on surfaces. , (4):14–20, 2012.
E. A. Kudryavtseva. The topology of spaces of [M]{}orse functions on surfaces. , 92(1-2):219–236, 2012. Translation of Mat. Zametki [[**[9]{}**]{}2]{} (2012), no. 2, 241–261.
E. A. Kudryavtseva. On the homotopy type of spaces of [M]{}orse functions on surfaces. , 204(1):75–113, 2013.
E. A. Kudryavtseva. Topology of spaces of functions with prescribed singularities on the surfaces. , 93(3):264–266, 2016.
S. Maksymenko. Homotopy types of stabilizers and orbits of [M]{}orse functions on surfaces. , 29(3):241–285, 2006.
S. Maksymenko. Homotopy dimension of orbits of [M]{}orse functions on surfaces. , 18:39–44, 2008.
S. Maksymenko. Functions on surfaces and incompressible subsurfaces. , 16(2):167–182, 2010.
S. Maksymenko. Functions with isolated singularities on surfaces. , 7(4):7–66, 2010.
S. Maksymenko. Homotopy types of right stabilizers and orbits of smooth functions on surfaces. , 64(9):1186–1203, 2012.
S. Maksymenko. Deformations of functions on surfaces by isotopic to the identity diffeomorphisms. page arXiv:math/1311.3347, 2014.
S. Maksymenko and B. Feshchenko. Homotopy properties of spaces of smooth functions on 2-torus. , 66(9):1205–1212, 2014.
S. Maksymenko and B. Feshchenko. Orbits of smooth functions on $2$-torus and their homotopy types. , 44(1):67–84, 2015.
S. Maksymenko and B. Feshchenko. Smooth functions on $2$-torus whose [K]{}ronrod-[R]{}eeb graph contains a cycle. , 21(1):22–40, 2015.
Georges Reeb. . Actualités Sci. Ind., no. 1183. Hermann & Cie., Paris, 1952. Publ. Inst. Math. Univ. Strasbourg 11, pp. 5–89, 155–156.
Francis Sergeraert. Un théorème de fonctions implicites sur certains espaces de [F]{}réchet et quelques applications. , 5:599–660, 1972.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We combine the next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) QCD corrections to lepton-pair production through the Drell-Yan mechanism with the next-to-leading order (NLO) electroweak corrections within the framework of the FEWZ simulation code. Control over both sources of higher-order contributions is necessary for measurements where percent-level theoretical predictions are crucial, and in phase-space regions where the NLO electroweak corrections grow large. The inclusion of both corrections in a single simulation code eliminates the need to separately incorporate such effects as final-state radiation and electroweak Sudakov logarithms when comparing many experimental results to theory. We recalculate the NLO electroweak corrections in the complex-mass scheme for both massless and massive final-state leptons, and modify the QCD corrections in the original FEWZ code to maintain consistency with the complex-mass scheme to the lowest order. We present phenomenological results for LHC studies that include both NNLO QCD and NLO electroweak corrections. In addition, we study several interesting kinematics features induced by experimental cuts in the distribution of photon radiation at the LHC.'
author:
- Ye Li
- Frank Petriello
title: '**Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in FEWZ**'
---
Introduction
============
The Drell-Yan (DY) production [@Drell:1970wh] of lepton pairs through the exchange of a $Z$-boson or virtual photon plays a critical role at the LHC. The relative ease of identifying two leptons leads to a very clean channel for detector calibration and performance studies [@Haywood:1999qg]. The DY process can serve as a luminosity monitor [@Dittmar:1997md] because of its relatively large production rate, and can be used to perform precision electroweak (EW) measurements [@Chatrchyan:2011ya] and constrain parton distribution functions (PDFs) [@pdf]. Moreover, the study of hadronic dilepton production in the high invariant-mass region could reveal signs of new physics.
All of these uses require theoretical predictions at the percent level of precision. The largest correction to the leading-order predictions comes from quantum chromodynamics (QCD). QCD corrections to DY production up to the next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) in the strong coupling constant have been previously calculated, both for the inclusive cross section [@Hamberg:1990np] and for differential quantities [@Anastasiou:2003yy; @Anastasiou:2003ds; @Melnikov:2006di; @Melnikov:2006kv; @Catani:2009sm; @Catani:2010en]. We have previously implemented the fully differential corrections to the DY process in the form of the flexible parton-level simulation code FEWZ ([**F**]{}ully [**E**]{}xclusive ${\bf W}$ and ${\bf Z}$ Production) [@Melnikov:2006kv; @Gavin:2010az; @Gavin:2012kw]. Using FEWZ, predictions for arbitrary kinematic distributions can be obtained, and for most such observables the estimated theoretical uncertainty from higher-order QCD effects is a few percent. However, at this level of precision the full EW correction at next-to-leading (NLO) cannot be neglected. The NLO EW effects are known [@Berends:1984qa; @Berends:1984xv; @Baur:1997wa; @Baur:2001ze; @CarloniCalame:2007cd; @Dittmaier:2009cr], and have been implemented in several public codes such as ZGRAD2 [@Baur:1997wa; @Baur:2001ze] and HORACE [@CarloniCalame:2007cd]. One major effect of the EW correction comes from photon radiation from the final-state leptons, which can lead to large logarithmic corrections sensitive to the lepton mass or calorimeter setting. The weak correction in the high-energy Sudakov regime [@Ciafaloni:2000df; @ciafaloni; @Fadin:1999bq; @Kuhn:1999nn] can also cause a significant deviation from the leading order contribution.
In this manuscript, we combine the NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to DY production of lepton pairs in a new version of the FEWZ code. We rederive the EW one-loop correction using the complex mass scheme (CMS). The higher-order contributions from both the QCD and the EW theory are simply summed together to achieve ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)+{\cal O}(\alpha_{EW})$ accuracy. In addition to providing the needed theoretical control over multiple sources of higher-order corrections, the inclusion of EW effects in FEWZ also eliminates the need to unfold photonic radiative effects before comparing data to theory, as is currently done in LHC studies. For completeness, we also include the photon-induced dilepton production channel at the lowest order in perturbation theory if the selected PDF set comes with a photon distribution.
The features of the upgraded FEWZ are summarized below.
- The user can either choose from two hard-coded schemes for the input parameters, the $\alpha(M_Z)$ or $G_{\mu} $ scheme, or specify each coupling manually as in the original FEWZ. However, if the user decides to manually input the coupling parameters, only the QED corrections will be included in order to protect gauge invariance.
- Two different modes corresponding to either a zero or a non-zero lepton mass can be chosen. Massless leptons lead to collinear divergences, and therefore photon-lepton recombination must be applied when their separation drops below a certain detector resolution limit. If no recombination procedure is performed and massive leptons are selected, the predictions become sensitive to logarithms of the lepton mass.
- Histograms of photonics variables, such as the photon $p_T$ and photon-lepton separation, have been added. They can be specified in the histogram configuration file.
In order to demonstrate the features of the updated FEWZ, we present numerous phenomenological results that can be compared to LHC data. We first check the results of our calculation of the NLO EW corrections against previous results in the literature [@Dittmaier:2009cr], and find excellent agreement across a broad variety of observables. We then proceed to present results for DY production at the LHC that demonstrate the interplay between QCD and EW effects. We also study the effects of photon radiation in the DY process at the LHC, and point out several interesting kinematic features that occur as a result of the imposed experimental cuts. Our combination of fixed-order QCD at NNLO with the NLO EW corrections is complementary to other efforts which combine NLO QCD plus parton-shower effects with the EW corrections to $W$-boson production [@Bernaciak:2012hj; @Barze:2012tt].
This manuscript is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:conv\], we present our conventions, discuss different input parameter schemes, and introduce the complex-mass scheme for unstable particles. In Section \[sec:corr\], we discuss in detail our implementation of the complex mass scheme and adapt the original QCD calculation to the complex-mass scheme. Numerical results are presented in Section \[sec:result\] and compared to the previous literature. Histograms of phenomenologically interesting observables at the LHC and the effect of different lepton identification procedures are studied in detail. We conclude in Section \[sec:conc\].
Setup and conventions \[sec:conv\]
==================================
Only three parameters are needed as basic inputs in the electroweak theory in addition to the fermion masses. We study here two different input schemes, both of which use the $W$ and $Z$ masses as the first two input parameters. The last input parameter is given by either the Fermi constant in the $G_{\mu}$ scheme, or the effective electromagnetic coupling at the $Z$ mass in the $\alpha(M_Z)$ scheme. At tree level, the effective electromagnetic coupling can be derived from the Fermi constant as $\alpha_{G_{\mu}}=\sqrt{2} G_{\mu} M_W^2(1-M_W^2/M_Z^2)$. We do not consider the fine structure constant as an input-parameter option because it receives large logarithmic corrections of the form $\alpha \ln m_f^2$, induced by light fermion masses in gauge boson self-energy insertions. The effective coupling $\alpha(M_Z)$ resums the above logarithms by running the effective electromagnetic coupling from the scale $Q=0$ to $M_Z$. The Fermi constant $G_{\mu}$ is derived from the effective theory describing the weak force in low energy processes. It is most precisely measured in muon decay and receives a radiative correction denoted as $\Delta r$, which contains $\Delta \alpha(M_Z)$. $\Delta r$ additionally contains $\Delta \rho$, which accounts for the running of the weak mixing angle and receives isospin-violating corrections induced by the heavy top-quark mass. The $G_{\mu}$ input parameter scheme has been shown to be the choice most stable against higher order EW corrections [@Dittmaier:2009cr] and therefore is our default option here. We list below the Standard Model parameters used in the updated FEWZ code: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SMparams}
G_{\mu} = 1.16637 \times 10^{-5}~\textrm{GeV}^{-2} &,& ~ \nonumber \\
\alpha(0) = 1/137.035999911 &,& \alpha(M_{Z}) = 1/128.91 ~, \nonumber\\
M_{Z,OS} = 91.1876~\textrm{GeV} &,& \Gamma_{Z,OS} = 2.4952~\textrm{GeV} ~, \nonumber\\
M_{W,OS} = 80.403~\textrm{GeV} &,& \Gamma_{W,OS} = 2.141~\textrm{GeV} ~, \nonumber\\
m_{e} = 5.1099891 \times 10^{-4}~\textrm{GeV} &,& m_{\mu} = 0.105658369~\textrm{GeV} ~,\nonumber\\
m_t=172.9~\textrm{GeV} &,& m_H=125~\textrm{GeV} ~.\end{aligned}$$ The subscript $OS$ denotes the on-shell values of the masses and widths. The fine structure constant $\alpha(0)$ is only used for the photon-induced process. We note that the corrections are insensitive to the choice of Higgs boson mass $m_H$.
We begin our discussion of the complex-mass by rewriting the on-shell expressions for the $W$ and $Z$ propagators in terms of the real and imaginary parts of their complex-plane poles: $$\frac{1} {s-M_{V,OS}^2+i s \Gamma_{V,OS}/M_{V,OS} \theta(s)} = \frac{1} {s-M_V^2+i \Gamma_V M_V } \left(1 + \mathcal{O}( \frac{\Gamma_V}{M_V})\right),$$ where $V$ stands for either the $W$-boson or $Z$-boson. We have assumed massless decay products in writing the left-hand side of this equation. In the right-hand side we have identified $$M_{W/Z}=\frac{M_{W/Z,OS}}{\sqrt{1+\Gamma_{W/Z,OS}^2/M_{W/Z,OS}^2}},
\Gamma_{W/Z}=\frac{\Gamma_{W/Z,OS}}{\sqrt{1+\Gamma_{W/Z,OS}^2/M_{W/Z,OS}^2}}.$$ The correct description of unstable particles produced on resonance is usually accomplished through Dyson resummation of self-energy insertions. It unavoidably introduces a mixing of perturbative orders and ruins gauge invariance if done incorrectly. It is especially tricky for unstable particles running in loops, since the resonant term cannot be simply factored out before the loop integration is performed. The complex mass scheme is a prescription that consistently uses complex masses everywhere for unstable particles. The complex masses of the $W$ and $Z$ gauge bosons are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\mu_W^2 &=& M_W^2-i M_W \Gamma_W = \frac{M_{W,OS}^2-i M_{W,OS} \Gamma_{W,OS}}{1+\Gamma_{W,OS}^2/M_{W,OS}^2} \nonumber\\
\mu_Z^2 &=& M_Z^2-i M_Z \Gamma_Z = \frac{M_{Z,OS}^2-i M_{Z,OS} \Gamma_{Z,OS}}{1+\Gamma_{Z,OS}^2/M_{Z,OS}^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $M_{W/Z,OS}$ and $\Gamma_{W/Z,OS}$ are the mass and width of each boson respectively; their numerical values are given in Eq. (\[SMparams\]). The weak mixing angle is given by $s_W^2=1-c_W^2=1-\mu_W^2/\mu_Z^2$, resulting in complex couplings of the fermions to the $Z$ and $W$ bosons. All relations following from gauge invariance are preserved because the masses are only modified by analytic continuation. Although the proof of unitarity order-by-order using the Cutkosky cutting rule no longer holds, the spurious terms are of higher order in the perturbation series as long as the width is a higher order object with respect to the mass. It should be noted that unstable particles should not be used as external particles in the computation of S-matrix elements [@Denner:2006ic].
There are other schemes which do not rely on complex parameters to cope with unstable particles in the propagator, such as the on-shell (OS) scheme and the pole scheme (PS). The OS scheme requires that a running width which vanishes at zero-momentum is kept after Dyson resummation. Otherwise an artificial infrared divergence would appear from the contribution of the would-be Goldstone boson in the case with finite fermion mass [@Dittmaier:2002nd]. The OS scheme also requires the running width to be kept in the propagator during the loop integration in order to describe the resonance correctly without spoiling gauge invariance. The PS takes advantage of the fact that the residue on the resonance peak is gauge invariant. The cross section in the pole scheme for the $Z$ boson can be schematically written as: $$d \sigma = \frac{A_{resonant} (s=M_Z^2)}{s-M_Z^2+ i M_Z \Gamma_Z }
+\frac{A_{resonant}(s)-A_{resonant}(s=M_Z^2)}{s-M_Z^2} + A_{non-resonant}(s).$$ The PS and CMS only need the input of a fixed width and are therefore more convenient. Numerically the difference between the CMS and the PS, even at thresholds, has been shown to be below 0.1% [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. The PS requires the separation of the differential cross section into resonant and non-resonant piece after completing the loop calculation. The CMS requires the analytic continuation of internal masses appeared in loop integrals into the complex plane. We choose the CMS here because most of the analytic continuation has already been provided in the early literature. Moreover, the CMS generally yields smooth distributions in resonant regions. The only complication is an extra analytic continuation for two-point scalar integrals, since the renormalization procedure in the CMS requires complex masses to be assigned to the originally real-valued momenta.
The NLO EW correction to the DY process \[sec:corr\]
====================================================
We discuss here the technical details of our calculation of the NLO EW corrections to lepton-pair production. We begin by separating the gauge-invariant QED subset of the correction from the full EW result. The photonic corrections can be further split into three distinct terms: initial-state terms, final-state terms, and initial-final interference terms. Each piece is identified through coupling combinations of quark and lepton electric charges: $Q_q^2$, $Q_l^2$ and $Q_q Q_l$ respectively. We rederive the photonic correction with finite lepton mass and zero lepton mass separately, and cross-check that the results agree under appropriate choice of electromagnetic calorimeter setting if the lepton mass is small. The weak portion of the NLO EW correction consists of gauge boson self-energy insertions, weak vertex corrections, and ZZ and WW box diagrams. All fermions except for the top quark are taken to be massless in the weak corrections.
QED corrections
---------------
The virtual photonic corrections to vertices as well as the fermion wave function renormalization constant contain both ultraviolet (UV) and infrared (IR) divergences. QED gauge invariance guarantees the cancellation of UV singularities between them, so that no renormalization procedure is required for the one-loop QED correction. The soft singularity is cancelled completely by the real radiation process $q\bar{q} \to l\bar{l} \gamma$.
Due to the assumption of massless quarks in the initial state, a collinear singularity arises from initial-state photon radiation. This can be absorbed into a bare PDF in complete analogy to gluon emission in QCD. We do not introduce the photonic contribution to PDF evolution, because it is suppressed by both $\mathcal{O}(\alpha)$ and the smallness of the photon PDF itself. We use the DIS scheme in constructing the PDF counterterm. The difference compared to the $\overline{\text{MS}}$ scheme is around 10% for the initial state radiation (ISR) contribution [@Baur:1997wa]. The final state radiation (FSR) also contains a collinear singularity if the lepton is assumed to be massless. A proper procedure to combine photon and leptons when two particles travel too close together leads to a cancellation of this divergence. This always occurs experimentally for the electron, since it is hard to separate a electron from its collinear photonic radiation in the electromagnetic calorimeter. For muons, such a separation is possible and the collinear singularity is instead regulated by the finite lepton mass in the form of $\alpha \ln(m_\mu)$. A strict isolation cut on a muon will therefore lead to a considerable photonic correction to the DY cross section. The results for massless and massive leptons are equivalent to each other up to $\mathcal{O}(m_l^2/M_Z^2)$ if the same recombination procedure is applied, as the $\ln(m_l)$ dependence cancels.
The virtual box contribution in QED contains only an IR singulary, which cancels the one arising from ISR-FSR interference terms in the real radiation process. We use dimensional regularization to regulate both UV and IR poles. Integration-by-parts (IBP) identities are used in the loop integration to reduce all tensor integrals to a few master scalar integrals via fully automated computer algorithms [@Anastasiou:2004vj]. All relevant scalar integrals with complex masses are calculated by hand and checked against the existing literature [@'tHooft:1978xw; @Hahn:1998yk; @Ellis:2007qk; @Denner:2010tr].
The soft and collinear singularities in the real radiation diagrams are extracted using a modified two cut-off phase space slicing method [@Harris:2001sx]. The first cut-off $\delta_s$ defines the soft region by $E_\gamma<\delta_s \sqrt{s}/2$, where $s$ denotes the partonic center of mass energy squared. The second cut-off $\delta_c$ defines the collinear regions with respect to each fermion (incoming quarks and outgoing leptons) by $s_{f\gamma}<\delta_c s$. By approximating the matrix element in the soft and collinear limits and integrating over only the soft and collinear phase space regions, we can obtain the IR singularities analytically as $1/\epsilon$ poles in dimensional regularization. The remaining hard non-collinear phase space can be integrated numerically in four dimensions. Given sufficiently small $\delta_s$ and $\delta_c$ parameters (terms of $\mathcal{O}(\delta_s)$, $\mathcal{O}(\delta_c)$ and $\mathcal{O}(\delta_c/\delta_s)$ are dropped), the sum of soft, collinear and hard non-collinear contributions will be independent of the cut-offs. A simply illustration of the cut-off method is as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\int^1_0 \frac{f(x)}{x^{1+\epsilon}} &=& \int^\delta_0 \frac{f(x)}{x^{1+\epsilon}} + \int^1_\delta \frac{f(x)}{x^{1+\epsilon}}\\
&=& \int^\delta_0 \frac{f(0)}{x^{1+\epsilon}} + \int^1_\delta \frac{f(x)}{x} + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) + \mathcal{O}(\delta) \\
&=& \left[- \frac{f(0)}{\epsilon} + f(0) \ln(\delta) \right] + \int^1_\delta \frac{f(x)}{x},\end{aligned}$$ where we have dropped the $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$ and $\mathcal{O}(\delta)$ terms as they are infinitesimal parameters. The first term corresponds to soft and collinear contributions which are regulated via dimensional regularization. The second term corresponds to the hard non-collinear contribution which is limited by the cut-off near the phase space boundary. We can easily conclude from observation of the above formula that extremely small cut-off parameters would lead to numerical instability. To avoid such issues and reduce artificial parameter dependence in FEWZ, we further work out the analytic dependence of the cut-off parameters by introducing counterterms, shown in the example below: $$\begin{aligned}
\int^{x_0}_0 \frac{f(x)}{x^{1+\epsilon}} &=& \left[- \frac{f(0)}{\epsilon} + f(0) \ln(\delta) \right] + \int^{x_0}_\delta \frac{f(x)}{x}\\
&=& \left[- \frac{f(0)}{\epsilon} + f(0) \ln(\delta) \right] + \int^{x_0}_\delta \frac{f(x)}{x} - \int^{x_0}_\delta \frac{f(0)}{x}+ \int^{x_0}_\delta \frac{f(0)}{x}\\
&=& \left[- \frac{f(0)}{\epsilon} + f(0) \ln(\delta) \right] + \int^{x_0}_0 \frac{f(x)}{x} - \int^{x_0}_0 \left(\frac{f(0)}{x} - \frac{f(0)}{x_0} \ln(\frac{x_0}{\delta})\right).\end{aligned}$$ The third term explicitly depends on the cut-off parameter and is our desired counterterm. It essentially becomes a subtraction method [@Frixione:1995ms; @Catani:1996vz]. The approximate matrix elements in the soft and collinear regions are integrated over 2-body phase space and cancel IR singularities from virtual diagrams, which can be interpreted as converting the $1/\epsilon$ pole in dimensional regulation to the cut-off regulator. The corresponding counterterms render the integrand of the 3-body phase space finite in the soft and collinear limits, and the hard non-collinear region can be extended to the full phase space. Agreement is found numerically before and after applying the subtraction procedure and the dependence on cut-off parameters indeed vanishes. The derivation of the couterterms can be fully automated after choosing a proper parameterization of the 3-body phase space, which is done in four space-time dimensions as the cut-off now regulates IR singularities.
Weak Correction
---------------
The weak correction is decomposed into self-energy insertions of $\gamma\gamma$, $ZZ$ and $\gamma Z$ mixing contributions, corrections to the $l \bar{l} \gamma/Z$ and $q \bar{q} \gamma/Z$ vertices, and $ZZ$ and $WW$ box contributions. The leading contribution comes from two pieces: the running of the electromagnetic coupling from the scale $Q=0$ to the scale of the hard interaction, and the isospin violation due to the large mass splitting between top and bottom quarks. The former receives contributions largely from light fermion loops in the photon self energy insertion $\hat{\Pi}_{f\not=t}(M_Z^2) $. The latter can be mostly accounted for by the difference between the self-energy insertions of the $W$ and $Z$ bosons, $\Delta \rho$. We adopt most of the results for the weak correction directly from Refs. [@Dittmaier:2009cr] and [@Denner:1991kt]. The renormalization of the vertices and self energy insertions in the CMS is described in detail in Section 3.3 of Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. Because we implement only the $\alpha(M_Z)$ and $G_{\mu}$ input parameter schemes, the logarithmic dependence on the small fermion mass cancels out in the coupling renormalization, as demonstrated below.
- $\alpha(M_Z)$ scheme: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\delta g_{f\bar{f}\gamma/Z}}{g_{f\bar{f}\gamma/Z}} \supset \frac{\delta e(M_Z)}{e(M_Z)} &=&\delta Z_e - \frac{1}{2} \Delta \alpha (M_Z) \nonumber \\
&=& - \frac{s_W}{c_W} \frac{\Sigma^{\gamma Z}_{T}(0)}{\mu_Z^2} + \frac{1}{2} Re \left\{ \frac{\Sigma^{\gamma\gamma}_{T,f\not=t}(M_Z^2)}{M_Z^2} \right\};\end{aligned}$$
- $G_{\mu}$ scheme: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\delta g_{f\bar{f}\gamma/Z}}{g_{f\bar{f}\gamma/Z}} \supset \frac{\delta e_{G_{\mu}}}{e_{G_{\mu}}} &=& \delta Z_e - \frac{1}{2} \Delta r\nonumber \\
&=& - \frac{s_W}{c_W} \frac{\Sigma^{\gamma Z}_{T}(0)}{\mu_Z^2} + \frac{c_W^2}{2 s_W^2} \left( \frac{\Sigma^{ZZ}_{T}(\mu_Z^2)}{\mu_Z^2} - \frac{\Sigma^{W}_{T}(\mu_W^2)}{\mu_W^2} \right) - \frac{\Sigma^{W}_{T}(0)-\Sigma^{W}_{T}(\mu_W^2)}{2\mu_W^2} \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{c_W}{s_W}\frac{\Sigma^{\gamma Z}_{T}(0)}{\mu_Z^2} - \frac{\alpha}{8\pi s_W^2}\left( 6+\frac{7-4s_W^2}{2s_W^2}\ln(c_W^2)\right).\end{aligned}$$
Both behave well in the limit of massless fermions. We have suppressed chirality indices in our notation for simplicity. Another logarithmic dependence on light fermion mass comes from the photon and $Z$ boson wave function renormalization constants. However, they appear in both the vertex and self-energy renormalizations and nicely cancel each other. We can therefore safely neglect all light quark and lepton masses in the computation of the weak correction. Because the top quark remains the only massive particle, the CKM matrix can be treated as unity and does not need to be renormalized.
Another complication of renormalization in the CMS is due to the analytic continuation of the complex momentum appearing in two-point scalar integrals, required in the calculation of gauge boson self energy insertions. An alternative procedure has been proposed in Ref. [@Denner:2005fg] based on the expansion around real-valued masses. The error from the expansion is of $\mathcal{O}(\Gamma_Z/M_Z)$ for the $Z$ boson self-energy insertion. Special care must to be taken for charged or colored particles like the $W$ boson. The expansions break down in the presence of photon or gluon exchange, which generates terms like $(s-\mu_W^2) \ln(s-\mu_W^2)$. We instead adopt the direct approach of performing the analytic continuation. We first note that except for light fermions whose masses are assumed to be zero, all particles in the $W/Z$ boson self-energy graphs have masses greater than or equal to $M_{W/Z}$. Since the internal propagators of these particles cannot go on-shell when the incoming energy is at the mass of the $W$ or $Z$ boson, there should be no imaginary part from the loop integration. This implies that no branch cut is crossed in the integration, and the analytic continuation can be performed using the analytic expression derived for real-valued momenta. In contrast, massless fermions running in the self-energy graphs go on-shell for any time-like momentum, and the integration contour moves away from the branch cut in the direction specified by the Feynman prescription. A complex mass for the incoming momentum squared leads to the opposite pole treatment from the Feynman prescription. As we will show later, a simple addition of $2 \pi i$ to the original result will fix this issue. A detailed derivation can be found in the Appendix \[sect:acB0\].
Higher-order QCD corrections in the CMS
---------------------------------------
The application of the CMS, and specifically the complex coupling, leads to a different LO expression than the original result implemented in FEWZ. Although the difference is numerically small, we modify the QCD corrections in FEWZ in order to achieve theoretical consistency. In the limit of massless leptons, the QCD correction to dilepton production can be schematically written as: $$\begin{aligned}
d\sigma^{\gamma\gamma}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}} &\sim& \frac {Q_u^2 Q_l^2 |\mathcal{M}_u|^2 + Q_d^2 Q_l^2 |\mathcal{M}_d|^2 + 2 Q_u Q_d Q_l^2 Re[\mathcal{M}_u\mathcal{M}_d^*]} {s^2}, \nonumber\\
%\\
d\sigma^{\gamma Z}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}} &\sim& 2 \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma,\sigma',\tau=+,-} \left\{ \frac{Q_u Q_l}{s} Re\left[ \frac {g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma} g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}}{s-\mu_Z^2} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma \tau} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma' \tau *} \right]
+ \frac{Q_d Q_l}{s} Re\left[ \frac {g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma} g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}}{s-\mu_Z^2} \mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma \tau} \mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma' \tau *} \right]
\right. \nonumber\\
&& + \left. \frac{Q_u Q_l}{s} Re\left[ \frac {g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma} g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma' \tau *}\mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma \tau} }{s-\mu_Z^2} \right] + \frac{Q_d Q_l}{s} Re\left[ \frac {g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma} g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma \tau}\mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma' \tau *} }{s-\mu_Z^2} \right] \right\}, \nonumber\\
%\\
d\sigma^{ZZ}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}} &\sim& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma,\tau=+,-} \left\{ \frac{|g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma}|^2 |g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}|^2}{|{s-\mu_Z^2}|^2} |\mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma \tau}|^2 + \frac{|g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma}|^2 |g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}|^2}{|{s-\mu_Z^2}|^2} |\mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma \tau}|^2 \right\} \nonumber \\
&& + 2 \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\not=\sigma',\tau=+,-} \frac{|g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}|^2}{|{s-\mu_Z^2}|^2} \left\{ Re[g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma}g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma' *} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma \tau}\mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma' \tau *}]
+ Re[g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma}g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma' *} \mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma \tau}\mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma' \tau *}] \right\} \nonumber \\
&& + 2 \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma,\sigma',\tau=+,-} \frac{|g_{l\bar{l}Z}^{\tau}|^2}{|{s-\mu_Z^2}|^2} Re[g_{u\bar{u}Z}^{\sigma} g_{d\bar{d}Z}^{\sigma' *} \mathcal{M}_u^{\sigma \tau}\mathcal{M}_d^{\sigma' \tau *}],\end{aligned}$$
in which $d\sigma^{\gamma\gamma}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}}$, $d\sigma^{ZZ}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}}$ and $d\sigma^{\gamma Z}_{p\bar{p}\to l \bar{l}}$ are the contributions from photon, $Z$ and photon-$Z$ interference channels. $\mathcal{M}_u$ and $\mathcal{M}_d$ are matrix elements connected to the photon or $Z$ propagator through up-type quark and d-type quark vertices respectively, $\sigma$ and $\sigma'$ are chirality indices of the relevant quarks, and $\tau$ is the chirality index of the leptons. This structure is illustrated in Fig. (\[QCDcorrDY\]) where the incoming parton line, though plotted as fermion line, could represent either a quark or a gluon.
![Graphical representation of the QCD corrections to lepton pair production.[]{data-label="QCDcorrDY"}](QCDcorrDY)
We have abused the chirality index so that a plus(minus) index means the interacting fermion and anti-fermion in the vertex are right(left)-handed and left(right)-handed separately due to helicity conservation. This definition of the matrix element incorporates all QCD corrections to the initial state. We note that the chirality indices of the quarks to which the vector boson couples are not necessarily related to the polarizations of the incoming partons labeled as $i$ and $j$. All chirality combinations are summed if the indices are suppressed, and the convolution with appropriate PDFs is omitted for simplicity. The full result with all its structure intact can be restored by the following substitutions:
$$\begin{aligned}
|\mathcal{M}_{u/d}|^2 &=& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma,\tau=+,-} |\mathcal{M}^{\sigma \tau}_{u/d}|^2
+ 2 \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\not=\sigma',\tau=+,-} Re[\mathcal{M}_{u/d}^{\sigma \tau}\mathcal{M}_{u/d}^{\sigma' \tau *}], \nonumber\\
%\\
Re[\mathcal{M}_u\mathcal{M}_d^*] &=& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma,\sigma',\tau=+,-} Re[\mathcal{M}_{u}^{\sigma \tau} \mathcal{M}_{d}^{\sigma' \tau *}], \nonumber \\
%\\
|\mathcal{M}_{u/d}^{\sigma \tau}|^2 &\to& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{i,j=q,\bar{q},g} |\mathcal{M}^{\sigma \tau;i j}_{u/d}(x_1,x_2)|^2 f_{i}(x_1) f_{j}(x_2), \nonumber\\
%\\
Re[\mathcal{M}_{u/d}^{\sigma \tau} \mathcal{M}_{u/d}^{\sigma' \tau *}] &\to& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{i,j=q,\bar{q},g} Re[\mathcal{M}^{\sigma \tau;i j}_{u/d}(x_1,x_2)\mathcal{M}^{\sigma' \tau;i j *}_{u/d}(x_1,x_2)] f_{i}(x_1) f_{j}(x_2), \nonumber\\
%\\
Re[\mathcal{M}_{u}^{\sigma \tau} \mathcal{M}_{d}^{\sigma' \tau *}] &\to& \displaystyle\sum\limits_{i,j=q,\bar{q},g} Re[\mathcal{M}^{\sigma \tau;i j}_{u}(x_1,x_2)\mathcal{M}^{\sigma' \tau;i j *}_{d}(x_1,x_2)] f_{i}(x_1) f_{j}(x_2).\end{aligned}$$
In the original FEWZ, combinations of charge, vector and axial couplings were multiplied by the corresponding PDF and $\gamma/Z$ propagator, forming a luminosity function, which was then convoluted with the squared matrix elements $\mathcal{M}_{q_i}^{\sigma\tau}\mathcal{M}_{q_j}^{\sigma'\tau' *}$. Here $\sigma$, $\sigma'$, $\tau$ and $\tau'$ denote vector or axial couplings. Only the real part was kept for the squared matrix element since the luminosity function is real-valued (except for $\gamma Z$ interference terms due to the width in the $Z$ propagator; the imaginary part was neglected based on the same reason as explained below for the CMS). This is no longer true in the CMS. However, we can calculate the luminosity function with complex numbers, and take the real part in the end. By effectively neglecting the imaginary part of the squared matrix element, we change the cross section by $\mathcal{O}(\Gamma_{W/Z}/M_{W/Z}) \approx \mathcal{O}(\alpha)$. The cross section at the lowest order does not change because its matrix element is always real. We conclude that the QCD part of FEWZ is changed from the correct formula only by $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s \alpha)$, which is beyond our approximation and can be safely neglected. In practice, we can apply complex couplings in the QCD module of FEWZ by declaring the coupling constants as complex numbers and modifying the following EW coupling combinations:
$$\begin{aligned}
\left( g^\sigma_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} \right)^2 &\to& \left| g^\sigma_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} \right|^2, \nonumber\\
g^\sigma_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z} g^{\sigma'}_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z} &\to& Re\left[ g^\sigma_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z} g^{\sigma' *}_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z} \right].\end{aligned}$$
The electric charges are always real and therefore no operation is necessary for the $\gamma\gamma$ and $\gamma Z$ interference channels. The modification is not required if proper conjugation of complex coupling is carried out from the beginning of the derivation. Alternatively, we can implement it in terms of vector and axial coupling as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
\left( g^{V/A}_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} \right)^2 &\to& \left| g^{V/A}_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} \right|^2, \nonumber\\
g^V_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} g^A_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} &\to& Re\left[ g^V_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/} g^{A *}_{u\bar{u}Z/d\bar{d}Z/l\bar{l}Z} \right].\end{aligned}$$
Phenomenological results \[sec:result\]
=======================================
We are now ready to present numerical results using the updated FEWZ simulation code. We split our phenomenological results into three sections. We first provide a detailed comparison of the EW corrections implemented in our code with previous calculations in the literature, to demonstrate consistency between them. We then present several representative distributions that illustrate the combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections obtained using FEWZ. In the last part we study distributions of the radiated photon, and point out several interesting kinematic features that should be observable in LHC data.
Comparison with the previous literature
---------------------------------------
We begin our presentation of phenomenological results by cross-checking our EW corrections against the results presented in Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. We take the top quark mass to be $m_t=174.6$ GeV and the Higgs boson mass $m_H=115$ GeV. The $G_{\mu}$ input parameter scheme is chosen and the MRST2004QED PDF set is used to include the contribution of the photon PDF. In the presence of photon radiation, the following recombination procedure is applied before any acceptance cuts on leptons are implemented. Photons with rapidity $|\eta_{\gamma}| > 3$ are discarded as beam remnants. The separation between surviving photons and each lepton, $\Delta R_{l^{\pm}\gamma} = \sqrt{\Delta\eta_{l^{\pm}\gamma}^{2}+\Delta \phi_{\l^{\pm}\gamma}^{2}}$, is calculated, and the photon is recombined with the closest (anti-)lepton if $\Delta R_{l^{\pm}\gamma} <0.1$. The following acceptance cuts on leptons are then applied:
$p_{T,l^{\pm}} > 25$ GeV, $|\eta_{l^{\pm}}| < 2.5$.
$M_{ll}$/GeV $ > 50$ $ > 100$ $ > 200$ $ > 500$ $ > 1000$ $ > 2000$
---------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ -------------- --------------- ----------------
LO(DH)/pb 738.733(6) 32.7236(3) 1.48479(1) 0.0809420(6) 0.00679953(3) 0.000303744(1)
LO$_{0}$/pb 738.789(9) 32.723(4) 1.483(1) 0.0809449(8) 0.0067993(6) 0.0003038(1)
LO$_{\mu}$/pb 738.769(9) 32.728(4) 1.483(1) 0.0809451(8) 0.0067993(6) 0.0003037(1)
$\delta^{\gamma\gamma,LO}$(DH)/% 0.17 1.15 4.30 4.92 5.21 6.17
$\delta^{\gamma\gamma,LO}$/% 0.17 1.15 4.30 4.92 5.21 6.18
$\delta^{QED,rec}$(DH)/% -1.81 -4.71 -2.92 -3.36 -4.24 -5.66
$\delta^{QED,rec}_{0}$/% -1.79 -4.80 -2.94 -3.41 -4.33 -5.81
$\delta^{QED,rec}_{\mu}$/% -1.77 -4.78 -2.93 -3.41 -4.33 -5.83
$\delta^{QED}_{\mu}$(DH)/% -3.34 -8.85 -5.72 -7.05 -9.02 -12.08
$\delta^{QED}_{\mu}$/% -3.38 -9.09 -5.85 -7.22 -9.28 -12.47
$\delta^{weak}$(DH)/% -0.71 -1.02 -0.14 -2.38 -5.87 -11.12
$\delta^{weak}$/% -0.70 -1.02 -0.14 -2.38 -5.87 -11.11
: Cross sections of dilepton production at a 14 TeV LHC using MRST2004QED PDFs, for various cuts on the dilepton invariant mass. The content of each row is explained in detail in the text. []{data-label="LHCsigmas"}
$M_{ll}$/GeV $ > 50$ $ > 100$ $ > 150$ $ > 200$ $ > 400$ $ > 600$
---------------------------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- --------------- ----------------
LO(DH)/pb 142.7878(7) 6.62280(3) 0.824114(3) 0.294199(1) 0.01775063(5) 0.001778465(5)
LO$_{0}$/pb 142.783(1) 6.6215(8) 0.8241(3) 0.294195(2) 0.017750(2) 0.0017789(6)
LO$_{\mu}$/pb 142.783(1) 6.6225(8) 0.8246(3) 0.294197(2) 0.017749(2) 0.017785 (6)
$\delta^{\gamma\gamma,LO}$(DH)/% 0.15 0.72 1.54 1.44 0.83 0.57
$\delta^{\gamma\gamma,LO}$/% 0.15 0.72 1.54 1.44 0.83 0.57
$\delta^{QED,rec}$(DH)/% -1.85 -4.87 -3.65 -3.83 -5.16 -6.56
$\delta^{QED,rec}_{0}$/% -1.82 -4.96 -3.70 -3.89 -5.29 -6.76
$\delta^{QED,rec}_{\mu}$/% -1.80 -4.93 -3.68 -3.88 -5.28 -6.75
$\delta^{QED}_{\mu}$(DH)/% -3.44 -8.93 -6.46 -6.86 -9.56 -12.42
$\delta^{QED}_{\mu}$/% -3.47 -9.15 -6.59 -7.02 -9.84 -12.83
$\delta^{weak}$(DH)/% -0.70 -1.01 -0.12 -0.15 -1.25 -2.60
$\delta^{weak}$/% -0.70 -1.00 -0.13 -0.15 -1.25 -2.60
: Cross sections of dilepton production at the 1.96 TeV Tevatron using MRST2004QED PDFs, for various cuts on the dilepton invariant mass. The content of each row is explained in detail in the text. []{data-label="TEVsigmas"}
Tables \[LHCsigmas\] and \[TEVsigmas\] summarize the comparisons between our results and those of Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr], denoted by DH. The subscript 0 denotes results obtained in the massless lepton mode, while the subscript $\mu$ indicates results obtained using the muon mass. When the recombination procedure is applied, the results given by the muon mode and massless lepton mode should be identical, since the large logarithms $\alpha \ln(m_l^2/M_Z^2)$ in the FSR and virtual photonic contributions cancel . Separate results for muons without recombination are given for comparison. The weak correction is generally small. For the LHC, it is enhanced in the high mass tail due to large EW Sudakov logarithms, reaching the same order as QCD and QED corrections. Results of photon-induced dilepton production are also listed, and are very small due to the suppression of photon PDF and the lack of resonance structure in this channel. However, its contribution can reach 5% in the high energy range as pointed out in Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. We find agreement with the numerical results of Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. The small difference at the 0.1% level for the photonic correction can be explained by the inclusion of the photon PDF in a redefined quark PDF, which was performed in Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr] but not here.
Fig. \[PercentageChange\] uses the histogramming feature of FEWZ to reproduce the percent changes in various distributions arising from QED and weak corrections in the $Z$ resonance region. We show several different lepton identification scenarios. An ideal resolution is assumed in the bare muon case, and no recombination procedure is applied. For massless leptons, two values of separation $\Delta R_{l\gamma}$ are considered for the recombination procedure. A larger $\Delta R_{l\gamma}$ effectively lowers the detector resolution and leads to a more inclusive observable. The photonic correction is dominated by FSR, which is particularly sensitive to the choice of the recombination procedure.
![Percentage change of various components of the NLO EW correction, with respect to the leading-order result. The MRST2004QED set is used, and the LHC center-of-mass energy is taken to be 14 TeV. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity[]{data-label="PercentageChange"}](HISTcomp_Mll_chg){width="3.0in"}
![Percentage change of various components of the NLO EW correction, with respect to the leading-order result. The MRST2004QED set is used, and the LHC center-of-mass energy is taken to be 14 TeV. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity[]{data-label="PercentageChange"}](HISTcomp_Zrap_chg){width="3.0in"}
![Percentage change of various components of the NLO EW correction, with respect to the leading-order result. The MRST2004QED set is used, and the LHC center-of-mass energy is taken to be 14 TeV. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity[]{data-label="PercentageChange"}](HISTcomp_lpT_chg){width="3.0in"}
![Percentage change of various components of the NLO EW correction, with respect to the leading-order result. The MRST2004QED set is used, and the LHC center-of-mass energy is taken to be 14 TeV. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity[]{data-label="PercentageChange"}](HISTcomp_leta_chg){width="3.0in"}
The invariant mass of the lepton pair $M_{ll}$ receives a positive photonic correction below the $Z$ peak and a negative correction above the $Z$ peak, leading to a shift of the $Z$ resonance position to a smaller value. The weak correction has a similar feature, but its size is an order of magnitude smaller in the resonance region. The lepton pT distribution has a well-known Jacobian peak at $M_Z/2$, which is also distorted primarily by the photonic correction. We note that a proper description of the $p_{T,l}$ distribution near the Jacobian peak requires resummation of multiple soft photon effects. The bottom two histograms in Fig. \[PercentageChange\] are the rapidity distributions of the reconstructed $Z$ and of the lepton. The NLO EW correction to the $Z$ rapidity is roughly constant except at the boundary of phase space. The contribution of photon-induced dilepton production is highly suppressed by the photon PDF and is negligible in most situations. It grows relatively more important in the high rapidity region due to the nature of its t-channel exchange diagrams. All histograms are consistent with the distribution shapes given in Ref. [@Dittmaier:2009cr]. The extensive comparison presented above reveals good agreement between our results and previous work.
Combination of electroweak and QCD corrections in FEWZ
------------------------------------------------------
![Several representative distributions showing the combination of NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to lepton-pair production at a $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV LHC. The MSTW2008NNLO PDF set has been used, with the hatched regions corresponding to the estimated 68% PDF error. The $\alpha_S$ error has not been included. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity.[]{data-label="AllNLOCorr"}](HPDFcomp_Mll_ful){width="3.0in"}
![Several representative distributions showing the combination of NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to lepton-pair production at a $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV LHC. The MSTW2008NNLO PDF set has been used, with the hatched regions corresponding to the estimated 68% PDF error. The $\alpha_S$ error has not been included. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity.[]{data-label="AllNLOCorr"}](HPDFcomp_Zrap_ful){width="3.0in"}
![Several representative distributions showing the combination of NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to lepton-pair production at a $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV LHC. The MSTW2008NNLO PDF set has been used, with the hatched regions corresponding to the estimated 68% PDF error. The $\alpha_S$ error has not been included. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity.[]{data-label="AllNLOCorr"}](HPDFcomp_lpT2_ful){width="3.0in"}
![Several representative distributions showing the combination of NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to lepton-pair production at a $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV LHC. The MSTW2008NNLO PDF set has been used, with the hatched regions corresponding to the estimated 68% PDF error. The $\alpha_S$ error has not been included. Clockwise from the upper left, the plots show the lepton-pair invariant mass, the lepton-pair rapidity, the lepton $p_T$, and the lepton pseudorapidity.[]{data-label="AllNLOCorr"}](HPDFcomp_leta_ful){width="3.0in"}
Having validated our calculation, we next study the combination of the NLO EW and the NNLO QCD corrections. We switch to $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV in this subsection. In Fig. (\[AllNLOCorr\]), we display the full corrections to dilepton production for several observables as a demonstration of the full functionality of FEWZ. The NLO EW correction, as explained above, plays an important role in defining the distribution shapes near the Z resonance. The shift of events from the $Z$-peak to lower invariant masses caused by FSR effects is apparent in the uppermost left plot. The large EW Sudakov logarithms cause the rise in the high-mass tail of the invariant-mass distribution seen in the plot. We note that because of the cut $p_{T,l}>25$ GeV, the invariant mass of the lepton pair is restricted to $M_{ll}> 50$ GeV, coinciding exactly with the cut on this variable that we impose. Sensitivity to this phase-space restriction leads to the large shift from the leading-prediction near this boundary. The lepton $p_T$ distribution in the lower-left panel exhibits the usual Jacobian peak at $M_Z/2$. Resummation of soft-photon and soft-gluon effects is needed for a proper description near this boundary. Both the lepton pseudorapidity and lepton-pair rapidity in the rich panels show little sensitivity to higher-order effects.
Distributions of photon radiation in Drell-Yan production
---------------------------------------------------------
We proceed to examine distributions of photon radiation at the LHC. To define photon experimentally, we impose the following cuts in our analysis: $$p_{T,\gamma} > 20\, \text{GeV}, \;\;\; |\eta_{\gamma}| < 2.5, \;\;\; \Delta R_{l\gamma}>0.05.
\label{cuts1}$$ We note that the experimental capabilities permit a much lower cut on photon $p_T$, reaching down to 5 GeV, but we set the cut high here to reveal certain kinematic features in the prediction. We focus on the invariant-mass region below the $Z$-peak, where FSR effects are enhanced. The following cuts are also applied in our study: $$\begin{aligned}
p_{T,l}^{hard} &>& 30 \,\text{GeV}, \;\;\; 30 \,\text{GeV} < M_{ll} < 86 \, \text{GeV}, \nonumber \\
p_{T,l}^{soft} &>& 10 \,\text{GeV}, \;\;\; |\eta_l| < 2.5.
\label{cuts2}\end{aligned}$$ These cuts are motivated by an ongoing study of photon radiation in the Drell-Yan process within CMS [@cms]. We also study distributions where the softer-lepton $p_T$ cut is increased to $p_{T,l}^{soft} > 20 \,\text{GeV}$. To facilitate comparison with the ongoing experimental study we consider the $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV LHC.
![Distributions of photon radiation in the Drell-Yan process. The left panel shows the distribution of separation between the photon and the nearest leptons using both $\Delta \phi$ and $\Delta R$ as a distance measure. The right panel shows the photon transverse momentum spectrum. The cuts are those described in Eqs. (\[cuts1\]) and (\[cuts2\]).[]{data-label="PhotonDist"}](HISTcomp_FSRdRrl_pht){width="3.0in"}
![Distributions of photon radiation in the Drell-Yan process. The left panel shows the distribution of separation between the photon and the nearest leptons using both $\Delta \phi$ and $\Delta R$ as a distance measure. The right panel shows the photon transverse momentum spectrum. The cuts are those described in Eqs. (\[cuts1\]) and (\[cuts2\]).[]{data-label="PhotonDist"}](HISTcomp_FSRrpT_pht){width="3.0in"}
The left histogram in Fig. \[PhotonDist\] shows the distribution of $\Delta R_{l\gamma} = \sqrt{(\Delta \eta_{l\gamma})^2+ (\Delta \phi_{l\gamma})^2}$, defined as the separation between the photon and the nearest lepton. It peaks toward zero separation, corresponding to the FSR collinear divergence. We also present the distribution of $\Delta \phi_{l\gamma}$, the difference in azimuthal angle between the photon and the nearest lepton, in the same histogram. There is a kink in both the $\Delta R_{l\gamma}$ and $\Delta \phi_{l\gamma}$ distributions, the location of which is roughly given by $\pi-\arccos(p_{T,\gamma,min}/M_Z) \approx \pi/2$ for small $p_{T,\gamma,min}$. It occurs for the maximum $\Delta \phi_{l\gamma}$ when the two leptons and the photon travel with the same pseudorapidity. The exact location of the feature is at the angle $\pi-\arccos(p_{T,\gamma,min}/\sqrt{M_Z^2+p^{2}_{T,\gamma,min}})$ for ISR photons and $\pi-\arccos(p_{T,\gamma,min}/(M_Z-p_{T,\gamma,min}))$ for FSR photons. At small $p_{T,\gamma,min}$, the two expressions yields roughly the same number. However, the dominance of FSR photons with small separation washes out this effect. At large $p_{T,\gamma,min}$, the collinear FSR contribution becomes suppressed and the prominence of the effect increases. We can enhance the kinematic feature by increasing the cut on the softer lepton, which further reduces the collinear FSR contribution. This is shown in Fig. \[PhotonDist2\], where we have used $p_{T,l}^{soft} > 20 \,\text{GeV}$. The kink has now become a small peak.
![The separation between the photon and the nearest lepton using instead $p_{T,l}^{soft} > 20 \,\text{GeV}$.[]{data-label="PhotonDist2"}](HISTcomp_FSRdRhardlr_pht){width="4.0in"}
The photon $p_T$ distribution in the right panel of Fig. \[PhotonDist\] has a shoulder at around 35 GeV. It can be explained by noting that the majority of photon radiation occurs as a result of bremsstrahlung radiation off a lepton from an on-shell $Z$. Most of the photon radiation is collinear to the direction of the lepton, and is limited to a maximum $p_T$ of half of the $Z$ mass as it recoils against the other lepton. However, the requirement of a lepton with a $p_T$ greater than 10 GeV reduces the maximally allowed $p_T$ for FSR photon to $M_Z/2-p_{T,l,min} \approx35\textrm{GeV} $ where $p_{T,l,min} = 10~\textrm{GeV}$. We can interpret the small bump as the “Jacobian peak" of the photon, in analogy to the lepton case.
Conclusion \[sec:conc\]
=======================
In this paper we have presented a combination of the NNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to the Drell-Yan production of a lepton pair. This combination was not previously available in the literature. We have incorporated these corrections into an updated version of the analysis code FEWZ, which is used in numerous experimental studies. The combination of both the QCD and EW sources of higher-order corrections in a single program eliminates the need to piece them consistently. We have recalculated the EW corrections in the complex-mass scheme and have cross-checked our results in detail against previous results in the literature. We have presented several new techniques in the course of our calculation, including a combination of phase-space slicing and subtraction methods for handling real-emission corrections, and a treatment for the analytic continuation of two-point functions needed in the complex-mass scheme.
We have presented numerous phenomenological results relevant for LHC studies, including the first theoretical results for distributions containing both NNLO QCD and NLO EW effects. We have also discussed several interesting kinematic features in photon-radiation distributions caused by imposing experimental cuts. These should be observable in the LHC data, and would offer interesting tests of the underlying mechanism for producing photons in association with a lepton pair in hadronic collisions.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We are grateful to A. Kubik, M. Schmitt and S. Stoynev for useful discussions on the ongoing experimental studies at CMS. We also thank S. Quackenbush for advice and help in finalizing the new version of FEWZ. This work is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Division of High Energy Physics, under contract DE-AC02-06CH11357 and the grants DE-FG02-95ER40896 and DE-FG02-08ER4153, and with funds provided by Northwestern University.
Analytic Continuation of the Scalar Bubble Integral \[sect:acB0\]
=================================================================
The two-point one-loop scalar integral (the bubble integral) is defined as follows:
$$B_0(s;M_1^2,M_2^2) =
\frac{(2\pi\mu)^{4-D}}{i \pi^2}\int d^D l \;
\frac{1}
{(l^2-M_1^2+i\varepsilon)
((l+p)^2-M_2^2+i\varepsilon)}\,,$$
where $s=p^2$. The space-time dimension is taken to be $D=4-2\epsilon$. Introducing a standard Feynman parameterization of the integral, we obtain
$$\begin{aligned}
B_0(s;M_1^2,M_2^2)
&=& (4\pi\mu^2)^{\epsilon} \Gamma(\epsilon) \int_0^1 \; dx \;
[-x (1-x) s +x M_2^2+(1-x) M_1^2 -i \varepsilon]^{-\epsilon} \nonumber \\
&=& (4\pi\mu^2)^{\epsilon} %\Gamma(1+\e)
\left\{ \frac{1}{\epsilon}
-\int_0^1 \; dx \; \ln (-x(1-x) s +x M_2^2+(1-x) M_1^2 -i \varepsilon ) \right\}
+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon) . \nonumber\\
\end{aligned}$$
The logarithm is defined to have a branch cut on the negative real axis. If $s$, $M_1^2$, and $M_2^2$ are real parameters, the integration contour stays below the branch cut due to the Feynman prescription for the propagators. If we replace $M_1^2$ and $M_2^2$ with the complex masses $\mu_{1,2}^2=M_{1,2}^2-i\Gamma_{1,2}M_{1,2}$, the contour simply moves further away from the branch cut. This can change if $s$ is also a complex mass, as shown in Fig. \[complexbubble\]. If the masses $M_1$ and $M_2$ are sufficiently large so that both particles in the loop cannot go on shell, then the argument inside the logarithm of the integrand always has a positive real part, and the contour never crosses the branch cut. If the particles in the loop can go on-shell, the branch cut can be crossed.
![The contour for $\text{ln}\,F$ in the complex plane, assuming arbitrary complex parameters.[]{data-label="complexbubble"}](ExpB0cpls)
For the computation of the gauge boson self-energy insertions, the particles running in the loop are either massless fermions, a heavy top quark, a Higgs boson or the gauge boson themselves. Except for massless fermions, the other internal particles can never be on-shell. Therefore, we only need to worry about the bubble integral of the form $B_0(s,0,0)$ with $s=\mu_Z^2$ or $\mu_W^2$. It is easy to work out the integral assuming s is the complex mass of either the $W$ or $Z$ boson: $$\begin{aligned}
B_0(s;0,0)
&=& (4\pi\mu^2)^{\epsilon} %\Gamma(1+\e)
\left\{ \frac{1}{\epsilon}
-\int_0^1 \; dx \; \ln (-x(1-x) s -i \varepsilon ) \right\}
+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)\nonumber\\
&=& (4\pi\mu^2)^{\epsilon} %\Gamma(1+\e)
\left\{ \frac{1}{\epsilon} + 2
- \left[ \ln (s-i\varepsilon) +\ln(-1-i\varepsilon/s)\right] \right\}
+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon) .
\end{aligned}$$ In the last line, we have written the integral in a form valid for both real $s$, or if $s$ is given by a complex mass. The second logarithm consistently yields $-i\pi$ as long as $\textrm{Re}(s) > 0$, ensuring a smooth transition for a complex mass valued $s$. It is easy to find the following Taylor expansion assuming a small imaginary part for $s$: $$B_0(\mu_{W/Z}^2;0,0) = B_0(M_{W/Z}^2;0,0) + (\mu_{W/Z}^2-M_{W/Z}^2) \left.\frac{d B_0(s;0,0)}{ds}\right|_{s=M_{W/Z}^2} + \mathcal{O}(\Gamma_{W/Z}^2/M_{W/Z}^2) ,$$ which demonstrates the equivalence at NLO between our result and the alternative procedure proposed in Ref. [@Denner:2005fg].
[99]{}
S. D. Drell and T. -M. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**25**]{}, 316 (1970) \[Erratum-ibid. [**25**]{}, 902 (1970)\]. S. Haywood [*et al.*]{}, arXiv:hep-ph/0003275. M. Dittmar, F. Pauss and D. Zurcher, Phys. Rev. D [**56**]{}, 7284 (1997) \[arXiv:hep-ex/9705004\]; V. A. Khoze, A. D. Martin, R. Orava and M. G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. C [**19**]{}, 313 (2001) \[arXiv:hep-ph/0010163\]; W. T. Giele and S. A. Keller, arXiv:hep-ph/0104053. S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**84**]{}, 112002 (2011) \[arXiv:1110.2682 \[hep-ex\]\]. For recent studies, see R. D. Ball, L. Del Debbio, S. Forte, A. Guffanti, J. I. Latorre, J. Rojo and M. Ubiali, Nucl. Phys. B [**838**]{}, 136 (2010) \[arXiv:1002.4407 \[hep-ph\]\]; R. S. Thorne, A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling and G. Watt, arXiv:1006.2753 \[hep-ph\]; H. L. Lai, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, Z. Li, P. M. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin and C. P. Yuan, arXiv:1007.2241 \[hep-ph\]; S. Alekhin, J. Blumlein and S. Moch, arXiv:1202.2281 \[hep-ph\]. R. Hamberg, W. L. van Neerven and T. Matsuura, Nucl. Phys. B [**359**]{}, 343 (1991) \[Erratum-ibid. B [**644**]{}, 403 (2002)\]. C. Anastasiou, L. J. Dixon, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**91**]{}, 182002 (2003) \[hep-ph/0306192\].
C. Anastasiou, L. J. Dixon, K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. [**D69**]{}, 094008 (2004) \[hep-ph/0312266\].
K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{}, 231803 (2006) \[arXiv:hep-ph/0603182\]. K. Melnikov and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{}, 114017 (2006) \[arXiv:hep-ph/0609070\]. S. Catani, L. Cieri, G. Ferrera, D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**103**]{}, 082001 (2009) \[arXiv:0903.2120 \[hep-ph\]\]. S. Catani, G. Ferrera and M. Grazzini, JHEP [**1005**]{}, 006 (2010) \[arXiv:1002.3115 \[hep-ph\]\]. R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello and S. Quackenbush, Comput. Phys. Commun. [**182**]{}, 2388 (2011) \[arXiv:1011.3540 \[hep-ph\]\]. R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello and S. Quackenbush, arXiv:1201.5896 \[hep-ph\]. C. M. Carloni Calame, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini and A. Vicini, JHEP [**0710**]{}, 109 (2007) \[arXiv:0710.1722 \[hep-ph\]\]. F. A. Berends and R. Kleiss, Z. Phys. C [**27**]{}, 365 (1985). F. A. Berends, R. Kleiss, J. P. Revol and J. P. Vialle, Z. Phys. C [**27**]{}, 155 (1985). U. Baur, S. Keller and W. K. Sakumoto, Phys. Rev. D [**57**]{}, 199 (1998) \[hep-ph/9707301\]. U. Baur, O. Brein, W. Hollik, C. Schappacher and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Rev. D [**65**]{}, 033007 (2002) \[hep-ph/0108274\]. S. Dittmaier and M. Huber, JHEP [**1001**]{}, 060 (2010) \[arXiv:0911.2329 \[hep-ph\]\]. M. Ciafaloni, P. Ciafaloni and D. Comelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{}, 4810 (2000) P. Ciafaloni and D. Comelli, Phys. Lett. B [**446**]{}, 278 (1999); Phys. Lett. B [**476**]{}, 49 (2000) V. S. Fadin, L. N. Lipatov, A. D. Martin and M. Melles, Phys. Rev. D [**61**]{}, 094002 (2000) J. H. Kuhn, A. A. Penin and V. A. Smirnov, Eur. Phys. J. C [**17**]{}, 97 (2000)
C. Bernaciak and D. Wackeroth, arXiv:1201.4804 \[hep-ph\]. L. Barze, G. Montagna, P. Nason, O. Nicrosini and F. Piccinini, JHEP [**1204**]{}, 037 (2012) \[arXiv:1202.0465 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. [**160**]{}, 22 (2006) \[hep-ph/0605312\]. S. Dittmaier and A. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. D [**65**]{}, 113003 (2002) \[hep-ph/0203120\]. C. Anastasiou and A. Lazopoulos, JHEP [**0407**]{}, 046 (2004) \[arXiv:hep-ph/0404258\]. G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B [**153**]{}, 365 (1979). T. Hahn and M. Perez-Victoria, Comput. Phys. Commun. [**118**]{}, 153 (1999) \[hep-ph/9807565\]. R. K. Ellis and G. Zanderighi, JHEP [**0802**]{}, 002 (2008) \[arXiv:0712.1851 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Nucl. Phys. B [**844**]{}, 199 (2011) \[arXiv:1005.2076 \[hep-ph\]\]. B. W. Harris and J. F. Owens, Phys. Rev. D [**65**]{}, 094032 (2002) \[arXiv:hep-ph/0102128\]. S. Frixione, Z. Kunszt and A. Signer, Nucl. Phys. B [**467**]{}, 399 (1996) \[hep-ph/9512328\]. S. Catani and M. H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B [**485**]{}, 291 (1997) \[Erratum-ibid. B [**510**]{}, 503 (1998)\] \[arXiv:hep-ph/9605323\]. A. Denner, Fortsch. Phys. [**41**]{}, 307 (1993) \[arXiv:0709.1075 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. Kubik and M. Schmitt, private communication.
A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth and L. H. Wieders, Nucl. Phys. B [**724**]{}, 247 (2005) \[Erratum-ibid. B [**854**]{}, 504 (2012)\] \[hep-ph/0505042\].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper a construction of quantum codes from self-orthogonal algebraic geometry codes is provided. Our method is based on the CSS construction as well as on some peculiar properties of the underlying algebraic curves, named Swiss curves. Several classes of well-known algebraic curves with many rational points turn out to be Swiss curves. Examples are given by Castle curves, GK curves, generalized GK curves and the Abdón-Bezerra-Quoos maximal curves. Applications of our method to these curves are provided. Our construction extends a previous one due to Hernando, McGuire, Monserrat, and Moyano-Fernández.'
address:
- ' Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy'
- ' Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark'
- ' Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Caserta, Italy'
author:
- Daniele Bartoli
- Maria Montanucci
- Giovanni Zini
title: 'On certain self-orthogonal AG codes with applications to Quantum error-correcting codes'
---
[^1]
[^2]
Introduction
============
Since the discovery of quantum algorithms, such as a polynomial time algorithm for factorization by Shor [@Shor] and a quantum search algorithm by Grover [@Grover], quantum computing has received a lot of attention. Even though a concrete and practical implementation of these algorithms is far away, it has nonetheless become clear that some form of error correction is required to protect quantum data from noise. This was the motivation for the development of quantum computation and, more specifically, of quantum error-correcting codes.
In the last decades much research has been done to find good quantum codes following several strategies and underlying mathematical structures. However, the most remarkable result is probably the one obtained by Calderbank and Shor [@CSH], and Steane [@STE]; see also [@10]. Indeed they showed that quantum codes can be derived from classical linear error-correcting codes provided that certain orthogonality properties are satisfied, including Euclidean and Hermitian self-orthogonality; see [@10; @28; @NC]. This method, known as CSS construction, has allowed to find many powerful quantum stabilizer codes.
Among all the classical codes used to produce quantum stabilizer codes, Algebraic-Geometry (AG) codes [@G1982] have received considerable attention [@MST; @MTT; @LGP; @SSSSSOCODESSS; @BMZ; @MTZ; @MPL; @CHe; @GAHE; @c1; @c2; @c3; @c4; @d1; @d2]. The interest towards AG codes is due to several reasons. First, every linear code can be realized as an algebraic geometry code[@PE]. Also, AG codes were indeed used to improve the Gilbert-Varshamov bound [@GV], an outstanding result at that time. Finally, conditions for Euclidean self-orthogonality of AG codes are well known [@BO] and allow us to translate the pure combinatorial nature of this problem into geometrical terms concerning the structure of the curves involved and their corresponding function fields.
Castle curves and AG codes from them [@MST] give rise to good quantum error-correcting codes. Indeed, among all curves used to get AG codes, Castle and weak Castle curves combine the good properties of having a reasonable simple handling and giving codes with excellent parameters. This is confirmed by the fact that most of the best one-point AG codes studied in the literature belong to the family of Castle codes.
In [@MTT], Munuera, Tenório and Torres used the good properties of algebraic-geometry codes coming from Castle and weak Castle curves to provide new sequences of self-orthogonal codes. Their construction was extended in [@SSSSSOCODESSS] by Hernando, McGuire, Monserrat, and Moyano-Fernández, who provided a way to obtain self-orthogonal AG codes, and hence good quantum codes, from a more general class of curves, strictly including Castle curves. In this paper we further generalize the family of curves considered in [@SSSSSOCODESSS] to what we call Swiss curves. The geometric properties on the underlying plane curves considered in [@SSSSSOCODESSS] are weakened, focusing on the algebraic structure of the curves, that is, on their function field. The family of Swiss curves, and more generally of $r$-Swiss curves, includes the most studied and known families of algebraic curves with many rational points over finite fields. Some example are given by the Giulietti-Korchmáros curve [@GK2009], the two generalized Giulietti-Korchmáros curves [@GGS2010] and [@BM], as well as the Abdón-Bezerra-Quoos curve [@ABQ]. Explicit constructions of quantum codes from these curves are provided, as well as comparisons with the quantum Gilbert-Varshamov bound.
The paper is organized as follows. Section \[sec:preliminaries\] recalls basic notions on AG codes and quantum codes; in particular, we present some constructions from the literature where quantum codes are obtained from AG codes with self-orthogonality properties. Section \[sec:swiss\] defines a class of curves, namely Swiss curves, for which we prove in Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] a result about self-orthogonality properties. This is applied in Section \[sec:appl\] to several curves which are shown to be Swiss and which provide quantum codes. The results of Section \[sec:swiss\] are generalized in Section \[sec:r-swiss\] to a larger class of curves, called $r$-Swiss curves, and then applied in Section \[sec:r-appl\] to generalized GK curves over finite fields of even order. Finally, we note in Section \[sec:comp\] that certain stabilizer quantum codes constructed in the previous sections are pure and exceed the quantum Gilbert-Varshamov bound.
AG codes and quantum codes {#sec:preliminaries}
==========================
AG codes
--------
We introduce here some basic notions on AG codes; for a detailed introduction to this topic, we refer to [@Sti Chapter 2].
Let $\mathbb{F}_q$ be the finite field of order $q$ and $\mathcal{X}$ be a projective, absolutely irreducible, algebraic curve of genus $g$ defined over $\mathbb{F}_q$. Let $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{X})$ be the field of rational functions on $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{X}(\mathbb{F}_q)$ be the set of rational places of $\mathcal{X}$. For any divisor $D=\sum_{P\in\mathcal{X}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_q)}n_P P$ on $\mathcal{X}$, we denote by $v_P(D)$ the weight $n_P\in\mathbb{Z}$ of $P$ in $D$ (also called the valuation of $D$ at $P$), and by ${\rm supp}(D)$ the support of $D$, that is the finite set of places with non-zero weight in $D$; the degree of $D$ is $\deg(D)=\sum_{P\in{\rm supp}(D)} n_P$. The Riemann-Roch space $\mathcal{L}(D)$ of an $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor $D$ is the finite dimensional $\mathbb{F}_q$-vector space $$\mathcal{L}(D)=\{f\in\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{X})\setminus\{0\}\colon (f)+D\geq0\}\cup\{0\},$$ where $(f)=(f)_0-(f)_{\infty}$ denotes the principal divisor of $f$; here, $(f)_0$ and $(f)_\infty$ are respectively the zero divisor and the pole divisor of $f$. The $\mathbb{F}_q$-dimension of $\mathcal{L}(D)$ is denoted by $\ell(D)$.
Let $\{P_1,\ldots,P_N\}\subseteq\mathcal{X}(\mathbb{F}_q)$ with $P_i\ne P_j$ for $i\ne j$, $D$ be the $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor $P_1+\cdots+P_N$, and $G$ be an $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor of $\mathcal{X}$ such that ${\rm supp}(D)\cap{\rm supp}(G)=\emptyset$. Consider the $\mathbb{F}_q$-linear evaluation map $$\begin{aligned}
e_D:&\mathcal{L}(G)&\to\mathbb{F}_q^N\\
&f&\mapsto(f(P_1),\ldots,f(P_N)).\end{aligned}$$
The (functional) AG code $C(D,G)$ is defined as the image $e_D(\mathcal{L}(G))$ of $e_D$. The code $C(D,G)$ has parameters $[N,k,d]_q$ which satisfy $k=\ell(G)-\ell(G-D)$ and $d\geq N-\deg(G)$. If $\deg(G)<N$, then $e_D$ is injective and $k=\ell(G)$. If $2g-2<\deg(G)<N$, then $k=\deg(G)+1-g$.
The (Euclidean) dual code $C(D,G)^\bot$ has parameters $[N^\bot,k^\bot,d^\bot]_q$, where $N^\bot=N$, $k^\bot=N-k$, and $d^\bot\geq \deg(G)-2g+2$. Note that, if $2g-2<\deg(G)<N$, then $k^\bot=N-\deg(G)+g-1$.
Quantum codes
-------------
The main ingredient to construct quantum codes in this paper is the so-called [*CSS construction*]{} (named after Calderbank, Shor and Steane) which enables to construct quantum codes from classical linear codes; see [@LGP Lemma 2.5].
A $q$-ary quantum code $Q$ of length $N$ and dimension $k$ is defined to be a $q^k$-dimensional Hilbert subspace of a $q^N$-dimensional Hilbert space $\mathbb H=(\mathbb C^q)^{\otimes n}=\mathbb C^q\otimes\cdots\otimes\mathbb C^q$. If $Q$ has minimum distance $D$, then $Q$ can correct up to $\lfloor\frac{D-1}{2}\rfloor$ quantum errors. The notation $[[N,k,D]]_q$ is used to denote such a quantum code $Q$. For an $[[N,k,D]]_q$-quantum code the quantum Singleton bound holds, that is, the minimum distance satisfies $D\leq 1+(N-k)/2$. The quantum Singleton defect is $\delta^Q:=N-k-2D+2\geq0$, and the relative quantum Singleton defect is $\Delta^Q:=\delta^Q/N$. If $\delta^Q=0$, then the code is said to be quantum MDS. For a detailed introduction on quantum codes see [@LGP] and the references therein.
Another important bound for quantum codes is an analogue of the Gilbert-Varshamov bound.
[[@FM2004 Theorem 1.4]]{} Suppose that $N>k\geq2$, $d\geq 2$, and $N\equiv k \pmod 2$. Then there exists a pure stabilizer quantum code with parameters $[[N,k,d]]_q$ provided that $$\label{Dis:GV}
\frac{q^{N-k+2}-1}{q^2-1}>\sum_{i=1}^{d-1}(q^2-1)^{i-1}\binom{N}{i}.$$
[[@10; @28; @NC]]{} \[ccs\] [(CSS construction)]{} Let $C_1$ and $C_2$ denote two linear codes with parameters $[N,k_i,d_i]_q$, $i=1,2$, and assume that $C_1 \subset C_2$. Then there exists an $[[N,k_2-k_1,D]]_q$ code with $D=\min\{wt(c) \mid c \in (C_2 \setminus C_1) \cup (C_1^\perp \setminus C_2^\perp)\}$, where $wt(c)$ is the Hamming weight of $c$.
A stabilizer quantum code $C$ is pure if the minimum distance of $C^\bot$ coincides with the minimum Hamming weight of $C^{\bot}\setminus C$.
[[@10; @28]]{} \[th:stab\] Let $C$ be an $[N,k,d]_q$-code such that $C\subseteq C^{\bot}$, i.e. $C$ is self-orthogonal. Then there exists an $[[N,N-2k,\geq d^{\bot}]]_q$ stabilizer quantum code, where $d^{\bot}$ denotes the minimum distance of $C^\bot$. If the minimum weight of $C^{\bot}\setminus C$ is equal to $d^{\bot}$, then the stabilizer code is pure and has minimum distance $d^{\bot}$.
[[@SSSSSOCODESSS]]{}\[Corollary\] Let $C$ be an $[N,k,d]_q$-code such that $C\subseteq C^\bot$. If $d>k+1$ then there exists an $[[N,N-2k, d^{\bot}]]_q$-code which is pure.
$C^\bot$ is an $[N,N-k,d^{\bot}]_q$ code, with $d^{\bot}\leq k+1$ by the Singleton Bound. If $d>k+1$, then by Theorem \[th:stab\] there exists a pure $[[N,N-2k, d^{\bot}]]_q$ stabilizer quantum code.
Constructions of AG quantum codes
---------------------------------
We list here some constructions of quantum codes starting from AG codes which have been provided in the literature and exploit self-orthogonality properties of the underlying AG codes.
- *General t-point construction* due to La Guardia and Pereira; see [@LGP Theorem 3.1]. This is a direct application of the CSS construction to AG codes.
\[lem1\] [(General t-point construction)]{} Let $\mathcal X$ be a nonsingular curve over $\mathbb F_q$ with genus $g$ and $N+t$ distinct $\mathbb F_q$-rational points, for some $N,t>0$. Assume that $a_i,b_i$, $i=1,\ldots,t$, are positive integers such that $a_i \leq b_i$ for all $i$ and $2g-2 < \sum_{i=1}^{t} a_i < \sum_{i=1}^t b_i < N$. Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $[[N,k,D]]_{q}$ with $k=\sum_{i=1}^{t} b_i - \sum_{i=1}^{t} a_i$ and $D \geq \min \big\{ N - \sum_{i=1}^{t} b_i, \sum_{i=1}^{t} a_i - (2g-2)\big\}$.
- *Quantum codes from weak Castle curves*, due to Munuera, Tenório, and Torres; see [@MTT Sections 3.3 and 3.4].
A weak Castle curve over $\mathbb{F}_q$ is a pair $(\mathcal{X},P)$, where $\mathcal{X}$ is an absolutely irreducible $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational curve and $P$ is a rational place of $\mathcal{X}$ such that the following conditions hold.
- The Weierstrass semigroup $H(P)$ at $P$ is symmetric.
- there exist a positive integer $s$, a rational map $f:\mathcal{X}\to\mathbb{P}^1$, and a non-empty set $\{\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_h\}\subseteq\mathbb{F}_q$ such that $(f)_\infty= sP$ and for all $i=1,\ldots,h$ we have $f^{-1}(\alpha_i)\subseteq\mathcal{X}(\mathbb{F}_q)$ and $|f^{-1}(\alpha_i)=s|$.
With the same notation, let $\phi\in\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{X})$ be defined as $\phi=\prod_{i=1^h}(f-\alpha_i)$, and let $D$ be the sum of all $N=|\mathcal{X}(\mathbb{F}_q)|-1$ rational places of $\mathcal{X}$ different from $P$. Denote by $M=\{m_1=0,m_2,\ldots,m_N\}$ the dimension set of $(\mathcal{X},P)$, i.e. $m_i=\min\{m\colon \ell(mP)-\ell((m-N)P)\geq i\}$, and by $C_i$ the weak Castle code $C(D,m_i P)$. For any $r\geq1$ let $\gamma_r$ be the $r$-th gonality of $\mathcal{X}$, that is the minimum degree of a divisor $A$ on $\mathcal{X}$ such that $\ell(A)\geq r$.
[[@MTT Corollary 5]]{} Using the same notation as above, let $(\mathcal{X},P)$ be a weak Castle curve of genus $g$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}$ such that $(d\phi)=(2g-2)P$. If $(q+1)m_i\leq N+2g-2$ for some $i$, then there exists a quantum code with parameters $[[N,N-2i,\geq d(C_{n-i})]]_q$ with $d(C_{n-i})\geq N-m_{N-i}+\gamma_{a+1}$, where $a=\ell((m_{N-i}-N)P)$.
- *Self-orthogonal AG codes from curves with only one place at infinity*, due to Hernando, McGuire, Monserrat, and Moyano-Fernández; see [@SSSSSOCODESSS Section 3].
Let $\mathcal{X}$ be an absolutely irreducible $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational plane curve with $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{X})=\mathbb{F}_q(x,y)$ such that $\mathcal{X}$ has only one point $\mathcal{P}_{\infty}$ at infinity, there is only one place $P_\infty$ centered at $\mathcal{P}_{\infty}$, and $P_{\infty}$ is rational. Let $\mathcal{A}$ be the set of the elements $a\in\mathbb{F}_q$ such that $\mathcal{X}$ and the line $L_a$ with affine equation $X=a$ are $\mathbb{F}_q$-transversal, that is, the points of $\mathcal{X}\cap L_a$ are $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational and the intersection multiplicity of $\mathcal{X}$ and $L_a$ is $1$ at every point of $\mathcal{X}\cap L_a$. Let $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal{A}}$ be the set of places of $\mathcal{X}$ centered at affine points of $\mathcal{X}$ whose $X$-coordinate is in $\mathcal{A}$, and $D$ be the divisor $\sum_{P\in\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal A}}P$. Define the rational functions $f_{\mathcal A}(x)=\prod_{a\in\mathcal{A}}(x-a)$ and $f_{\mathcal A}^{\prime}(x)$, where $f_{\mathcal A}^\prime (X)=\partial_X f_{\mathcal A}(X)$. Let $M$ be the divisor of $\mathcal{X}$ such that ${\rm supp}(M)=\{P\in{\rm supp}((f_{\mathcal A}^\prime)_0)\colon P\ne P_{\infty}\}$ and $v_Q(M)=v_Q((f_{\mathcal A}^\prime)_0)$ for every $Q\in{\rm supp}(M)$.
[[@SSSSSOCODESSS Theorem 3.1]]{} Using the same notation as above, let $G$ be an $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor of $\mathcal{X}$ with ${\rm supp}(G)\cap{\rm supp}(D)=\emptyset$. Then $$C(D,G)^\bot = C(D,(2g-2+\deg(D)-\deg(M))P_{\infty}+M-G) .$$ If in addition $2G\leq(2g-2+\deg(D)-\deg(M))P_{\infty}+M$, then $$C(D,G)\subseteq C(D,G)^\bot.$$
Swiss curves and codes {#sec:swiss}
======================
A Swiss curve is a pair $(\mathcal{C},P)$ such that $\mathcal{C}$ is an absolutely irreducible $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational curve, $P$ is a place of $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ and the following holds.
1. $P$ is rational;
2. there exists a function $x\in \mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ such that $(dx)=(2g-2)P$.
Note that the existence of a function $x$ such that $(dx)=(2g-2)P$ implies that the Weierstrass semigroup at $P$ is symmetric, that is, $2g-1 \in G(P)$. Indeed, $(dx)=(2g-2)P$ implies that $(2g-2)P$ is a canonical divisor and hence the dimension of its Riemann-Roch space is equal to $g$, see [@Sti Proposition 1.6.2]. Since there are exactly $g$ elements in $G(P)$ (and they are at most $2g-1$) we get that $2g-1 \in G(P)$.
Even though Condition $(1)$ is not difficult to be forced, Condition $(2)$ seems to be quite cryptic. The following remark describes a way to force also Condition $(2)$ to hold.
\[remo\] One way to force the existence of $x$ is the following. Suppose that there exists a function $x \in \mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ such that $dx \ne 0 $ and in $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x)$ there is a unique ramification place and it is totally ramified. Without loss of generality we can assume that the totally ramified place is the pole $P_\infty$ of $x$. In fact, if such a place is the zero of $x-\alpha$, it is enough to replace $x$ with $1/(x-\alpha)$ and consider $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(1/(x-\alpha))$. From [@Sti Theorem 3.4.6], $$({\rm{Cotr}}_{\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x)}(dx))=(dx)_{\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})}={\rm{Con}}_{\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x)}((dx))+{\rm{Diff}}(\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x)).$$ Since the support of both ${\rm{Con}}_{\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x)}((dx))$ and ${\rm{Diff}}(\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C}) / \mathbb{F}_q(x))$ is just $P_\infty$, we get that $(dx)_{\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})}=(2g-2)P_\infty$.
Swiss curves can be constructed as explained in the following remark.
\[remo1\] Let $\mathcal{C}$ be an $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational curve of $p$-rank zero. Assume that there exist a rational place $P$ of $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ and a $p$-subgroup $S$ of automorphisms of $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ fixing $P$ such that the quotient curve $\mathcal{C}/S$ is rational. Then $(\mathcal{C},P)$ is a Swiss curve. Indeed $(1)$ is trivially satisfied and from [@HKT Lemma 11.129] $P$ is the unique place ramifying in $\mathcal{C}/S$ and it is totally ramified. Hence also Condition $(2)$ is satisfied by Remark \[remo\].
In the following, we will denote by $\mathbb{P}_q$ the set of all rational places of $ \mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$. Also, given a divisor $D$ and a place $Q$, we denote by $v_Q(D)$ the weight of $D$ at $Q$.
Consider a Swiss curve $(\mathcal{C},P)$ and the set $$\mathcal{A}=\left\{\alpha \in \mathbb{F}_q \ :\ (x-\alpha)_0-v_P((x-\alpha)_0) P\leq \sum_{Q\in \mathbb{P}_q\setminus \{P\}} Q \right\}.$$
Basically, $\mathcal{A}$ consists of all the $\alpha\in \mathbb{F}_q$ such that all the zeros of the function $x-\alpha$ other than (possibly) $P$ are rational and simple.
Also, let $$D=\sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}} \bigg((x-\alpha)_0-v_P((x-\alpha)_0) P \bigg).$$
\[Main:Swiss\] Let $(\mathcal{C},P)$ be a Swiss curve. With the same notation as above, consider another $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor $G$ such that ${\rm supp}(G)\cap {\rm supp}(D) =\emptyset$. Then
1. $C(D,G)^{\bot} =C(D,E+(\gamma+2g-2) P-G)$, for some positive divisor $E$ and some integer $\gamma$;
2. if, in addition, $2G\leq E+(\gamma+2g-2) P $ then $C(D,G)\subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$.
Define $$h=\sum_{a \in \mathcal{A}} \frac{1}{x-a},\qquad\omega=\left(h\right)dx.$$ Clearly, places in ${\rm supp}(D)$ are simple poles of $h$.
By hypothesis $(dx)=(2g-2)P$. Also, $\left(h\right)=E-D+\gamma P$, where $$E=\left(h\right)_0-v_P((h)_0) P,\qquad\gamma =\deg D-\deg E.$$ Hence, $(\omega)=E-D+(\gamma+2g-2) P$.
Therefore $\omega$ has poles at places of $D$ and it is readily seen that the residue of $\omega$ at such places is $1$. Now, the claim follows from [@27 Theorem 2.72].
In Section \[sec:appl\], we describe several Swiss curves. Using Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] we construct families of self-orthogonal codes, which provide stabilizer quantum codes by means of Theorem \[th:stab\].
Applications to some Swiss curves {#sec:appl}
=================================
GK curve
--------
The Giulietti-Korchmáros curve over $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ is a non-singular curve in ${\rm PG}(3,\mathbb{K})$, $\mathbb{K}=\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}$, defined by the affine equations: $$GK_q:
\begin{cases}
Y^{q+1} = X^q+X,\\
Z^{q^2-q+1} =Y^{q^2}-Y.
\end{cases}$$ It has genus $g=\frac{(q^3+1)(q^2-2)}{2}+1$, and the number of its $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-rational places is $q^8-q^6+q^5+1$. The GK curve first appeared in [@GK2009] as a maximal curve over $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$, since the latter number coincides with the Hasse-Weil upper bound, $q^6+2gq^3+1$. The GK curve is the first example of an $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-maximal curve that is not $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-covered by the Hermitian curve, provided that $q>2$.
Since this curve is $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-maximal its $p$-rank is zero. Indeed, we will show that Condition $(2)$ is satisfied by applying Remark \[remo1\]. The coordinate function $z$ has valuation $1$ at each affine $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-rational point of $GK_q$, hence $z$ is a separating element for $\mathbb{K}(GK_q)/\mathbb{K}$ by [@Sti Prop. 3.10.2]. Then $dz$ is non-zero by [@Sti Prop. 4.1.8(c)]. It is easily checked that $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(GK_q)/\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(z)$ is a Galois extension of degree $q^3$; also, the unique place $P_\infty$ centered at the unique point at infinity of $GK_q$ is a ramification place for $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(GK_q)/\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(z)$. From Remark \[remo1\], $(GK_q,P_\infty)$ is a Swiss curve and $(dz)=(2g-2)P_{\infty}=(q^3+1)(q^2-2)P_\infty$.
Let $m=q^2-q+1$. It can be seen that if $\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ is such that $Y^{q^2}-Y=\xi^m$ has $q^2$ solutions in $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$, then for each $\eta\in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ satisfying $\eta^{q^2}-\eta=\xi^m$ there are precisely $q$ values $\theta \in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ such that $\theta^q+\theta = \eta^{q+1}$. Also, the values $\xi\in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ for which all the zeros of $z-\xi$ are rational are those satisfying $$\label{eq:cond}
\xi^{mq^4}+\xi^{mq^2}+\xi^m=0;$$ moreover for each of them there are exactly $q^3$ triples $(\bar x,\bar y,\bar z) \in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}^3$ such that $\bar{z}^m = \bar{y}^{q^2}-\bar{y}$ and $\bar{y}^{q+1}=\bar{x}^q+\bar{x}$. This implies that there are exactly $q^5-q^3+q^2$ values $\xi\in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}$ satisfying Equation . Let $$\Xi =\{\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^6} \ : \ \xi^{mq^4}+\xi^{mq^2}+\xi^m=0\}.$$ Then $$\Xi \setminus \{0\}=\left\{\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^6} \ : \ \left(\xi^{(q-1)(q^3+1)}\right)^{q^2+1}+\left(\xi^{(q-1)(q^3+1)}\right)+1=0\right\}.$$ Note that if $\mu_{q^2+q+1}$ denotes the set of the $(q^2+q+1)$-th roots of unity then $$\{ \theta \in \mu_{q^2+q+1} \ : \ \theta^{q^2+1}+\theta+1 =0\}=\{ \theta \in \mu_{q^2+q+1} \ : \ \theta^{q+1}+\theta^q+1 =0\}.$$ Thus, the polynomial $$f(Z)=Z^{q^5-q^3+q^2}+Z^{q^5-q^4+q^2-q+1}+Z\in \mathbb{F}_{q^6}[Z]$$ factorizes completely over $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$, and $$f(Z)=\prod _{\xi \in \Xi }(Z-\xi).$$ Also, $$f^{\prime}(Z)
=Z^{q^5-q^4+q^2-q}+1=(Z^{(q^3+1)(q-1)}+1)^q,$$ and hence the zero divisor of the rational function $f^\prime(z)\in\mathbb{K}(GK_q)$ satisfies $$\deg(f^{\prime}(z))_0 =(q^5-q^4+q^2-q)q^3.$$ Now consider in $\mathbb{K}(GK_q)$ the function $$\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}=\frac{f^{\prime}(z)}{f(z)}.$$ Its principal divisor is $$M-D+(q^4-q^3+q)q^3P_{\infty},$$ where $M$ is the zero divisor of $f^{\prime}(z)$ and $D$ is the zero divisor $\sum_{P \in \mathbb{P}_{q^6}(GK_q)\setminus \{P_{\infty}\}}P$ of $f(z)$ of degree $q^5(q^3-q+1)$. The divisor of $$\omega=\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}\,dz$$ is $$M-D+[2g-2+(q^4-q^3+q)q^3]P_{\infty}=M-D+[q^7-q^6+q^5+q^4-2q^3+q^2-2]P_{\infty}.$$
Consider the one-point divisor $G=sP_{\infty}$. By Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] and its proof, $$\begin{aligned}
C(D,G)^{\bot}&=&C(D,M+[2g-2+(q^4-q^3+q)q^3-s]P_{\infty})\\
&=&C(D,M+[q^7-q^6+q^5+q^4-2q^3+q^2-2-s]P_{\infty}).\end{aligned}$$ Also, $C(D,G) \subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$ if $$s \leq \frac{q^7-q^6+q^5+q^4-2q^3+q^2-2}{2}.$$ Finally, by Theorem \[th:stab\], we obtain the following result.
\[Th:GKQuantum\] With the same notation as above, consider the $q^6$-ary code $C(D,s P_{\infty})$ from the GK curve. Assume that $$q^5-2q^3+q^2-2\leq s \leq \frac{q^7-q^6+q^5+q^4-2q^3+q^2-2}{2}.$$ Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $$[[\,q^8-q^6+q^5,\;q^8-q^6+2q^5-2q^3+q^2-2-2s,\;\geq s-q^5+2q^3-q^2+2\,]]_{q^6}.$$
GGS curves {#SubSection:GGS}
----------
Let $q$ be a prime power and $n\geq5$ be an odd integer. The GGS curve $GGS(q,n)$ is defined by the equations $$\label{GGS_equation}
GGS(q,n): \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
X^q + X = Y^{q+1}\\
Y^{q^2}-Y= Z^m\\
\end{array}
\right.
,$$ where $m= (q^n+1)/(q+1)$; see [@GGS2010]. The genus of $GGS(q,n)$ is $\frac{1}{2}(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)$, and $GGS(q,n)$ is $\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}$-maximal. Let $P_0=(0,0,0)$, $P_{(a,b,c)}=(a,b,c)$, and let $P_{\infty}$ be the unique ideal point of $GGS(q,n)$. Note that $GGS(q,n)$ is singular, being $P_\infty$ its unique singular point. Yet, there is only one place of $GGS(q,n)$ centered at $P_\infty$. The divisors of the coordinate functions $x,y,z$ satisfying $x^q + x = y^{q+1}$ and $y^{q^2}-y= z^m$ are $$\begin{aligned}
(x)&=&m(q+1)P_0-m(q+1)P_{\infty},\\
(y)&=&m\sum_{\alpha^q+\alpha=0} P_{(\alpha,0,0)}-mqP_{\infty},\\
(z)&=&\sum_{\scriptsize\begin{array}{l} \alpha^q+\alpha=\beta\\ \beta \in \mathbb{F}_{q^2}\\ \end{array}} P_{(\alpha,\beta,0)}-q^3P_{\infty}.\end{aligned}$$ As for the GK curve, the curve $GGS(q,n)$ has $p$-rank zero because it is $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$-maximal, and $(dz)=(2g-2)P_\infty$ being $\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}(GGS(q,n))/\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}(z)$ a Galois extension of degree $q^3$ in which $P_\infty$ is totally ramified. Hence $(GGS(q,n),P_\infty)$ is a Swiss curve. From the proof of [@GGS2010 Theorem 2.6] every $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$-rational point of the curve $Y^{q^2}-Y=Z^m$ which is not centered at the unique point at infinity of the curve splits completely in $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}(GGS(q,n))/\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}(y,z)$. This is equivalent to say, as for the GK curve, that if $\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ is such that $Y^{q^2}-Y=\xi^m$ has $q^2$ solutions in $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$, then for each $\eta\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ satisfying $\eta^{q^2}-\eta=\xi^m$ there are precisely $q$ values $\theta \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ such that $\theta^q+\theta = \eta^{q+1}$. Also, the values $\xi\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ for which all the zeros of $z-\xi$ belong to $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ are those satisfying $$\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (\xi^m)^{q^{2i}}=0;$$ moreover for each of them there are exactly $q^3$ triples $(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}^3$ such that $z^m = y^{q^2}-y$ and $y^{q+1}=x^q+x$. This means that there are exactly $q^{2n-1}-q^n+q^{n-1}$ such values $\xi\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ as $|GGS(q,n)(\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}})|=q^{2n+2}-q^{n+3}+q^{n+2}+1$. Let $$\Xi =\{\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}} \ : \ \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (\xi^m)^{q^{2i}}=0\}.$$ Then $$\Xi \setminus \{0\}=\{\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}} \ : (\xi^m)^{q^{2(n-1)}-1}+(\xi^m)^{q^{2(n-2)}-1}+\cdots+(\xi^m)^{q^2-1}+1=0\}$$ has cardinality $(q^n+1)(q^{n-1}-1)$.
Let $\mu_{(q^n-1)/(q-1)}$ be the set of $\frac{q^n-1}{q-1}$-th roots of unity, and let $k=\frac{n-1}{2}\geq2$. Then $$\Theta=\{\theta \in \mu_{(q^n-1)/(q-1)} \mid \theta^{q^{2(n-2)}+q^{2(n-3)}+\cdots+q^2+1} + \theta^{q^{2(n-3)}+\cdots+q^2+1}+\cdots+\theta^{q^2+1}+\theta+1=0\}$$ $$=\{\theta \in \mu_{(q^n-1)/(q-1)} \mid p(\theta)=0\},$$ where $$\label{eq:polp}
p(Z)=1+\sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{\sum_{j=0}^{i}q^{2j} + \sum_{j=0}^{k-1} q^{2j+1}} + \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j+1}}\;\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}[Z]$$ which is a separable polynomial of degree $\sum_{j=0}^{2k-1} q^j$, see the proof of [@ABQ Lemma 2] and in particular [@ABQ Equation (4)].
Thus, the polynomial $$f(Z)=Z \cdot p(Z^{(q^n+1)(q-1)}) \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}[X]$$ factorizes completely over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$, and $$\begin{aligned}
f(Z)&=\prod _{\xi \in \Xi }(Z-\xi)=&Z+\sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{1+\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j}(q^n+1)(q-1) + \sum_{j=0}^{k-1} q^{2j+1} (q^n+1)(q-1)}\\
& & + \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{1+\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j+1}(q^n+1)(q-1)}.\end{aligned}$$ Also, $$f^{\prime}(Z)=1+Z^{q(q^n+1)(q-1)} + \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} Z^{\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j+1}(q^n+1)(q-1)}$$ and hence $$\deg(f^{\prime}(z))_0 =\bigg(q\frac{(q^n+1)}{q+1}(q^{n-1}-1)\bigg)q^3.$$ Now consider the function $$\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}=\frac{f^{\prime}(z)}{f(z)}.$$ Its principal divisor is $$M-D+\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3P_{\infty},$$ where $M$ is the zero divisor of $f^{\prime}(z)$ and $$D=(f(z))_0= \sum_{P \in \mathbb{P}_{q^{2n}}(GGS(q,n))\setminus \{P_{\infty}\}}P$$ has degree $q^3((q^{n-1}-1)(q^n+1)+1)= q^{2n+2}-q^{n+3}+q^{n+2}$. The principal divisor of $$\omega=\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}\,dz$$ is $$M-D+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3+2g-2\bigg]P_{\infty}.$$ Consider the one-point divisor $G=s P_{\infty}$. By Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] and its proof, $$C(D,G)^{\bot}=C\bigg(D,M+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3+2g-2-s\bigg]P_{\infty}\bigg)$$ $$=C\bigg(D,M+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3+(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)-2-s\bigg]P_{\infty}\bigg).$$ Also, $C(D,G) \subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$ if $$s \leq \frac{\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3+(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)-2\bigg]}{2}.$$ From Theorem \[th:stab\] we have the following result.
\[Th:GGSQuantum\] With the same notation as above, consider the $q^{2n}$-ary code $C(D,mP_{\infty})$ from the GGS curve. Assume that $$(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)-2\leq s \leq \frac{\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^3+(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)-2\bigg]}{2}.$$ Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $$[[\,q^{2n+2}-q^{n+3}+q^{n+2},\;q^{2n+2}-q^{n+3}+q^{n+2}+(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)-2-2s,$$ $$\geq s-(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)+2\,]]_{q^{2n}}.$$
Abdón-Bezerra-Quoos curve {#SubSection:ABQ}
-------------------------
Let $q$ be a prime power and $n\geq3$ be an odd integer. The Abdón-Bezerra-Quoos curve $ABQ(q,n)$ is defined by the equation $$\label{ABQ_equation}
ABQ(q,n):
Y^{q^2}-Y= X^m,$$ where $m= (q^n+1)/(q+1)$; see [@ABQ; @GGS2010]. The curve $ABQ(q,n)$ is singular, has genus $\frac{1}{2}(q-1)(q^{n}-q)$, and is $\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}$-maximal. Let $P_0=(0,0,0)$, $P_{(a,b,c)}=(a,b,c)$, and let $P_{\infty}$ be the unique ideal point of $ABQ(q,n)$. The point $P_\infty$ is the unique singular point of $ABQ(q,n)$. Yet, there is only one place of $ABQ(q,n)$ centered at $P_\infty$. As for the GK and GGS cases, $ABQ(q,n)$ is $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$-maximal and hence has $p$-rank zero. The extension $\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}(ABQ(q,n))/\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}(x)$ is a Galois extension of degree $q^2$, and $P_\infty$ is totally ramified in it. Thus, $(dx)=(2g-2)P_\infty$ and $(ABQ(q,n),P_\infty)$ is a Swiss curve.
An element $\xi \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ is such that $Y^{q^2}-Y=\xi^m$ has $q^2$ solutions in $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ if and only if $$\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (\xi^m)^{q^{2i}}=0.$$ Also, there are exactly $q^{2n-1}-q^n+q^{n-1}$ such values $\xi\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ as $|ABQ(q,n)(\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}})|=q^{2n+1}-q^{n+2}+q^{n+1}+1$.
Arguing as in Section \[SubSection:GGS\], the polynomial $$f(Z)=Z \cdot p(Z^{(q^n+1)(q-1)})\, \in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}[Z]$$ factorizes completely over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$; here, the polynomial $p(X)\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}[X]$ is as in Equation . Also, $$\begin{aligned}
f(Z)=\prod _{\xi \in \Xi }(Z-\xi)&=&Z+\sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{1+\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j}(q^n+1)(q-1) + \sum_{j=0}^{k-1} q^{2j+1} (q^n+1)(q-1)} \\
&&+ \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} Z^{1+\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j+1}(q^n+1)(q-1)}.\end{aligned}$$ Also, $$f^{\prime}(Z)=1+Z^{q(q^n+1)(q-1)} + \sum_{i=1}^{k-1} Z^{\sum_{j=0}^{i} q^{2j+1}(q^n+1)(q-1)}$$ and hence $$\deg(f^{\prime}(z))_0 =\bigg(q\frac{(q^n+1)}{q+1}(q^{n-1}-1)\bigg)q^2.$$ Now, the function $$\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}=\frac{f^{\prime}(z)}{f(z)}$$ has principal divisor $$M-D+\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2 P_{\infty},$$ where $M$ is the zero divisor of $f^{\prime}(z)$ and $$D=(f(z))_0= \sum_{P \in \mathbb{P}_{q^{2n}}(ABQ(q,n))\setminus \{P_{\infty}\}}P$$ has degree $q^2((q^{n-1}-1)(q^n+1)+1)= q^{2n+1}-q^{n+2}+q^{n+1}$. The principal divisor of $$\omega=\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}dz$$ is $$M-D+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2+2g-2\bigg]P_{\infty}.$$ Consider the one-point divisor $G=s P_{\infty}$. By Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] and its proof, $$\begin{aligned}
C(D,G)^{\bot}&=&C\bigg(D,M+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2+2g-2-s\bigg]P_{\infty}\bigg)\\
&=&C\bigg(D,M+\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2+(q-1)(q^n-q)-2-s\bigg]P_{\infty}\bigg).\end{aligned}$$ Also, $C(D,G) \subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$ if $$s \leq \frac{\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2+(q-1)(q^{n}-q)-2\bigg]}{2}.$$ The theorem below follows from Theorem \[th:stab\].
\[Th:ABQQuantum\] With the same notation as above, consider the $q^{2n}$-ary code $C(D,mP_{\infty})$ from the ABQ curve. Assume that $$(q-1)(q^{n}-q)-2\leq s \leq \frac{\bigg[\bigg( (q^{n-1}-1)\frac{q^n+1}{q+1}+1\bigg)q^2+(q-1)(q^{n}-q)-2\bigg]}{2}.$$ Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $$[[\,q^{2n+1}-q^{n+2}+q^{n+1},\;q^{2n+1}-q^{n+2}+q^{n+1}+(q-1)(q^{n}-q)-2-2s,\,\geq s-(q-1)(q^{n}-q)+2\,]]_{q^{2n}}.$$
Suzuki and Ree curves
---------------------
Let $q_0= 2^s$, where $s\geq1$, and $q= 2q_0^2$. The Suzuki curve $S_q$ is given by the affine model $$S_q: Y^q+Y=X^{q_0}(X^q+X).$$ The curve $S_q$ is $\mathbb{F}_{q^4}$-maximal of genus $q_0(q-1)$. It has a unique singular point, namely its unique point at infinity $P_\infty$,which is a $q_0$-fold point and the center of just one place of $S_q$. The extension $\mathbb{F}_{q^4}(S_q)/\mathbb{F}_{q^4}(x)$ is a Galois extension of degree $q$ in which $P_\infty$ is the only ramified place, and it is totally ramified. Hence, by Remark \[remo1\], $(dx)=(2g-2)P_\infty=(2q_0(q-1)-2)P_\infty$ and $(S_q,P_\infty)$ is a Swiss curve.
Let $q_0= 3^s$, where $s\geq1$, and $q= 3q_0^2$. The Ree curve $R_q$ is given by the affine space model $$R_q:\begin{cases} Y^q-Y=X^{q_0}(X^q-X), \\ Z^q-Z=X^{2q_0}(X^q-X)\end{cases}.$$ This curve has genus $\frac{3}{2}q_0(q-1)(q+q_0+1)$ and it is $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}$-maximal. It has a unique singular point coinciding with its unique infinite point; moreover there is a unique place $P_\infty$ centered in it. The extension $\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(R_q)/\mathbb{F}_{q^6}(x)$ is a Galois extension of degree $q^2$ in which $P_\infty$ is the only ramified place, and it is totally ramified. Hence, by Remark \[remo1\], $(dx)=(2g-2)P_\infty$ and $(R_q,P_\infty)$ is a Swiss curve.
Since Suzuki and Ree curves are Swiss curves, it makes sense to ask for a suitable set $I$ of rational points as well as a covering of $I$ made of lines, to which Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] applies. According to the equations defining the curves, the most natural choice would probably be $I={S}_q(\mathbb{F}_q)$ and $I={R}_q(\mathbb{F}_q)$ respectively. Indeed, in both cases a nice covering of lines is given simply by the vertical lines $x=a$, with $a \in \mathbb{F}_q$. However, in this case one would obtain $f(X)=\prod_{a\in\mathbb{F}_q}(X-a)=X^q-X$, which has clearly constant derivative. Hence the construction would be the same as in [@MTT]. The determination of a suitable set $I$ and a covering of lines remains an open problem.
$r$-Swiss curves and codes {#sec:r-swiss}
==========================
In this section we generalize the construction of Section \[sec:swiss\] to a larger class of curves.
Let $r$ be a positive integer. An $r$-Swiss curve is an $(r+1)$-tuple $(\mathcal{C},P_1,\ldots,P_r)$ such that $\mathcal{C}$ is an absolutely irreducible $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational curve, $P_1,\ldots,P_r$ are distinct places of $\mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$, and the following properties hold:
1. $P_i$ is rational for every $i=1,\ldots,r$;
2. there exists a function $x\in \mathbb{F}_q(\mathcal{C})$ such that $(dx)=\frac{2g-2}{r}(P_1+\ldots+P_r)$;
3. ${\rm supp}\left((x)_\infty\right)=\{P_1,\ldots,P_r\}$.
Clearly, a $1$-Swiss curve is just a Swiss curve.
Consider an $r$-Swiss curve $(\mathcal{C},P_1,\ldots,P_r)$ and the set $$\mathcal{A}=\left\{\alpha \in \mathbb{F}_q \ :\ (x-\alpha)_0- \sum_{i=1}^r v_{P_i}((x-\alpha)_0) P_i\leq \sum_{Q\in \mathbb{P}_q\setminus \{P_1,\ldots,P_r\}} Q \right\}.$$ The set $\mathcal{A}$ consists of all elements $\alpha\in \mathbb{F}_q$ such that all the zeros of the function $x-\alpha$ other than (possibly) $P_1,\ldots,P_r$ are rational and simple. Also, let $$D=\sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}}\left( (x-\alpha)_0- \sum_{i=1}^r v_{P_i}((x-\alpha)_0) P_i \right).$$
\[Main:WSwiss\] Let $(\mathcal{C},P_1,\ldots, P_r)$ be an $r$-Swiss curve. With the same notation as above, consider another $\mathbb{F}_q$-rational divisor $G$ such that $\rm{supp}(G)\cap \rm{supp}(D) =\emptyset$. Then
1. $C(D,G)^{\bot} =C(D,E+\sum_{i=1}^r(\gamma_i+2g-2) P_i-G)$, for some positive divisor $E$ and some integers $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_r$;
2. if, in addition, $2G\leq E+\sum_{i=1}^r\left(\gamma_i+\frac{2g-2}{r}\right) P_i $ then $C(D,G)\subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$.
Let $h=\sum_{a \in \mathcal{A}} \frac{1}{x-a}$. Clearly, places in ${\rm supp}(D) \setminus \{P_1,\ldots, P_r\}$ are simple poles of $h$. Consider $$\omega=\left(h \right) dx.$$ By hypothesis $(dx)=\sum_{i=1}^r\frac{2g-2}{r}P_i$, and $$\left(h\right)=E-D+ \sum_{i=1}^r\gamma_i P_i,$$ where $E=\left(h\right)_0-\sum_{i=1}^r v_{P_i}((h)_0)P_i$ and $\sum_{i=1}^r \gamma_i =\deg D-\deg E$. Summing up, $$(\omega)=Z-D+\sum_{i=1}^r\bigg(\gamma_i+\frac{2g-2}{r}\bigg) P_i.$$ Therefore $\omega$ has poles at places of $D$ and it is readily seen that the residue of $\omega$ at such places is $1$. Now the claim follows from [@27 Theorem 2.72].
Applications to some $r$-Swiss curves {#sec:r-appl}
=====================================
GGK curves {#SubSection:GGK}
----------
Let $q$ be a prime power and $n\geq3$ be an odd integer. The curve $GGK2(q,n)$ is defined by the equations $$\label{GGK_equation}
GGK2(q,n): \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
X^{q+1} -1 = Y^{q+1}\\
Y\bigg(\frac{X^{q^2}-X}{X^{q+1}-1}\bigg)= Z^m\\
\end{array}
\right.
,$$ where $m= (q^n+1)/(q+1)$; see [@BM]. The genus of $GGK2(q,n)$ is $\frac{1}{2}(q-1)(q^{n+1}+q^n-q^2)$, $GGK2(q,n)$ is $\mathbb F_{q^{2n}}$-maximal, and $GGK2(q,3)\cong GK_q$. The coordinate function $x$ has exactly $q+1$ distinct poles $P_1,\ldots,P_{q+1}$; also, the coordinate function $z$ has pole divisor $(z)_\infty=(q^2-q)(P_1+\ldots+P_{q+1})$, and $(dz)=\frac{2g-2}{q+1}(P_1+\ldots+P_{q+1})$ (see [@BM Page 17]). Hence, $(GGK2(q,n),P_1,\ldots,P_{q+1})$ is a $(q+1)$-Swiss curve.
### **The case $q=2$.**
In the rest of this section, $q=2$ and $GGK2(q,n)$ reads $$GGK2(2,n): \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
X^{3} -1 = Y^{3}\\
YX= Z^{(2^n+1)/3}\\
\end{array}
\right..$$ It is easily seen that $z=a$ has exactly $q^3-q=6$ rational zeros if and only if either $a=0$ or $Y^6+Y^3-a^{2^n+1} \in \mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}[Y]$ has $6$ distinct roots in $\mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}$. From the maximality of $GGK2(2,n)$ and $[\mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}(x,y,z) : \mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}(z)]=6$ follows that the set $$\mathcal{A}=\{a \in \mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}^* \mid Y^6+Y^3=a^{2^n+1} \ \textrm{has 6 distinct roots in} \ \mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}\}$$ has size $$|\mathcal{A}|=4(2^n+1)(2^{n-1}-1)/3.$$ Let $f(X)=\prod_{a \in \mathcal{A}}(x-a)$. The following can be checked by direct computation with MAGMA.
- $n=3$. In this case, $$f(X)=X^{36} + X^{27} + X^{18} + 1, \qquad f^\prime (X)=x^{26}.$$ Since $P_1,P_2,P_3$ are not zeros of $f^\prime$, we have $(f^\prime(z))_\infty=26(q^2-q)(P_1+P_2+P_3)$ and hence $$\deg(f^{\prime}(z))_0 =26(q+1)(q^2-q)=156.$$ Now, the function $$\sum_{\xi \in \mathcal{A}}\frac{1}{z-\xi}=\frac{f^{\prime}(z)}{f(z)}$$ has principal divisor $$M-D+20 \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i,$$ where $M$ is the zero divisor of $f^{\prime}(z)$ and $$D=(f(z))_0= \sum_{P \in \mathbb{P}_{2^{6}}(GGK2(2,3))\setminus \mathbb{P}_{2^{2}}(GGK2(2,3)) }P$$ has degree $216$. The principal divisor of $$\omega=\sum_{\xi \in \mathcal{A}}\frac{1}{z-\xi}dz$$ is $$M-D+26 \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i.$$ Consider the multi-point divisor $G=s \sum_{i=1}^{3} P_i$. By Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] and its proof, $$C(D,G)^{\bot}=C\left(D,M+(26-m) \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i \right).$$ Also, $C(D,G) \subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$ if $s \leq 13$. Now we apply Theorem \[th:stab\].
\[Th:GGK21Quantum\_3\] With the same notation as above, consider the $2^6$-ary code $C(D,s\sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i )$ from the curve $GGK2(2,6)$. Assume that $6\leq m \leq 13$. Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $$[[\,216,\;k_m,\;3m-18\,]]_{2^{6}},\qquad k_m=\begin{cases} 196, \ if \ m=6, \\ 192-6(m-7), \ if \ 7\leq m\leq 13. \end{cases}$$
- $n=5$. Here, $$\begin{aligned}
f(X)={}&X^{660} + X^{627} + X^{594} + X^{528} + X^{495} + X^{396} + X^{363} + X^{330} + X^{132} + X^{66} + 1,\end{aligned}$$ and $$f^\prime (X)=X^{626} + X^{494} + X^{362}.$$ Since $P_1,P_2,P_3$ are not zeros of $f^\prime$ we have $(f^\prime(z))_\infty=626(q^2-q)\sum_{i=1}^{3} P_i$ and hence $$\deg(f^{\prime}(z))_0 =626(q+1)(q^2-q)=3756.$$ Now, the function $$\sum_{\xi \in \Xi}\frac{1}{z-\xi}=\frac{f^{\prime}(z)}{f(z)}.$$ has principal divisor $$M-D+68 \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i,$$ where $M$ is the zero divisor of $f^{\prime}(z)$ and $$D=(f(z))_0= \sum_{P \in \mathbb{P}_{2^{10}}(GGK2(2,5))\setminus \mathbb{P}_{2^{2}}(GGK2(2,5)) }P$$ has degree $3960$. The principal divisor of $$\omega=\sum_{\xi \in \mathcal{A}}\frac{1}{z-\xi}dz$$ is $$M-D+98 \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i.$$ Consider the multi-point divisor $G=s \sum_{i=1}^{3} P_i$. By Theorem \[Main:Swiss\] and its proof, $$C(D,G)^{\bot}=C\left(D,M+(98-m) \sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i \right).$$ Also, $C(D,G) \subset C(D,G)^{\bot}$ if $m \leq 49$. Now we apply Theorem \[th:stab\].
\[Th:GGK21Quantum\_5\] With the same notation as above, consider the $2^{10}$-ary code $C(D,m\sum_{i=1}^{3}P_i )$ from the curve $GGK2(2,10)$. Assume that $30\leq m \leq 49$. Then there exists a quantum code with parameters $$[[3960,k_m, 3m-90]]_{2^{6}},\qquad k_m=\begin{cases} 3868, \ if \ m=30, \\ 3864-6(m-31), \ if \ 31\leq m\leq 49. \end{cases}$$
Comparisons {#sec:comp}
===========
The $[[N,k,d]]_{q^6}$-codes constructed in Theorem \[Th:GKQuantum\] are pure. If in addition $s\geq 7q^5-14q^3+7q^2+12$, then they do not satisfy Condition .
Firstly, note that all the $[[N,k,d]]_{q^6}$-codes of Theorem \[Th:GKQuantum\] satisfy $N\equiv k \pmod 2$.
Also, the codes are pure. In fact, $C(D,G)$ is an $[N_1,k_1,d_1]_q$ code, with $N_1=q^8-q^6+q^5$, $k_1=s-\frac{(q^3+1)(q^2-2)}{2}$, $d_1\geq q^8-q^6+q^5-s$. It is readily seen that $d_1>k_1+1$ and by Corollary \[Corollary\] the quantum codes are pure.
As $N-k+2=2s -q^5+2q^3-q^2+4$, the left-hand side of Condition reads $$\frac{q^{6(N-k+2)}-1}{q^{12}-1}<\frac{q^{6(N-k+2)}}{q^{12}-1}=\frac{q^{6(2s -q^5+2q^3-q^2+4)}}{q^{12}-1},$$ whereas the right-hand side is larger than $$\begin{aligned}
\binom{N}{d-1}(q^{12}-1)^{d-2}&=&\binom{N}{d-1}\frac{(q^{12}-1)^{d-1}}{q^{12}-1} >\left(\frac{N}{d-1}\right)^{d-1}\frac{(q^{12}-1)^{d-1}}{q^{12}-1} \\
&>&\left(\frac{N}{d-1}\right)^{d-2}\frac{q^{12(d-1)}}{q^{12}-1}\geq \frac{q^{12(s-q^5+2q^3-q^2+1)}}{q^{12}-1}q^{d-2},\end{aligned}$$ where we used that $N/(d-1)\geq q$, which is implied by $s\leq q^7+q^4-2q^3+q^2-1$ and hence by the hypothesis $s\leq \frac{q^7-q^6+q^5+q^4-2q^3+q^2-2}{2}$.
From $s\geq 7q^5-14q^3+7q^2+12$ follows $d-2+12(s-q^5+2q^3-q^2+1)\geq 6(2s -q^5+2q^3-q^2+4)$; therefore, the left-hand side is smaller than the right-hand side and Condition is not satisfied.
Acknowledgments\*
=================
The research of D. Bartoli and G. Zini was partially supported by the Italian National Group for Algebraic and Geometric Structures and their Applications (GNSAGA - INdAM).
[99]{}
M. Abdón, J. Bezerra, and L. Quoos, “Further examples of maximal curves", *J. Pure Appl. Algebra* **213**, 1192–1196 (2009).
D. Bartoli, M. Montanucci and G. Zini, “AG codes and AG quantum codes from the GGS curve”, Des. Codes Cryptogr., **86** 2315–2344 (2018).
P. Beelen and M. Montanucci, “A new family of maximal curves”, *J. Lond. Math. Soc.* (2) **98**, 573–592 (2018).
A.R. Calderbank, E.M. Rains, P.W. Shor and N.J.A.Sloane, “Quantum error correction via codes over GF(4)”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory **44**, 1369–1387 (1998).
A.R. Calderbank and P.W. Shor, “Good quantum error-correcting codes exist”, Physical Review A **54**,1098–1105 (1996).
H. Chen, “Some good quantum error-correcting codes from algebraic geometry codes”, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory **47**, 2059–2061 (2001).
K. Feng, Z. Ma, “A finite Gilbert-Varshamov bound for pure stabilizer quantum codes”, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory **50**, 3323–3325 (2004).
C. Galindo and F. Hernando, "Quantum codes from affine variety codes and their subfield-subcodes, Des. Codes and Cryptogr. **76**, 89–100 (2015).
A. Garcia, C. Güneri, and H. Stichtenoth, “A generalization of the Giulietti-Korchmáros maximal curve", Adv. Geom. [**10**]{}(3) (2010), 427–434.
M. Giulietti and G. Korchmáros, “A new family of maximal curves over a finite field", [*Math. Ann.*]{} [**343**]{}(1) (2009), 229–245.
L.K. Grover, “A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search". Proceedings of the Twenty-eighth Annual ACMSymposium on the Theory of Computing (Philadelphia, PA, 1996), ACM, New York (1996), 212–219.
V.D. Goppa, “Algebraic-geometric codes" (in Russian), [*Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat.*]{} [**46**]{}(4) (1982), 762–781.
F. Hernando, G. McGuire, F. Monserrat, and J.J. Moyano-Fernández, “Quantum codes from a new construction of self-orthogonal algebraic geometry codes”, preprint, https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.05645.
J.W.P. Hirschfeld, G. Korchmáros, and F. Torres, [*Algebraic Curves over a Finite Field*]{}. Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics, Princeton (2008).
T. Høholdt, J. van Lint and R. Pellikaan, Algebraic geometry codes. In: Handbook of Coding Theory, vol. 1, pp. 871–961 (1998).
A. Ketkar, A. Klappenecker, S. Kumar and P.K. Sarvepalli, “Nonbinary stabilizer codes over finite field”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory **52** (2006), 4892–4924.
A. Klappenecker and P.K Sarvepalli, “Nonbinary quantum codes from Hermitian curves”, in: Applied Algebra, Algebraic Algorithms and Error-Correcting Codes, 136–143. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3857, Springer, Berlin (2006).
L. Jin, “Quantum stabilizer codes from maximal curves”, IEEE Trans.Inf. Theory **60** (2014), 313–316.
L. Jin and C.P. Xing, “Euclidean and Hermitian self-orthogonal Algebraic Geometry codes and their application to Quantum codes”, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory **58** (2012), 5484–5489 .
J. Kim and G.L. Mathews, “Quantum error-correcting codes from algebraic curves”, in: Advances in Algebraic Geometry codes, 419–444. Martinez, E., Munuera, C., Ruano, D. (Eds.). Word Scientific, Hackensack (2008).
J. Kim and J. Walker, “Nonbinary quantum error-correcting cods from algebraic curves”, Discrete Math. **308** (2008), 3115–3124.
G. G. La Guardia, F. R. F. Pereira, “Good and asymptotically good quantum codes derived from algebraic geometry," Quantum Inf. Process. [**16**]{}(6) (2017), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-017-1618-7.
M. Montanucci, M.Timpanella and G. Zini, “AG codes and AG quantum codes from cyclic extensions of the Suzuki and the Ree curves”, J. Geom. **109** (2018), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00022-018-0428-0.
M. Montanucci and V. Pallozzi Lavorante, “AG codes from the second generalization of the GK maximal curve”, preprint, arXiv:1901.08897.
C. Munuera, A. Sepúlveda and F. Torres, “Castle curves and codes”, Adv. Math. Commun. **3** (2009), 399–408.
C. Munuera, W. Tenório, F. Torres, “Quantum error-correcting codes from algebraic geometry codes of Castle Type”, Quant. Inf. Process.**15** (2016), 4071–4088.
M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang, [*Quantum Computation and Quantum Information*]{}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).
R. Pellikaan, B.Z. Shen, G.J.M. van Wee, “Which linear codes are Algebraic-Geometric”, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory **37** (1991), 583–602.
T. Shaska, “Quantum codes from algebraic curves with automorphisms”, Condensed Matter Physics **11** (2008), 383–396 .
P.W. Shor, “Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring”, 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Santa Fe, NM, 1994), IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, Los Alamitos, CA (1994), 124–134.
A.M. Steane, “Multiple-particle interference and quantum error correction”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London-Series A **452** (1996), 2551–2557.
H. Stichtenoth, [*Algebraic function fields and codes*]{}, Graduate Texts in Mathematics [**254**]{}, Springer, Berlin (2009).
H. Stichtenoth, “Self-dual Goppa codes”, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra **55** (1988), 199–211.
M.A. Tsfasman, S.G. Vlăduţ and T. Zink, “Modular Curves, Shimura Curves and AG Codes, better than Varshamov-Gilbert bound”, Math. Nachr.**109** (1982), 21–28.
[^1]: [*2010 Math. Subj. Class.*]{}: 94B27, 11T71, 81P70, 14G50
[^2]: [*Keywords*]{}: Finite fields, algebraic geometry codes, quantum error-correction, algebraic curves
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We provide a concise review on multi-field inflation and cosmological perturbations. We discuss convenient and physically meaningful bases in terms of which perturbations can be systematically studied. We give formal accounts on the gauge fixing conditions and present the perturbation action in two gauges. We also briefly review non-linear perturbations.'
---
1.0 cm
[**Multi-field inflation and cosmological perturbations**]{}
1.0cm
[Jinn-Ouk Gong ]{}
0.5cm
1.2cm
Introduction
============
Cosmology, a comprehensive study on the origin and evolution of the universe, has become a branch of physical sciences only in twentieth century. With its theoretical foundation being provided by general relativity [@Einstein:1916vd], the hot big bang cosmology emerged in 1920s in which the universe has ever been expanding from an extremely hot and dense initial state in very far past [@lemaitre]. Supported by a series of observational discoveries including the expansion of the universe from the relation between distance and redshift of galaxies [@Hubble:1929ig], and especially the cosmic microwave background (CMB) in 1965 [@Penzias:1965wn], now the hot big bang cosmology is regarded as the standard model of cosmology.
CMB was generated when the universe has become cooled down due to the expansion so that the coupling between electrons and photons by Thompson scattering could not be maintained any longer [@Dicke:1965zz]. This happened about 380,000 years after the big bang, thus the CMB may be regarded as a snapshot of the universe at this very early moment. On the whole observable range, the CMB exhibits an almost perfect black body spectrum corresponding to a homogeneous temperature of $2.725$ K with an accuracy of ${{\cal O}}(10^{-5})$. This observation suggests that when the CMB was generated, the observable patch of the universe was in thermal equilibrium in a single causally connected patch. However, as we will see, naively the universe at that time was composed of a huge number of causally disconnected regions and thus there is no reason for them to have the same temperature with ${{\cal O}}(10^{-5})$ accuracy. That is, the hot big bang cosmology is plagued by an extremely finely tuned initial condition to reproduce the universe as we observe now [@Misner:1967uu], and this is the so-called horizon problem. There are similar problems of initial conditions with fine tuning such as flatness problem.
In early 1980s[^1], it was realized that all the necessary initial conditions for successful hot big bang cosmology can be naturally provided by a period of rapid expansion of the universe at very early times, called “inflation” [@inflation]. Furthermore, inflation not only solves the otherwise finely tuned initial conditions like the horizon problem, but also provides the seed of subsequent structure formation in the universe [@Mukhanov:1981xt]: during inflation, quantum mechanical fluctuations are stretched due to the rapid expansion to become classical perturbations. After inflation, these perturbations become the seed for the temperature anisotropies in the CMB and the inhomogeneous distribution of galaxies on large scales. Thus, by observing them closely we can study the primordial cosmic inflation and the underlying physics. Indeed, an important prediction of inflation is that the primordial perturbations produced during inflation have more or less the same amplitude on different length scales, i.e. scale-invariant, since the expansion is so fast that no appreciable change in inflationary dynamics happened on the whole observable scales relevant for, say, the CMB observations. And this prediction has been verified with very high confidence by most recent CMB observations including the Planck missions [@Ade:2015oja].
An immediate question that follows would be how to realize inflation concretely. Since the energy scale of the very early universe when cosmic inflation occurred is likely to be extremely high, as large as $10^{15}$ GeV. This is far exceeding the energy scale we can probe with terrestrial particle accelerators such as the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, with which we have confirmed the standard model of particle physics up to TeV scale. We regard, however, the standard model of particle physics as a low-energy effective field theory of a parent theory relevant for higher energy scales due to a number of reasons: small but non-zero neutrino masses are not explained, gravity is not included, and so on. Thus, inflation is likely to be described in the context of theories beyond the standard model of particle physics [@bsm-inflation] such as supersymmetric theories and string theory. One common feature of those theories is that there are a multiple number of degrees of freedom [@Nilles:1983ge] that could be relevant for inflation. Usually inflation is supposed to be driven by a single scalar field dominating the energy density of the universe during inflation, called inflaton. There are many scalar, possibly light, fields as the so-called superpartners in supersymmetric theories and as moduli fields in string theory, which all can in principle participate in inflationary dynamics and thus can be identified as the inflatons. Therefore we do have good theoretical motivations to consider more than single degree of freedom during inflation. Furthermore, the existence of other degrees of freedom can give rise to a phenomenology full of rich and interesting observational consequences that can be further constrained or even detected in near future.
The aim of this article is to provide a concise and easily accessible review for inflation driven by a multiple number of fields, complementing many excellent review articles [@bsm-inflation; @reviews] and textbooks [@books] on related topics. The outline of this article is as follows. In Section \[sec:inflation\], we briefly recall the basic of inflationary cosmology. In Section \[sec:BG\] we move to our main topic of multi-field inflation by starting with the background dynamics. Section \[sec:pert\] is devoted to the conventional approach to the cosmological perturbations produced during multi-field inflation. In Section \[sec:pert-general\] we present more careful considerations on the formulation of perturbations with alternative choices of gauge. We devote Section \[sec:non-linear\] to discuss concisely non-linear perturbations. Then we conclude in Section \[sec:conc\].
Inflation {#sec:inflation}
=========
Before we begin our main topic of multi-field inflation, we quickly recall inflation: what it is, why it is attractive and how it occurs.
Background equations
--------------------
We begin with the so-called Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric of a flat universe $$\label{eq:ds}
ds^2 = -dt^2 + a^2(t)\delta_{ij}dx^idx^j \, .$$ This metric describes a flat, homogeneous, isotropic and expanding universe parametrized by the scale factor $a(t)$. The spatial distance with the scale factor being singled out is described by $\delta_{ij}dx^idx^j$, which is called [*comoving*]{} distance. On the contrary, the [*physical*]{} distance is multiplied by the scale factor.
We first want the key equations. These are given by the Einstein equation $$\label{eq:Einstein-eq}
G_{\mu\nu} = \frac{T_{\mu\nu}}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, .$$ We first consider the left hand side of , namely, the Einstein tensor $$\label{eq:Einstein_tensor}
G_{\mu\nu} = R_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R \, .$$ We can immediately write each component of the metric tensor $g_{\mu\nu}$ and its inverse $g^{\mu\nu}$ as $$\begin{split}
& g_{00} = -1 \, , \hspace{0.5cm} g_{ij} = a^2\delta_{ij} \, ,
\\
& g^{00} = -1 \, , \hspace{0.5cm} g^{ij} = a^{-2}\delta^{ij} \, .
\end{split}$$ To compute the Einstein tensor $G_{\mu\nu}$, we need to calculate the Christoffel symbol, the Ricci tensor and the Ricci scalar: $$\begin{split}
\Gamma^\rho_{\mu\nu} & = \frac{1}{2}g^{\rho\sigma} \left( g_{\mu\sigma,\nu} +
g_{\sigma\nu,\mu} - g_{\mu\nu,\sigma} \right) \, ,
\\
R_{\mu\nu} & = \Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu,\alpha} - \Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\alpha,\nu} +
\Gamma^\alpha_{\sigma\alpha}\Gamma^\sigma_{\mu\nu} -
\Gamma^\alpha_{\sigma\nu}\Gamma^\sigma_{\mu\alpha} \, ,
\\
R & = g^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu} \, .
\end{split}$$ The non-zero components of the Christoffel symbols are, after some calculations, $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma^0_{ij} & = a^2H\delta_{ij} \, ,
\\
\Gamma^i_{0j} = \Gamma^i_{j0} & = H\delta^i{}_j \, ,\end{aligned}$$ with $H = \dot{a}/a$ being the Hubble parameter, otherwise zero. Then, easily we have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{00} & = -3 \left( H^2 + \dot{H} \right) \, ,
\\
R_{ij} & = a^2 \left( 3H^2 + \dot{H} \right)\delta_{ij} \, ,
\\
R & = 6 \left( \dot{H} + 2H^2 \right) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus, the non-zero components of the Einstein tensor , or more frequently $G^\mu{}_\nu = g^{\mu\rho}G_{\rho\nu}$, are $$\begin{aligned}
G_{00} & = 3H^2 \, ,
\\
G_{ij} & = -a^2 \left( 2\dot{H} + 3H^2 \right)\delta_{ij} \, ,
\\
G^0{}_0 & = -3H^2 \, ,
\\
G^i{}_j & = - \left( 2\dot{H} + 3H^2 \right)\delta^i{}_j \, .\end{aligned}$$
As can be read from , the Einstein tensor which describes the structure of the space-time should be matched with the energy-momentum tensor which describes the matter residing in the space-time. On the assumption of the homogeneous and isotropic background, we may regard at the background level that the energy-momentum tensor is that of perfect fluid[^2], i.e. $$\label{eq:energy-momentum_tensor_BG}
T^\mu{}_\nu = \mathrm{diag}(-\rho,p,p,p) \, .$$
Now we can write each component of : $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Friedmann_eq}
00 \mbox{ component: } & H^2 = \frac{\rho}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, ,
\\
\label{eq:BGij}
ij \mbox{ component: } & -3H^2 - 2\dot{H} = \frac{p}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, .\end{aligned}$$ is called the Friedmann equation, which relates the Hubble parameter to the energy density. Using for to replace $H^2$ with $\rho$, we can find the time variation of $H$ as $$\label{eq:acc_eq2}
\dot{H} = -\frac{\rho+p}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, .$$ Or, explicitly in terms of the time derivatives of the scale factor, $$\label{eq:acc_eq}
\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} = -\frac{\rho+3p}{6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, .$$ We will refer to this equation soon. Note that by taking a time derivative of and using to eliminate $\dot{H}$, we can derive energy conservation equation $$\label{eq:BGconservation}
\dot\rho + 3H(\rho+p) = 0 \, .$$ This is what we can find from the conservation of energy-momentum tensor: from $$T^\mu{}_{\nu;\mu} = T^\mu{}_{\nu,\mu} - \Gamma^\rho_{\mu\nu}T^\mu{}_\rho + \Gamma^\mu_{\rho\mu}T^\rho{}_\nu = 0 \, ,$$ we can trivially check that $\nu=0$ component gives . $\nu=i$ component vanishes identically.
Cosmic microwave background
---------------------------
### Generation of the CMB
With the necessary background equations, now let us see what happened in the past when the temperature was high. First, we note that from the conservation equation that different species scale differently: ordinary particles (electron, proton, neutron...) have very large rest energy compared to the kinetic energy, so they are called pressureless matter and $p=0$. Meanwhile, photons, or more generally relativistic particles, have $p=\rho/3$ and are called radiation. Plugging these relations into , we find $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:rhom_scale}
\rho_\text{matter} & \propto a^{-3} \, ,
\\
\rho_\text{radiation} & \propto a^{-4} \, .\end{aligned}$$ We may understand that the energy density of pressureless matter is inversely proportional to the volume $\sim a^3$ which contains the matter particles, and for radiation the energy density is also proportional to the frequency, or the inverse of the wavelength, so we have one more power of the scale factor. What this tells us is that, in the past, the universe was dominated by radiation.
More radiation in the past means, of course, the universe was hotter. It was too hot to maintain neutral molecules, like hydrogen: because of the very hot temperature, electrons were energetic enough to overcome the binding energy to protons, so that the universe was filled by radiation (mostly photons), free electrons and nuclei (and dark matter). During this stage, the mean free path of photons was very short because of the Thomson scattering between free electrons and photons, maintaining thermal equilibrium. Thus, the universe was very “foggy” for photons: exactly like we cannot see very far away when the weather is very foggy. This stage continued until the universe was cooled to a critical temperature $T_c \sim 3000$ K. Below this temperature, the binding energy between electrons and protons could overcome thermal background and there remained no free electron. Thus, from this time on, the universe has become transparent to photons and they could reach us after propagating for a long long time. This situation is depicted in Figure \[fig:decoupling\]. These very old photons, which have traveled since the moment of this “last scattering”, are the cosmic microwave background (CMB). It was observed in 1965 by Penzias and Wilson by chance.
![When $T>T_c$, electrons were free and constantly scattered off photons, so that the universe was “foggy”. After the temperature drops below $T_c$, electrons are all captured by protons, and photons can propagate without scattering.[]{data-label="fig:decoupling"}](fig_recombination.pdf){width="12cm"}
The observations tell us that the CMB is extremely homogeneous and isotropic, i.e. we observe the same average temperature $T_0 \sim 2.7$ K no matter which part or direction of the sky we observe. Since photons were constantly scattering off free electrons and thus in thermal equilibrium, the temperature spectrum of the CMB exhibits that of almost perfect blackbody radiation. Moreover, the CMB could be generated only when the universe was hotter in the past. Thus the discovery of the CMB was the knockdown blow for the steady state cosmology which was competing against the hot big bang model in 60’s. Note that, after removing all the contaminations and foreground effects, we have genuine temperature fluctuations of the magnitude $\delta{T}/T_0 \sim 10^{-5}$. We will return to this point later. In Figure \[fig:cmb\] we show the background and fluctuation temperature maps of the CMB.
![(Left) the cosmic microwave background is observed to be extremely homogeneous and isotropic with the average temperature $T_0 \sim 2.7$ K. (Right) however, it contains genuine temperature fluctuations with respect to $T_0$ of the magnitude $\delta{T}/T_0\sim10^{-5}$. The temperature fluctuation map is taken by the Planck satellite [@Adam:2015rua].[]{data-label="fig:cmb"}](cmb_bg.jpg "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![(Left) the cosmic microwave background is observed to be extremely homogeneous and isotropic with the average temperature $T_0 \sim 2.7$ K. (Right) however, it contains genuine temperature fluctuations with respect to $T_0$ of the magnitude $\delta{T}/T_0\sim10^{-5}$. The temperature fluctuation map is taken by the Planck satellite [@Adam:2015rua].[]{data-label="fig:cmb"}](cmb_fluc.jpg "fig:"){width="6.3cm"}
### Horizon problem
The CMB has brought, with the triumph of the hot big bang cosmology, big mysteries at the same time. Let us consider 1 of them, namely, why the CMB is so much homogeneous. For this, it is very convenient to introduce the conformal time $\tau$, defined by $$d\tau \equiv \frac{dt}{a} \, .$$ With $\tau$, the line element is written as $$ds^2 = a^2(\tau) \left( -d\tau^2 + \delta_{ij}dx^idx^j \right) \, ,$$ so that the metric is written as a product of the static Minkowski metric times the scale factor. What does the conformal time mean? Let us consider the radial propagation of light, which is the null geodesic $ds^2=0$. Then, using the spherical coordinate we can write the radial distance $r$ a photon has traveled from some initial moment in terms of the conformal time as $$r = \tau \, ,$$ i.e. the conformal time measures the (comoving) distance a photon has traveled.
Then what’s the trouble with the CMB? We can straightforwardly find that from an initial moment $i$ till present $0$, the conformal time (i.e. the distance photons have traveled) $$\tau = \int_i^0 \frac{dt}{a} = \int_i^0 \frac{1}{a}\frac{dt}{da}da = \int_i^0 \frac{1}{aH} d\log{a} \propto a^{1/2}|_i^0 \, ,$$ where for each equality we have used 1) the scale factor is a function of time solely, $a=a(t)$, 2) the definition of the Hubble parameter, $\dot{a}=aH$, and 3) assumption of a matter dominated universe, $H \sim \rho_\text{matter}^{1/2} \sim a^{-3/2}$. Now, without loss of generality, we can take initial moment as the initial singularity $a(t_i)=0$, where also $\tau=0$, so that simply $\tau \propto a^{1/2}$. Further, using the relation between the scale factor which is normalized to $a_0=1$ at present and the redshift $z$ $$a = \frac{1}{1+z} \, ,$$ we can find $\tau \propto (1+z)^{-1/2}$. Using $z_0=0$ and $z_\text{CMB} \sim 1100$, we can easily find $$\frac{\tau_\text{CMB}}{\tau_0} \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{1100^3}} \sim 0.03 \, .$$ Thus, at the moment when the CMB was generated, the past light cones stemming from the two end points do not have any overlapping region initially, i.e. those two points were never in causal communication and thus there is no reason they should have the same temperature with the accuracy of $10^{-5}$: we must impose a heavy fine tuning over $10^4 - 10^5$ causally disconnected patches at the moment of the last scattering unless we provide a natural way for them to have the same temperature. This is the so-called horizon problem. It is depicted in the left panel of Figure \[fig:horizon\]. Note that the spatial distance shown in the figure is the comoving one, thus the physical distance is obtained by multiplying the scale factor $a(t)$ which vanishes as we approach the cosmic singularity, currently at $\tau=0$.
![(Left) conformal diagram of the universe. From the cosmic singularity ($\tau_i=0$) until the moment of the CMB generation ($\tau_\text{CMB}$) there was no time for the CMB to achieve causal communication to have the same temperature $T_0$. (Right) as a sample calculation, we can see that at that time the universe was filled with $10^4-10^5$ causally disconnected patches.[]{data-label="fig:horizon"}](fig_horizonproblem.pdf){width="15cm"}
To have a more concrete idea, let us assume that the observed CMB size coincides with the current Hubble patch $1/H_0$, within which causal communications are possible. Then let us ask whether they were the same when the CMB was generated, or if different how much they were different. First, what is $\lambda_{H_0^{-1}}$, the [*physical*]{} size that corresponds to $1/H_0$? Physical sizes simply scale with the scale factor $a(t)$, which is inversely proportional to the temperature $T$. Thus, we can easily find $$\lambda_{H_0^{-1}} = H_0^{-1}\frac{a_\text{CMB}}{a_0} = H_0^{-1}\frac{T_0}{T_\text{CMB}} \, .$$ Meanwhile, $H$ evolves according to the Friedmann equation . It is important to notice at this moment that $H$ depends on the energy density, i.e. which types of matter contents are there. For simplicity we assume the universe is dominated by matter that is inversely proportional to the physical volume as can be read from , and thus $H$ is proportional to $T^3$: $$H^2 \propto \rho_\text{matter} \propto a^{-3} \propto T^3 \, ,$$ so that we can find $H_\text{CMB}^{-1}$, the Hubble horizon radius when the CMB was generated, as $$H_\text{CMB}^{-1} = H_0^{-1} \left( \frac{T_0}{T_\text{CMB}} \right)^{3/2} \, .$$ Thus, if we compare the ratio of these volumes, $$\frac{\lambda_{H_0^{-1}}^3}{\left( H_\text{CMB}^{-1} \right)^3} = \left( \frac{T_\text{CMB}}{T_0} \right)^{3/2} \sim 4 \times 10^4 \, .$$ That is, assuming that at present the Hubble horizon size and the CMB scale are the same, when the CMB was generated, the corresponding physical volume was filled with $10^4$ - $10^5$ causally disconnected patches: see the right panel of Figure \[fig:horizon\]. Thus, it is a tremendous fine tuning that these disconnected patches all turn out to have the same temperature with the accuracy of $10^{-5}$ as the current observations on the CMB demand.
Inflation {#inflation}
---------
### Inflation: what and how
Thus, we see that at the heart of the horizon problem lies the fact that the Hubble horizon $1/H = 1/\left(\dot{a}/a\right)$ always expands faster than the physical length scale $\lambda \sim a$, $$\frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{\lambda}{H^{-1}} \right) \sim \frac{d}{dt} \left[ \frac{a}{\left(\dot{a}/a\right)^{-1}} \right] = \ddot{a} < 0 \, ,$$ irrespective of whether the universe is dominated by matter or radiation. Thus, we can just turn upside down and make the physical size expands faster than the Hubble horizon: then physical scales expand faster than the horizon so causal communication could be possible during this stage. This tells us $$\label{eq:inf-def}
\frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{\lambda}{H^{-1}} \right) > 0 \quad \longleftrightarrow \quad \ddot{a}>0 \, .$$ That is, the universe experiences an [*accelerated*]{} expansion. This period of accelerated expansion is called “[*inflation*]{}”.
How can we more quantitatively say if it’s inflation or not? We can rewrite as $$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} = \frac{2\rho}{6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} - \frac{3\rho+3p}{6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} = H^2 + \dot{H} > 0 \, ,$$ where the 2nd equality follows by applying and , and the last inequality is the definition of inflation . Thus, inflation occurs when the following condition is satisfied: $$\label{eq:SRepsilon}
\epsilon \equiv -\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2} < 1 \, .$$ This parameter, which tells whether it’s inflation or not, is called “slow-roll” parameter, in the context of slow-roll inflation: see the next section.
So with what kind of matter can we have inflation? From , we see that to have $\ddot{a}>0$ we need a special form of matter which has a negative pressure, $p < -\rho/3$, or in terms of the equation of state $w$, $$w \equiv \frac{p}{\rho} < -\frac{1}{3} \, .$$ Clearly usual pressureless matter ($w=0$) or radiation ($w=1/3$) cannot support inflation. The simplest candidate is the so-called cosmological constant $\Lambda$, which has $$p_\Lambda = -\rho_\Lambda \quad \left( w_\Lambda = -1 \right) \, .$$ Then the Friedmann equation is trivially solved: since $\Lambda$ is, as the name suggests, a constant and so is $H$: $$H^2 = \frac{\Lambda}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} = \text{constant} \, .$$ Thus we can see that the scale factor increases exponentially during inflation as $$a \propto \exp \left( \sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}}t \right) \, .$$
### Horizon problem revisited
So the question is: how does inflation solve the horizon problem? Now we can move to the conformal time to see a clear visualization how inflation solves the horizon problem. During inflation, for convenience driven by a cosmological constant $\Lambda$ so that $H$ is constant, the conformal time is given by $$\tau = \int \frac{dt}{a} = \int \frac{e^{-Ht}}{a_0} dt = -\frac{1}{aH} < 0 \, .$$ That is, the conformal time is [*negative*]{} during inflation. Further, now the cosmic singularity $a=0$ can be pushed to $\tau = -\infty$. Thus, even the two end points at $\tau=\tau_\text{CMB}$ have no overlap at $\tau=0$, now $\tau$ can be extended to negative infinity during inflation so that there could be ample overlapping region enough to explain the homogeneity of the CMB.
![(Left) conformal diagram of the universe, this time including inflation. Inflation extends $\tau$ to $-\infty$, giving ample room for causal communication well before the onset of hot big bang evolution at $\tau=0$. (Right) inflation corresponds to the period when the physical size $\lambda \sim a$ expands faster than the Hubble horizon $1/H$.[]{data-label="fig:horizon-sol"}](fig_horizonproblem-inflation.pdf){width="15cm"}
As is clear from Figure \[fig:horizon-sol\], the longer inflation lasts, the larger the overlapping region becomes. Thus we need a certain duration of inflation to explain the homogeneous CMB. The amount of inflation is quantified by the number of $e$-folds $N$ between some initial ($i$) and final ($f$) moments, which is given by $$\label{eq:e-folds}
N \equiv \int_i^f H dt = \int_i^f \frac{da}{a} = \log \left( \frac{a_f}{a_i} \right) \, .$$ Thus, with a given $N$, the final scale factor is related to the initial scale factor by $a_f = a_i e^N$, i.e. the universe has expanded by $e^N$ times. Now we can compute how large $N$ should be for the CMB. The most natural way is that at the beginning of inflation (or the part of inflation relevant for our observable universe) the physical length scale $\lambda_{H_0^{-1}}$ is smaller than the Hubble horizon during inflation $H_I$ so that causal communication has been established within $\lambda_{H_0^{-1}}$ to have the same temperature. This gives $$\lambda_{H_0^{-1}} = H_0^{-1} \frac{a_i}{a_0} = H_0^{-1} \frac{a_f}{a_0} \frac{a_i}{a_f} = H_0^{-1} \frac{T_0}{T_f} e^{-N} < H_I^{-1} \, .$$ Thus, solving for $N$ from the last inequality, we obtain $$N > \log \left( \frac{T_0}{H_0} \right) - \log \left( \frac{T_f}{H_I} \right) \sim 67 - \log \left( \frac{T_f}{H_I} \right) \, ,$$ where we have used $H_0 \sim 10^{-42}$ GeV and $T_0 \sim 10^{-13}$ GeV. Thus, assuming that the logarithmic term which includes two unknown factors give a number of ${{\cal O}}(1)$, we require that $$N \gtrsim 60 \, .$$ That is, to explain the homogeneity of the CMB, i.e. to solve the horizon problem, we need 60 $e$-folds of expansion: during inflation the universe should have expanded by $e^{60} \sim 10^{26}$ times.
### Single field inflation and slow-roll approximation
The cosmological constant is obviously the simplest candidate that drives inflation, but the problem is that if this is the case, inflation never ends and we cannot recover the universe in which we live with stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies and so on. Thus, we need some different material which can mimic the cosmological constant and at the same time provide a “graceful exit” from inflation. This is usually achieved by a scalar field $\phi$. For simplicity here we assume that this scalar field, named “inflaton” in the sense that it drives inflation, is minimally coupled to gravity and has canonical kinetic term. Then the action is the sum of the gravitational sector, which we take the Einstein-Hilbert action, and the matter sector: $$\label{eq:action}
S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2}R + \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \bigg[ \underbrace{ -\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\phi\partial_\nu\phi - V(\phi) }_{\equiv {{\cal L}}_m} \bigg] \, .$$ The corresponding energy-momentum tensor $T_{\mu\nu}$ of $\phi$ can be obtained by perturbing the matter Lagrangian with respect to $g^{\mu\nu}$, $$\label{eq:phiEMtensor}
T_{\mu\nu} = -\frac{2}{\sqrt{-g}} \frac{\delta \left( \sqrt{-g}{{\cal L}}_m \right)}{\delta{g}^{\mu\nu}} = \partial_\mu\phi\partial_\nu\phi - g_{\mu\nu} \left[ \frac{1}{2}g^{\rho\sigma}\partial_\rho\phi\partial_\sigma\phi + V(\phi) \right] \, .$$ Then we can easily compute $00$ and $ii$ components which can then be matched to the energy density and pressure respectively[^3] \[see \]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:BGphi_rho}
\rho & = -T^0{}_0 = \frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2 + \frac{1}{2}\frac{(\nabla\phi)^2}{a^2} + V \, ,
\\
\label{eq:BGphi_p}
p & = \frac{1}{3}T^i{}_i = \frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2 - \frac{1}{6}\frac{(\nabla\phi)^2}{a^2} - V \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus, if potential dominates over the kinetic energy ($\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi \ll V$) these simplify to $\rho \approx V \approx -p$, thus the inflaton provides a nearly cosmological constant, leading to an exponential expansion of the universe, viz. inflation.
Let us write the background equation of motion for $\phi$. From this we can find a number of useful formulae which do not resort to the dynamics of $\phi$ but to $V$ and its derivatives only. The equation of motion for $\phi$ can be found from the Euler-Lagrange equation, $$\partial_\mu \left[ \frac{\partial{{\cal L}}}{\partial(\partial_\mu\phi)} \right] = \frac{\partial{{\cal L}}}{\partial\phi} \, .$$ This gives $$-\Box\phi + \frac{\partial{V}}{\partial\phi} = 0 \, ,$$ where $$\Box \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}} \partial_\mu \left( \sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\nu \right) = -\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2} - 3H\frac{\partial}{\partial t} + \frac{\Delta}{a^2} \, ,$$ with $\Delta \equiv \delta^{ij}\partial_i\partial_j$ being the spatial Laplacian operator. Here for the last equality we have taken the background metric. Thus, the background field $\phi = \phi(t)$ follows the equation of motion $$\label{eq:BGphi_eom}
\ddot\phi + 3H\dot\phi + \frac{\partial{V}}{\partial\phi} = 0 \, .$$
So how this equation for $\phi$ simplifies? From , using and we require $$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} = -\frac{\dot\phi^2-V}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} > 0 \, .$$ Note that we can again precisely find by using and for and . Then this means $$\dot\phi^2 < V \, .$$ Taking a time derivative on both sides, this says $\ddot\phi < \partial{V}/\partial\phi$. Thus, is simplified to $$\label{eq:SRBGphi_eq}
3H\dot\phi + \frac{\partial{V}}{\partial\phi} = 0 \, .$$ Thus we can replace $\dot\phi$, or more generally the dynamics of $\phi$, with the derivatives of the potential $V$.
Then now let us consider the slow-roll parameter $\epsilon$, . Applying , we find $$\label{eq:epsilon-SR}
\epsilon = -\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2} \approx \frac{\dot\phi^2/(2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2)}{V/(3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2)} \approx \frac{3}{2} \frac{1}{V} \frac{{V'}^2}{9H^2} \approx \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left( \frac{V'}{V} \right)^2 \, ,$$ where $V' \equiv \partial{V}/\partial\phi$. Thus, $\epsilon$ in the slow-roll approximation tells us how steep the potential slope is. We can introduce another important slow-roll parameter $\eta$, which describes how quickly $\epsilon$ evolves: $$\label{eq:eta-SR}
\eta \equiv \frac{\dot\epsilon}{H\epsilon} \approx \left[ H \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left( \frac{V'}{V} \right)^2 \right]^{-1} {m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \frac{V'}{V} \left[ \frac{V''}{V} - \left( \frac{V'}{V} \right)^2 \right] \dot\phi \approx 2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2\frac{V''}{V} + 4\epsilon \, .$$ Also note that in the slow-roll approximation the $e$-fold $N$ can be written in terms of the potential solely: $$\label{eq:N_SR}
N = \int_i^f H dt = \int_i^f H \frac{dt}{d\phi}d\phi = \int_i^f \frac{H}{\dot\phi}d\phi \approx \frac{1}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \int_f^i \frac{V}{V'}d\phi \, .$$
Background dynamics {#sec:BG}
===================
In the previous section, we have briefly recalled the basic of inflation driven by a single inflaton field. Being well acquainted with the prerequisite knowledge, now we move to our main topic of multi-field inflation. Explicitly, we consider a $n$-dimensional multi-field system with a generic field space metric $G_{ab}$ coupled to the Einstein gravity: $$\label{eq:action}
S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \left[ \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2}R - \frac{1}{2}G_{ab}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi^b - V(\phi) \right] \, .$$ We may well consider more general possibilities, such as $f(R)$ gravity [@f(R)] or $P(G_{ab},X^{ab},\phi^a)$ with $X^{ab} \equiv -g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi^b/2$ [@k-inflation]. But the discussions and considerations presented in this article can be straightly applied and extended, so we restrict our discussions to .
We begin with the background dynamics. The energy-momentum tensor derived from is of the form $$\label{eq:EMtensor}
T_{\mu\nu} = G_{ab}\partial_\mu\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi^b - g_{\mu\nu} \left[ \frac{1}{2}G_{ab}g^{\rho\sigma}\partial_\rho\phi^a\partial_\sigma\phi^b + V(\phi) \right] \, ,$$ from which we can combine the $00$ and $ij$ components of the Einstein equation to find $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Friedmann}
H^2 & = \frac{1}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \left[ \frac{1}{2}\dot\phi_0^2 + V(\phi_0) \right] \, ,
\\
\label{eq:Hdot}
\dot{H} & = -\frac{\dot\phi_0^2}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\dot\phi_0^2 \equiv G_{ab}\dot\phi_0^a\dot\phi_0^b$ with $\phi_0^a$ being the background value. The background equation of motion for the scalar fields can be obtained either by the variation of the action with respect to $\phi^a$ or $\nu=0$ component of the conservation of the energy-momentum tensor $T^\mu{}_{\nu;\mu}=0$ as $$\label{eq:BGphi}
D_t\dot\phi_0^a + 3H\dot\phi_0^a + G^{ab}V_b = 0 \, ,$$ where $$D_t\dot\phi_0^a = \frac{D\dot\phi_0^a}{dt} \equiv \frac{d\dot\phi_0^a}{dt} + \Gamma^a_{bc}\dot\phi_0^b\dot\phi_0^c$$ is a covariant time derivative with $\Gamma^a_{bc}$ being the Christoffel symbol constructed by the field space metric $G_{ab}$. For more geometric discussions, see e.g. [@geometry].
Before we proceed further to discuss perturbations, it is very useful to consider the change of basis in the field space. As in space-time, $\phi^a$ plays the role of coordinates in the field space[^4]. Thus we are free to choose and/or transform to a convenient basis. One possible choice is a local orthogonal frame: we can introduce a complete set of vielbeins $e_a^I = e_a^I(t)$ which maps the general, arbitrary basis denoted by the index $a$ into a local orthogonal frame denoted by the superscript $I$ as $$e^I_ae^J_bG^{ab} = \delta^{IJ} \quad \text{and} \quad e^I_ae^J_b\delta_{IJ} = G_{ab} \, .$$ Note that here we have not specified the new, orthogonal $IJ$ basis: we may choose whatever frame we like as long as it is orthogonal. A physically important one is the so-called “kinematic basis”, which is set along and perpendicular to the field trajectory [@geometry; @basis; @Achucarro:2010da]. The unit tangent vector $T^a$ is defined by $$\label{eq:Ta}
T^a \equiv \frac{\dot\phi_0^a}{\dot\phi_0} \, .$$ The normal vector $N^a$ which satisfies $G_{ab}T^aN^b = 0$ is naturally proportional to the derivative of $T^a$, i.e. $D_tT^a \propto N^a$. Taking a time derivative to $T^a$ and using , we find $$D_tT^a = -\frac{\ddot\phi_0}{\dot\phi_0}T^a - \frac{1}{\dot\phi_0} \left( 3H\dot\phi_0^a + V^a \right) \, .$$ Projecting this equation along $T^a$ and $N^a$, we obtain respectively $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:BGtangent}
& \ddot\phi_0 + 3H\dot\phi_0 + V_T = 0 \, ,
\\
& D_tT^a = -\frac{V_N}{\dot\phi_0}N^a \equiv \dot\theta N^a \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $V_T \equiv V_aT^a$ and $V_N \equiv V_aN^a$ are the projection of the potential derivative onto the tangential and perpendicular direction to the trajectory respectively, and we have [*defined*]{} the proportionality parameter as the angular velocity $\dot\theta$ of the trajectory. Note that the background equation along the tangent direction is precisely the same as that in single field inflation . Thus we are naturally led to identify the tangential component of the field fluctuations as what is associated with the curvature perturbation, as we will see in later sections. Also note that the kinematic basis is not the only sensible choice for an orthogonal basis. We will discuss another physically illuminating choice in the next section.
Dynamics of perturbations {#sec:pert}
=========================
Up to now, we have considered background dynamics only. But as mentioned before, the observables in the universe such as the temperature anisotropies of the CMB and the inhomogeneous distribution of galaxies on large scales are originated from the primordial perturbations. During inflation, the whole observable patch of the universe was once deep inside the horizon, subject to quantum fluctuations around the homogeneous background. These fluctuations exit the horizon and become classical perturbations before they disappear due to rapid expansion. Since the perturbation in the matter sector is equivalent to that in space-time, there are small perturbations in otherwise smooth three-hypersurfaces. Once inflation is over and Hubble horizon expands faster than the physical scales, these perturbations enter the horizon and matter piles up, leading eventually to gravitational collapse when the amplitude of density perturbation exceeds certain critical value. Thus cosmological perturbations produced during inflation lies at the heart of the observational tests. In this section, we first take a conventional approach to the cosmological perturbations in multi-field inflation to gain solid idea. More careful considerations on cosmological perturbations will be given in the following section.
Solutions of constraints
------------------------
We begin with the Arnowitt-Deser-Misner (ADM) form of the metric [@Arnowitt:1962hi], $$ds^2=-{{\cal N}}^2 dt^2+\gamma_{ij}(\beta^i dt + dx^i)(\beta^j dt + dx^j) \, ,$$ where ${{\cal N}}$ is the lapse function and $\beta^i$ is the shift vector and $\gamma_{ij}$ is the spatial metric. With the extrinsic curvature $$\label{eq:extrinsiccurvature}
K_{ij} = \frac{1}{2{{\cal N}}} \left( \partial_t\gamma_{ij} - \beta_{i;j} - \beta_{j;i} \right) \, ,$$ with the covariant derivative being with respect to $\gamma_{ij}$, the action is rewritten as $$\label{eq:ADMaction}
S = \int d^4x \sqrt{\gamma} {{\cal N}}\left[ \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left( R^{(3)}+K_{ij}K^{ij}-K^2 \right) - \frac{1}{2}G_{ab}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi^b - V(\phi) \right] \, ,$$ where $R^{(3)}$ is the curvature of three-dimensional hypersurface of constant $t$, constructed from $\gamma_{ij}$, and $K \equiv K^i{}_i$.
Varying the action with respect to ${{\cal N}}$ and $\beta^i$ respectively yield the constraints $$\begin{aligned}
R{}^{(3)} - \left( K^{ij}K_{ij}-K^2 \right) & = \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \left[ \frac{1}{2}G_{ab}g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu\phi^a\partial_\nu\phi^b + V(\phi) \right] \, ,
\\
\left( K^{ij}-\gamma^{ij}K \right)_{;j} & = \frac{G_{ab}}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2{{\cal N}}} \left( \dot\phi^b - \beta^j\partial_j\phi^b \right) \partial^i\phi^a \, .\end{aligned}$$ Solving these constraints give the solutions of unphysical perturbation variables. As advertised, in this section we work in the flat gauge in which the scalar sector of the spatial metric $\gamma_{ij}$ is unperturbed: $$\label{eq:flatgauge}
\gamma_{ij} = a^2(t) \left( \delta_{ij} + h_{ij}^{TT} \right) \, ,$$ where the pure tensor $h_{ij}^{TT}$ is transverse and traceless: $${h^{TT}}^i{}_i = {h^{TT}}^{ij}{}_{,j} = 0 \, .$$ For our discussion in this section at linear order, it is sufficient to obtain the linear solutions of the constraints. Writing the perturbation parts of the variables as $$\begin{aligned}
{{\cal N}}& = 1 + \alpha \, ,
\\
\beta_i & = \chi_{,i} + \beta_i^T \, ,
\\
\phi^a & = \phi_0^a + Q^a \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the transverse vector $\beta_i^T$ satisfies $\partial^i\beta_i^T = 0$, we find the solutions of the constraints as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:lapse-sol}
\alpha & = \frac{G_{ab}}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H}\dot\phi_0^bQ^a \equiv {{\cal N}}_aQ^a \, ,
\\
\label{eq:shift-sol}
-2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H\frac{\Delta}{a^2}\chi & = 6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2\alpha - \alpha\dot\phi_0^2 + G_{ab}\dot\phi_0^aD_tQ^b + V_aQ^a \, ,\end{aligned}$$ and $\beta_i^T = 0$. Plugging these solutions back into the action, we obtain the quadratic action for the field fluctuations $Q^a$ relevant for linear perturbation theory.
We can also arrive at the same solutions from the conventional perturbed Einstein equation. We can write the perturbed metric as $$\label{eq:metric-pert}
ds^2 = -(1+2A)dt^2 + 2a{{\cal B}}_idtdx^i + a^2 \left[ (1+2\varphi)\delta_{ij} + 2{{\cal E}}_{ij} \right]dx^idx^j \, ,$$ where the $0i$ and $ij$ components can be decomposed into $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:0ipert}
{{\cal B}}_i & = B_{,i} + S_i \, ,
\\
\label{eq:spatialmetricpert}
{{\cal E}}_{ij} & = H_{T,ij} + F_{(i,j)} + \frac{1}{2}h_{ij}^{TT} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ with $A = \alpha$ and $B = \chi/a$. Here the pure vectors $S_i$ and $F_i$ are transverse: $$S^i{}_{,i} = F^i{}_{,i} = 0 \, .$$ Then at linear order the scalar, vector and tensor equations are all decoupled and we can consider them independently from each other. The flat gauge condition corresponds to setting $\varphi = H_T = 0$, the $00$ and $0i$ components of the Einstein equation are respectively, with the energy-momentum tensor , $$\begin{aligned}
6H^2A + 2H\frac{\Delta}{a}B & = \frac{1}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \left( -G_{ab}\dot\phi_0^aD_tQ^b + \dot\phi_0^2A - V_aQ^a \right) \, ,
\\
2HA_{,i} & = \frac{1}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}G_{ab}\dot\phi_0^a\partial_iQ^b \, ,\end{aligned}$$ from which we can find the same solutions for $A$ and $B$ as and , respectively.
Quadratic action for perturbations
----------------------------------
Having found the linear solutions of the constraints, now we can use them to write the quadratic action of the field fluctuations $Q^a$ and the tensor perturbation $h_{ij}^{TT}$. After straightforward manipulations, we can obtain the quadratic action as [@Achucarro:2010da; @Seery:2005gb; @Langlois:2008mn; @Gong:2011uw; @Elliston:2012ab] $$\label{eq:S2-1}
S_2 = \int \! d^4x \frac{a^3}{2} \left\{ G_{ab}D_tQ^aD_tQ^b - \frac{\delta^{ij}}{a^2}G_{ab}\partial_iQ^a\partial_jQ^b - M^2_{ab}Q^aQ^b + \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{4} \left[ \left( \dot{h}_{ij}^{TT} \right)^2 - \frac{1}{a^2}\partial^kh_{ij}^{TT}\partial_kh_{ij}^{TT} \right] \right\} \, ,$$ where $$\label{eq:Mab}
M^2_{ab} \equiv V_{ab} - \mathbb{R}_{acdb}\dot\phi_0^c\dot\phi_0^d + (3-\epsilon)\frac{\dot\phi_{0a}}{{m_{\rm Pl}}}\frac{\dot\phi_{0b}}{{m_{\rm Pl}}} + \frac{1}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H} \left( \dot\phi_{0a}V_{b} + \dot\phi_{0b}V_{a} \right) \, ,$$ with $V_{ab} \equiv V_{;ab}$, $\mathbb{R}^a_{bcd} \equiv \Gamma^a_{bd,c} - \Gamma^a_{bc,d} + \Gamma^a_{ce}\Gamma^e_{bd} - \Gamma^a_{de}\Gamma^e_{bc}$ being the Riemann tensor associated with the field space and $\epsilon$ being the slow-roll parameter defined in . The field indices are raised and lowered by the field space metric $G_{ab}$. The equations of motion we can find by perturbing with respect to $Q^a$ and $h_{ij}^{TT}$ are, respectively, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Qeom1}
D_t^2Q^a + 3HD_tQ^a - \frac{\Delta}{a^2}Q^a + (M^2)^a{}_bQ^b & = 0 \, ,
\\
\label{eq:tensoreom}
\ddot{h}_{ij}^{TT} + 3H\dot{h}_{ij}^{TT} - \frac{\Delta}{a^2}h_{ij}^{TT} & = 0 \, .\end{aligned}$$ We see that in general the field fluctuations are coupled to each other through the effective mass matrix $M^2_{ab}$. Also note that the tensor sector is exactly the same as that in single field inflation.
While we will solve and later in Section \[sec:P\], at the moment for it is convenient to make use of the local orthogonal vielbeins $e^I_a$ introduced in Section \[sec:BG\]. Using the orthogonal basis is particularly useful to connect the field fluctuations to the curvature perturbation. The field fluctuation $Q^a$ in an arbitrary basis can be transformed into the one in the orthogonal frame by incorporating $e^I_a$ as $$Q^I = e^I_aQ^a \, .$$ Further, introducing $u^I \equiv aQ^I$ and moving to the conformal time $d\tau = dt/a$, we obtain $$\label{eq:S2}
S_2 = \int \! d\tau d^3x \frac{1}{2} \left[ \delta_{IJ} \left( {u^I}'{u^J}' + 2{u^I}'Z^J{}_Ku^K + Z^I{}_KZ^J{}_Lu^Ku^L - \delta^{ij}\partial_iu^I\partial_ju^J \right) - a^2 M^2_{IJ} u^Iu^J \right] \, ,$$ where a prime denotes a derivative with respect to the conformal time, $M^2_{IJ} \equiv e^a_Ie^b_JM^2_{ab} - H^2(2-\epsilon)\delta_{IJ}$, and $Z^I{}_J \equiv e^I_aD_\tau e^a_J$. The resulting equation of motion is $$\label{eq:uIeom}
{u^I}'' + 2Z^I{}_J{u^J}' + {Z^I{}_J}'u^J - Z^I{}_JZ^J{}_Ku^K - \Delta u^I + a^2(M^2)^I{}_Ju^J = 0 \, .$$ Thus we see that while the basis is orthogonal, the form of the equation of motion at first looks more complicated. This is because the vielbeins that map from an arbitrary basis to the orthogonal one are time-dependent, $e^I_a = e^I_a(t)$, so that the change of the vielbeins itself is reflected in the antisymmetric matrix $Z_{IJ} = -Z_{JI}$. Note, however, that we have used in usual partial derivatives, not covariant ones. Indeed, using $Z_{IJ}$ we can define a new covariant derivative ${{\cal D}}_\tau$ acting on quantities such as $v^I$ labelled with the $I$-index as $$\label{eq:newcovderiv}
{{\cal D}}_\tau u^I \equiv \frac{du^I}{d\tau} + Z^I{}_Ju^J \, .$$ Then the quadratic action becomes very simple [@Achucarro:2010da]: $$S_2 = \int \! d\tau d^3x \frac{1}{2} \left[ \delta_{IJ} \left( {{\cal D}}_\tau u^I {{\cal D}}_\tau u^J - \delta^{ij}\partial_iu^I\partial_ju^J \right) - a^2M^2_{IJ}u^Iu^J \right] \, ,$$ so is the equation of motion: $${{\cal D}}_\tau^2u^I - \Delta u^I + a^2(M^2)^I{}_Ju^J = 0 \, .$$
Explicit calculations: two-field case
-------------------------------------
Having discussed the general aspects, in this section we consider explicitly two-field inflation case. The benefit is three-fold: first, we will perform explicit calculations in detail so that we see how the previous discussions become materialized. Second, two-field inflation is the simplest and thus most intuitive case with multiple number of fields, yet captures many important aspects of multi-field inflation. Lastly, we can visualize the geometric implications very easily.
### Kinematic basis
First we consider the kinematic basis. For two-field case, one of the vielbeins corresponds to the tangent vector $T^a$ and the other to the normal vector $N^a$, $$e^a_T = T^a \quad \text{and} \quad e^a_N = N^a \, .$$ Then the parallel and normal perturbations with respect to the inflationary trajectory are given respectively by $$\begin{aligned}
u^T & = aQ^T = aT_aQ^a \, ,
\\
u^N & = aQ^N = aN_aQ^a \, .\end{aligned}$$ By choosing this frame, we find that $Z_{TN} = -Z_{NT} = -a\dot\theta = -\theta'$. Then, the quadratic action becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{S2:kinematic2field}
S_2 = \int d\tau d^3x \frac{1}{2} & \left[ {{u^T}'}^2 - (\nabla u^T)^2 - \left( a^2M^2_{TT} - {\theta'}^2 \right){u^T}^2 \right.
\nonumber\\
& \quad + {{u^N}'}^2 - (\nabla u^N)^2 - \left( a^2M^2_{NN} - {\theta'}^2 \right) {u^N}^2
\nonumber\\
& \left. \quad - 4\theta'{u^T}'u^N - 2 \left( a^2M^2_{TN} + \theta'' \right) u^Tu^N \right] \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the symmetric matrix $M^2_{IJ}$ consists of the following elements: $$\begin{aligned}
M^2_{TT} & = V_{TT} + 2H^2\epsilon(3-\epsilon) + \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H}\dot\phi_0V_T - (2-\epsilon)H^2 \, ,
\\
M^2_{NN} & = M^2 - (2-\epsilon)H^2 \, ,
\\
M^2_{TN} & = V_{TN} - 2\epsilon\dot\theta H \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $M^2 \equiv V_{NN} + \epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2\mathbb{R}$ is the (effective) mass squared of the orthogonal mode $u^N$ with $\mathbb{R}$ being the Ricci scalar parametrizing the geometry of the field space, and the projections of the potential derivatives can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
V_{TT} & = H^2 \left( 3\epsilon - 3\delta_1 - \delta_2 + \frac{\dot\theta^2}{H^2} \right) \, ,
\\
\label{eq:VTN}
V_{TN} & = H\dot\theta \left( -3 + 2\epsilon - 2\delta_1 + \frac{\ddot\theta}{H\dot\theta} \right) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where we have defined $$\label{eq:SR-delta}
\delta_n \equiv \frac{1}{H^n\dot\phi_0}\frac{d^{n+1}\phi_0}{dt^{n+1}} \, .$$ The action in the kinematic basis leads to the coupled equations of motion describing the evolution of both modes $u^T$ and $u^N$: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:uT}
{u^T}'' - 2\theta'{u^N}' + \left( -\Delta + a^2M^2_{TT} - {\theta'}^2 \right)u^T + \left( a^2M^2_{TN} - \theta'' \right) u^N & = 0 \, ,
\\
\label{eq:uN}
{u^N}'' + 2\theta'{u^T}' + \left( -\Delta + a^2M^2_{NN} - {\theta'}^2 \right)u^N + \left( a^2M^2_{NT} + \theta'' \right) u^T & = 0 \, .\end{aligned}$$
### Mass basis
In the very previous section we have considered the perturbations in the kinematic basis, set along and perpendicular to the background inflationary trajectory. In general for a curved trajectory, which naturally incorporates “heavy” and “light” degrees of freedom, in the mass matrix in the kinematic basis which can be written as $$\label{eq:VIJ}
V_{IJ} =
\begin{pmatrix}
V_{TT} & V_{TN}
\\
V_{TN} & V_{NN}
\end{pmatrix}
\, ,$$ the off-diagonal component of the mass matrix $V_{TN}$ is non-zero, as can be read from . Thus, regarding heaviness (or lightness) of the relevant degrees of freedom, it is most convenient to adopt another set of basis in which the mass matrix $V_{IJ}$ becomes diagonal. We may call this as the “mass basis” [@massbasis]. Then the two eigenvalues of the mass basis correspond to the light and heavy masses along the trajectory respectively. Notice that if one performs the change-of-basis around the bottom of the potential [@Burgess:2012dz], no kinematic information is required because geometry determines everything. Explicit diagonalization of gives two eigenvalues, $$\label{eq:VllVhh}
\lambda_\pm = \frac{1}{2} \left[ V_{NN}+V_{TT} \pm \left( V_{NN}-V_{TT} \right) \sqrt{1+\beta^2} \right] \quad \text{where} \quad \beta \equiv \frac{2V_{TN}}{V_{NN}-V_{TT}} \, ,$$ so that $\lambda_-$ ($\lambda_+$) corresponds to $V_{ll}$ ($V_{hh}$). The corresponding eigenvectors transformed from the kinematic basis are then $$\begin{split}
e_l^a & = T^a\cos\psi - N^a\sin\psi =
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos\psi
\\
-\sin\psi
\end{pmatrix}
\, ,
\\
e_h^a & = T^a\sin\psi + N^a\cos\psi =
\begin{pmatrix}
\sin\psi
\\
\cos\psi
\end{pmatrix}
\, ,
\end{split}$$ with $$\cos\psi \equiv \frac{1+\sqrt{1+\beta^2}}{\sqrt{2\left(1+\beta^2+\sqrt{1+\beta^2}\right)}}
\quad \text{and} \quad
\sin\psi \equiv \frac{\beta}{\sqrt{2\left(1+\beta^2+\sqrt{1+\beta^2}\right)}} \, .$$ So what does the angle $\psi$ mean? This becomes transparent if we write the change-of-basis matrix $P$ is, with $e_l^a$ and $e_h^a$ on the first and second column and row respectively is $$\label{eq:k-to-m}
P = \begin{pmatrix}
\cos\psi & \sin\psi
\\
-\sin\psi & \cos\psi
\end{pmatrix}
\, .$$ Thus, given the kinematic basis $\{T^a,N^a\}$, we can rotate it by $\psi$ to obtain the mass basis. This situation is depicted in Figure \[fig:basis\]. Notice that when we discuss about the kinematic basis, we take care of not $\theta$, which is the rotation angle from the general basis $\{\phi^1,\phi^2\}$ to the kinematic one, but only $\dot\theta$. This is because the field space coordinates $\phi^a$ can be set totally arbitrary, so important is only the rate of change of the kinematic basis with respect to the general basis, i.e. the “angular velocity” of the trajectory. But $\psi$ denotes the misalignment between the kinematic and mass bases, thus not only its rate of change but also its value itself are important to describe the dynamics along the trajectory: if $\psi \neq 0$ so that the two bases are misaligned, oscillations of the trajectory may be caused until the misalignment disappears.
![A schematic plot showing the relation between the arbitrary field basis ${\phi^1,\phi^2}$, kinematic basis $\{e^T,e^N\}$ and mass basis $\{e^l,e^h\}$. The field fluctuations in the field basis are decomposed into $\{Q^1,Q^2\}$. The angular velocity of the kinematic basis is $\dot\theta$ while that of the mass basis is $\dot\vartheta$, so that $\theta$, $\vartheta$ and $\psi$ are related by $\theta = \vartheta + \psi$, although for $\theta$ and $\vartheta$ only their rates of change are important since the field basis is arbitrary, with respect to which $\theta$ and $\vartheta$ are set.[]{data-label="fig:basis"}](fig_basis.pdf){width="10cm"}
Finally, $M^2_{IJ}$ in in the mass basis is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:coupling-Mll}
M_{ll}^2 & = V_{ll} - 2\epsilon H^2 \left[ \left( 3-\epsilon+\frac{\dot\epsilon}{H\epsilon} \right)\cos^2\psi - \frac{\dot\theta}{H}\sin(2\psi) + {m_{\rm Pl}}^2\mathbb{R}\sin^2\psi \right] - H^2(2-\epsilon) \, ,
\\
\label{eq:coupling-Mlh}
M_{lh}^2 & = 2\epsilon H^2 \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\left( 3-\epsilon+\frac{\dot\epsilon}{H\epsilon} \right)\sin(2\psi) - \frac{\dot\theta}{H}\cos(2\psi) + \frac{1}{2}{m_{\rm Pl}}^2\mathbb{R}\sin(2\psi) \right] \, ,
\\
\label{eq:coupling-Mhh}
M_{hh}^2 & = V_{hh} - 2\epsilon H^2 \left[ \left( 3-\epsilon+\frac{\dot\epsilon}{H\epsilon} \right)\sin^2\psi + \frac{\dot\theta}{H}\sin(2\psi) + {m_{\rm Pl}}^2\mathbb{R}\cos^2\psi \right] - H^2(2-\epsilon) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Then the quadratic action becomes explicitly [@Gao:2015aba] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:S2-2}
S_2 & = \int \! d\tau d^3x \frac{1}{2} \left[ {u_l'}^2 - (\nabla u_l)^2 - \left( a^2M_{ll}^2-{\vartheta'}^2 \right)u_l^2 \right.
\nonumber\\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad + {u_h'}^2 - (\nabla u_h)^2 - \left( a^2M_{hh}^2-{\vartheta'}^2 \right)u_h^2
\nonumber\\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad - 4\vartheta'u_l'u_h - 2 \left( a^2M_{lh}^2 + \vartheta'' \right) u_lu_h \bigg] \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\vartheta' = (\theta-\psi)'$ denotes the angular velocity of the mass basis. The first and second lines denote the free terms of the light and heavy modes respectively, while the third line is the interaction between them. Note that the form of the action is precisely the same as that in the kinematic basis . This should be obviously the case, since both the kinematic and mass bases are orthogonal ones.
Formulation of perturbations {#sec:pert-general}
============================
In the previous section, we have considered the perturbations in the flat gauge to extract physical scalar degrees of freedom. Let us recall the general arguments: on top of the matter sector which contains $n$ scalar fields, the gravitational sector brings additional 4 scalar, 4 vector and 2 tensor degrees of freedom. However, not all of them are physical, as we have the freedom to choose an arbitrary coordinate system with the same physics. That is, gravity allows gauge degrees of freedom. These fictitious gauge degrees of freedom can be removed by imposing appropriate gauge conditions and by solving the constraints – naively we have $n+4$ scalar variables: $n$ from $n$ scalar field components and 4 from the metric. Since there are 1 temporal and 1 spatial gauge transformations in the scalar sector, we can eliminate 2 of them. In the flat gauge discussed in the previous section, we impose the conditions that the perturbations of three-dimensional spatial metric on each time slice vanish. The remaining metric degrees of freedom are perturbations of the lapse function and the shift vector. They further can be removed by solving 2 constraint equations, so that after all $n$ degrees of freedom are left. Namely, we can write all the physical degrees of freedom solely in terms of the field fluctuations $Q^a$.
This however is not necessarily the only sensible choice. Especially, we do not directly observe the inflaton fields – the temperature fluctuations in the CMB and the distribution of galaxies on large scales reflect the initial perturbation in the curvature of the constant-time spatial hypersurfaces. This curvature perturbation becomes manifest in other gauge choices, not in the flat gauge we adopted in the previous section in which by definition there is no perturbation on spatial hypersurfaces. But the curvature perturbation is associated with the metric, so in this case we have to give 1 degree of freedom to the gravitational sector while the remaining $n-1$ to the matter sector that contains $n$ fields. But how can we do this conveniently, since the gravitational sector receives contributions from the total matter contents? Thus, we need to reconsider the formulation of perturbations more formally to establish possible gauge choices on concrete ground. We can discuss formally the issue of gauge fixing in the Hamiltonian formulation, which is also useful for path integral quantization of cosmological perturbations [@pathintegral]. In this section, we consider the Hamiltonian analysis of cosmological perturbations to study the gauge conditions systematically.
First-order form
----------------
For the Hamiltonian formulation, we begin with the canonical momentum of $\gamma_{ij}$ as $$\Pi^{ij} = \frac{\delta S_G}{\delta \partial_t \gamma_{ij}}=\frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2}\sqrt{\gamma}(K^{ij}-\gamma^{ij}K) \, .$$ The pure gravity part of the action then is written in the first-order form, $$S_G = \int d^4x \left( \Pi^{ij}\partial_t{\gamma}_{ij} - {{\cal N}}{{\cal H}}_G - \beta_i {{\cal H}}_G^i \right) \, ,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
{{\cal H}}_G & = \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2\sqrt{\gamma}} \left( \Pi^{ij} \Pi_{ij} - \frac12 \Pi^2 \right) - \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2}\sqrt{\gamma} R^{(3)},
\\
{{\cal H}}_G^i & = -2 \left( \partial_j\Pi^{ij} + \Gamma^i_{jk}\Pi^{jk} \right) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ with $\Pi \equiv \Pi^i{}_i$. Here, the lapse ${{\cal N}}$ and the shifts $\beta_i$ play the role of Lagrangian multipliers for the constraints ${{\cal H}}$ and ${{\cal H}}^i$ respectively, which are interpreted as the generators of diffeomorphism. Likewise, we can write the matter part of the action in the first-order form as $$S_M = \int d^4x \left( \Pi_a\partial_t{\phi}^a - {{\cal N}}{{\cal H}}_M - \beta_i{{\cal H}}_M^i \right) \, ,$$ where the canonical momentum $\Pi_a$ and the constraints ${{\cal H}}_M$ and ${{\cal H}}_M^i$ are $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_a & = \frac{\sqrt{\gamma}}{{{\cal N}}} G_{ab} \left( \partial_t\phi^b - \beta^i\partial_i\phi^b \right) \, ,
\\
{\cal H}_M & = \frac{G^{ab}}{2\sqrt{\gamma}}\Pi_a\Pi_b+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\gamma}\gamma^{ij}G_{ab}\partial_i\phi^a \partial_j \phi^b +\sqrt{\gamma} V(\phi^a) \, ,
\\
{\cal H}_M^i & = \Pi_a \partial^i \phi^a \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus, the action in the first-order form is given by $$S = \int d^4x \left[ \Pi^{ij}\partial_t{\gamma}_{ij} + \Pi_a\partial_t{\phi}^a - {{\cal N}}\left({{\cal H}}_G+{{\cal H}}_M \right) - \beta_i \left( {{\cal H}}_G^i + {{\cal H}}_M^i \right) \right] \, .$$ It is clearly seen that unphysical ${{\cal N}}$ and $\beta_i$ become Lagrange multipliers accompanying constraints ${{\cal H}}_G+{{\cal H}}_M$ and ${{\cal H}}_G^i+{{\cal H}}_M^i$, respectively.
We are interested in the cosmological perturbations around the time-dependent classical background. For gravity sector, we separate the FRW background quantities and their perturbations as: $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi^{ij} & = \frac{P(t)}{6a(t)} \left[ \delta^{ij}+\pi^{ij}(t,\mathbi{x}) \right] \, ,
\\
\gamma_{ij} & = a^2(t) \left[ \delta_{ij}+h_{ij}(t,\mathbi{x}) \right] \, ,
\\
{{\cal N}}& = {{\cal N}}_0(t)+\alpha(t,\mathbi{x}) \, ,
\\
\beta^i & = \beta^i(t,\mathbi{x}) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Note that at the moment we have kept the background lapse function denoted by ${{\cal N}}_0(t)$, not simply setting it to 1. This is because we can obtain a background equation by varying the zeroth order action with respect to ${{\cal N}}_0$ \[see and \]. For the matter sector, the perturbations around the classical backgrounds $\phi^a_0(t)$ are written as $$\begin{aligned}
\phi^a & = \phi_0^a(t) + Q^a(t,\mathbi{x}) \, ,
\\
\label{eq:conjmom-phi}
\Pi_a & = P_a(t) + \pi_a(t,\mathbi{x}) \, .\end{aligned}$$ We can obtain the classical solutions from the zeroth order action, $$\label{eq:S0}
S_0 = \int d^4x \left[ P\partial_t a + P_a\partial_t\phi_0^a - {{\cal N}}_0 \left( -\frac{P^2}{12{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 a}+\frac{G^{ab}P_aP_b}{2a^3}+a^3V \right) \right] \, .$$ Varying this with respect to the classical backgrounds, we obtain the background equations of motion as: $$\begin{aligned}
{4}
\frac{\delta S_0}{\delta P} = 0 & : & \qquad \dot{a} & = -\frac{P}{6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2a} \, ,
\\
\frac{\delta S_0}{\delta a} = 0 & : & \qquad \dot{P} & = -\frac{P^2}{12{m_{\rm Pl}}^2a^2} + \frac{3G^{ab}P_aP_b}{2a^4} - 3a^2V \, ,
\\
\label{eq:BGmomphi-sol}
\frac{\delta S_0}{\delta P_a} = 0 & : & \qquad \dot\phi_0^a & = \frac{G^{ab}P_b}{a^3} \, ,
\\
\frac{\delta S_0}{\delta\phi_0^a} = 0 & : & \qquad \dot{P}_a & = -a^3V_a - \frac{1}{2a^3} G^{cd}{}_{,a} P_cP_d \, ,
\\
\label{eq:BGNbar}
\frac{\delta S_0}{\delta{{\cal N}}_0} = 0 & : & \qquad \frac{P^2}{12{m_{\rm Pl}}^2a} & = \frac{G^{ab}P_aP_b}{2a^3} + a^3V \, ,\end{aligned}$$ Combining these equations, we obtain the familiar background equations , and . Note that from the linear order action $$\begin{aligned}
S_1 = \int d^4x {{\cal N}}_0 \bigg[ & \frac{a}{6} h \left( -\dot{P}+HP+\frac{P^2}{12 {m_{\rm Pl}}^2 a^2}+\frac{3G^{ab}P_aP_b}{2a^4}-3a^2 V \right)
+ \frac{P}{3}\pi \left( \dot{a}+\frac{P^2}{6{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 a} \right)
\nonumber\\
& + Q^a \left( \dot{P}_a+\frac{1}{2a^3}G^{cd}{}_{,a}P_cP_d+a^3V_a \right) + \pi_a \left( \dot{\phi}_0^a-\frac{G^{ab}P_b}{a^3} \right)
\nonumber\\
& + \frac{\alpha}{{{\cal N}}_0} \left( \frac{P^2}{12{m_{\rm Pl}}^2a} - \frac{G^{ab}P_aP_b}{2a^3} - a^3V \right) \bigg] \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $h \equiv h^i{}_i$ and $\pi \equiv \pi^i{}_i$, we can immediately read the same background equations, which we obtained by perturbing the zeroth order action with respect to the background variables, as the constraints for the perturbation variables.
Gauge fixing conditions
-----------------------
Having found the first-order form of the action, now we can proceed formal discussion on the possible choice of gauge fixing. Before we begin explicitly with the quadratic action for cosmological perturbations, let us recall how to remove properly the unphysical degrees of freedom for a constrained system, viz. when constraints are present [@const-H]. Let us consider a Hamiltonian with $r$ constraints in a $2f$-dimensional phase space $(q_1,\cdots,q_f; p_1,\cdots,p_f)$, $$H_\text{total}(q_i,p_i) = H(q_1,\cdots,q_f; p_1,\cdots,p_f) + \sum_{m=1}^r \lambda_m\chi_m(q_1,\cdots,q_f; p_1,\cdots,p_f) \, ,$$ where the Lagrangian multipliers $\lambda_m$ are combinations of unphysical degrees of freedom. Since there are $r$ constraints $\chi_m$, the number of degrees of freedom in the phase space is reduced to $2f-r$ by solving $r$ constraints. But the phase space should be even-dimensional, so total remaining degrees of freedom should be not $2f-r$ but $2f-2r$. That is, still $r$ unphysical degrees of freedom remain. This is because different values of $\lambda_m$ correspond to different copies of physical degrees of freedom in the phase space on $\chi_m = 0$. Thus we need $r$ more, [*gauge-fixing*]{} conditions $\psi_m(q_1,\cdots,q_f; p_1,\cdots,p_f) = 0$. In quantum field theory, these gauge fixing conditions are subject to $\text{det}([\chi_m,\psi_n])\neq0$ so that just one set of physical degrees of freedom is chosen. By choosing gauge fixing conditions satisfying $[\psi_m,\psi_n]=0$, we can identify $\psi_m$ as unphysical canonical momenta $p_m$ then the remaining $f-r$ momenta $(p_1^*,\cdots,p_{f-r}^*)$ are physical. Then $\text{det}([\chi_m,\psi_n]) = \text{det}([\chi_m,p_n]) = \text{det}(i\partial\chi_m/\partial{q}_n) \neq 0$ so that it is always possible to identify unphysical variables $q_m$ by inverting $\chi_m(q_1,\cdots,q_f;p_1^*,\cdots,p_{f-r}^*;p_1=\cdots=p_r=0)=0$. Thus, we are finally left with $2f-2r$ physical, constrained variables $(q_1^*,\cdots,q_{f-r}^*;p_1^*,\cdots,p_{f-r}^*)$.
Now we return to our discussion on the cosmological perturbations around the classical solutions. At quadratic order, the first-order form of the action is written as $$\label{eq:Sfree}
S_2 = \int d^4x \left( \pi_a\partial_tQ^a - 2a^3 H \pi^{ij}\partial_t h_{ij} - {{\cal H}}_2 + \alpha C^0_1 + \beta_i C^i_1 \right) \, ,$$ where ${{\cal H}}_2$ is the quadratic Hamiltonian, and $C_1^\mu$ denote the constraints linear in perturbations. They are given by $$\begin{aligned}
{{\cal H}}_2 & = 4a^3H^2\frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left[ \frac12 \pi^{ij}A_{ijkl}\pi^{kl} + \pi^{ij} \left( 2h_{ij} - \frac12\delta_{ij}h \right) \right] + \frac{G^{ab}}{2a^3} \left( \pi_a\pi_b - h P_a\pi_b \right)
\nonumber\\
& \quad + \frac{a}{2}G_{ab}\partial_iQ^a\partial_iQ^b + \frac{a^3}{2} \left( V_{ab}Q^aQ^b + h V_aQ^a \right)
\nonumber\\
& \quad + \left( \frac{5{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{4} a^3H^2 + \frac{G^{ab}}{8a^3}P_aP_b \right) h^{ij}h_{ij} - \left( \frac{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{8} a^3 H^2 - \frac{G^{ab}}{16 a^3} P_aP_b \right) h^2
\nonumber\\
& \quad + a\frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left( \frac14 h\Delta h - \frac12h h^{ij}{}_{,ij} + \frac12 h^{ij}\partial^k\partial_ih_{jk} - \frac14 h^{ij}\Delta h_{ij} \right) + a^3\frac{V}{4} \left( \frac{h^2}{2} - h^{ij}h_{ij} \right) \, ,
\\
C^{0}_1 & = a^3h \left( \frac{G^{ab}P_aP_b}{4a^6} + \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2}H^2 \right) + a\frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2} \left( h^{ij}{}_{,ij} - \Delta h \right) - a^3 V_aQ^a - \frac{G^{ab}}{a^3}P_a\pi_b + 2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2a^3H^2\pi - \frac{a^3}{2}hV \, ,
\label{Eq:C0(1)}
\\
C^i_1 & = -\frac{1}{a^2}P_a \partial^i Q^a - 2aH{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \left( \partial_j\pi^{ij} + \partial_j h^{ij} - \frac12 \partial^i h \right) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ with $A_{ijkl} \equiv \delta_{ik}\delta_{jl} + \delta_{il}\delta_{jk} - \delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}$. Notice that going beyond cubic order, which is necessary for non-linear perturbation theory, we can schematically write $$S_{\geq3} = \int d^4x \left( -{{\cal H}}_{\geq3} + \alpha C^0_{\geq 2} + \beta_i C^i_{\geq 2} \right) \, ,$$ where the subscript $\geq n$ denotes $n$-th order and beyond in perturbations.
Since gravity has four constraints, we need four gauge fixing conditions $\psi_\mu$ ($\mu=0,1,2,3$) satisfying $${\rm det}\left( \left\{C^\mu,\psi_\nu\right\} \right)\ne 0 \, ,
\label{Eq:FPcondition}$$ where curly brackets denote the Poisson brackets. To extract the possible gauge fixing conditions, we need the Poisson brackets of the constraints $C^\mu$ with the fluctuations $h_{ij}$ and $Q^a$. We can explicitly find $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{ h_{ij}(t, \mathbi{x}), C^0(t, \mathbi{y}) \right\} & = -2H{\tilde\gamma}^{-1/2} \Big\{ \delta_{ij} + \left( -h_{ij}+\delta_{ij}h-2\pi^{ij}+\delta_{ij}\pi \right)
\nonumber\\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad + \left[ (h+\pi)h_{ij}-2h_{ik}h_{jk}-2(h_{il}\pi^{jl}+h_{jl}\pi^{il})+\pi^{kl}h_{kl}\delta_{ij} \right]
\nonumber\\
& \qquad\qquad\qquad + (-2 h_{il}\pi^{lk}h_{jk}+h_{kl}\pi^{kl}h_{ij}) \Big\} \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, ,
\\
\left\{ h_{ij}(t, \mathbi{x}), C^k(t, \mathbi{y}) \right\} & = -\frac{2}{a^2} \left( \delta_{k(i}\partial^x_{j)}-\Gamma^k_{ij} \right) \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, ,
\\
\left\{ Q^a(t, \mathbi{x}), C^0(t, \mathbi{y}) \right\} & = -\frac{\tilde{\gamma}^{-1/2}}{a^3}(P_a+\pi_a) \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, ,
\\
\left\{ Q^a(t, \mathbi{x}), C^i(t, \mathbi{y}) \right\} & = -\frac{1}{a^3}\tilde{\gamma}^{ik}\partial_kQ^a \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\tilde\gamma_{ij} = \gamma_{ij}/a^2$. Since the participating degrees of freedom are the perturbed metric $h_{ij}$ and the field fluctuations $Q^a$, we can think of four possibilities for the gauge fixing conditions:
- Both the $\psi^0$ and the $\psi^i$ conditions come from $h_{ij}$.
- Both the $\psi^0$ and the $\psi^i$ conditions come from $Q^a$.
- The $\psi^0$ condition comes from $h_{ij}$, whereas the $\psi^i$ condition comes from $Q^a$.
- The $\psi^0$ condition comes from $Q^a$, whereas the $\psi^i$ condition comes from $h_{ij}$.
However, the 3-vector condition made up of $Q^a$, say, $\psi_i=\psi_i(Q^a,\partial_k Q^a)$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{ \psi_j(Q)(t, \mathbi{x}), C^i(t, \mathbi{y}) \right\} & = -\frac{\tilde{\gamma}^{ik}}{a^2} \partial_k Q^a (t, \mathbi{y}) \left[ \frac{\partial\psi_j}{\partial Q^a}(t, \mathbi{x}) + \frac{\partial \psi_j}{\partial (\partial_lQ^a)}(t, \mathbi{x})\partial^x_l \right] \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y})
\nonumber\\
&= -\frac{\tilde\gamma^{ik}}{a^2} D_k\psi_j \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus it vanishes under $\psi_i=0$, and is violated. That is, the spatial vector constraints $C^i$ cannot be satisfied with the field fluctuations $Q^a$. Hence, plausible gauge fixing conditions should be chosen between the possibilities 1 and 4.
For the first possibility, the gauge fixing is imposed entirely from the metric fluctuation. One simple example is $$\label{eq:flatgauge}
\begin{split}
\psi_0 & = 0 \, ,
\\
\psi_i & = \partial^j \left( h_{ij}-\frac{\delta_{ij}}{3}h \right) \, .
\end{split}$$ In terms of the metric decomposition in and the gauge fixing by $\psi_\mu=0$ in this choice is to set the scalar components of $h_{ij}$ zero, so that there is no scalar perturbation in the spatial metric as in . Thus in this gauge condition, the curvature of the three-hypersurface is uniform so it is called uniform-curvature gauge. Since we are considering spatially flat universe, we may call it “flat” gauge condition. In the flat gauge, the scalar degrees of freedom are entirely given to $Q^a$. Meanwhile, as an example for the fourth possibility, we can make use of the conditions $$\label{eq:comgauge}
\begin{split}
\psi_0 & = G_{ab}\dot{\phi}_0^a Q^b \, ,
\\
\psi_i & = \partial^j \left( h_{ij}-\frac{\delta_{ij}}{3}h \right) \, .
\end{split}$$ We can note from that the condition $\psi_0=0$ is equivalent to $T^0{}_i=0$. In terms of hydrodynamic fluid, the 3-velocity of the fluid vanishes in this gauge, $u_i = 0$. Thus in this gauge condition we do not observe momentum flux, and we move together with the cosmic fluid. So this gauge condition is known and the “comoving” gauge condition, and one scalar degree of freedom is associated with the metric – the curvature perturbation. But notice that all field contents contribute to $\psi_0$. A more convenient way of implementing $\psi_0=0$ will be discussed in the following sections.
Quadratic action in the comoving gauge
--------------------------------------
Having discussed the possible gauge conditions, now we consider the quadratic action for which we have not yet applied any gauge yet. For this, we decompose the metric perturbation $h_{ij}$ using the scalar, vector and tensor components as we already did in and [^5]: $$\label{Eq:metricdec}
h_{ij} = 2\varphi\delta_{ij} + 2H_{T,ij} + 2\partial_{(i}F_{j)} + h_{ij}^{TT} \, .$$ The quadratic action looks horribly complex, so we first need to arrange terms for physical clarity. For this, we introduce the Mukhanov-Sasaki variable [@MSvariable] à la single field inflation as $$\label{Eq:multiredef}
\tilde{Q}^a \equiv Q^a - \frac{\dot{\phi}_0^a}{H} \varphi \, .$$ Then, up to irrelevant auxiliary field terms which can be eliminated from dynamics after appropriate redefinitions, we obtain a surprisingly simple form: $$\label{Eq:quadratic}
S_2 = \int d^4x \frac{a^3}{2} \left\{ G_{ab}D_t\tilde{Q}^aD_t\tilde{Q}^b - \frac{G_{ab}}{a^2}\partial^i \tilde{Q}^a\partial_i \tilde{Q}^b - M_{ab}^2 \tilde{Q}^a\tilde{Q}^b + \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{4} \left[ \left( \dot{h}_{ij}^{TT} \right)^2 - \frac{1}{a^2} \partial^k{h}_{ij}^{TT} \partial_k{h}_{ij}^{TT} \right] \right\} \, ,$$ where $M_{ab}^2$ is given by .
Since the pure tensor action in is the same as that in single field inflation, we from now on concentrate on the scalar sector. As mentioned at the beginning of this section, it is very conventional to adopt the flat gauge for multi-field inflation in which $\varphi = H_T = 0$ so that simply $\tilde{Q}^a = Q^a$. This is because the number of the physical degrees of freedom, after eliminating the unphysical ones, is the same as the number of field contents. But in the comoving gauge, where one physical degree of freedom is the curvature perturbation $\varphi$, we need to fix a non-trivial temporal gauge condition $C^0$ for which all the field fluctuations contribute as can be read from $\psi_0$ in . Thus, is, while it gives a very simple form of the quadratic action , not most convenient to implement the comoving gauge condition. A more convenient alternative is to decompose $Q^a$ into the directions along and orthogonal to time evolution [@Achucarro:2012sm] as $$\label{eq:decomposition2}
Q^a(t,\mathbi{x}) = Q^a_\bot(t,\mathbi{x}) + \dot\phi^a_0(t)\tilde\pi(t,\mathbi{x}) \, ,$$ with the orthogonality condition $$\label{eq:orthogonality}
G_{ab}\dot\phi^a_0Q_\bot^b = 0 \, .$$ We can then rewrite the temporal gauge condition of very simply as as $$\psi_0 = \dot\phi_0^2\tilde\pi \, .$$ Thus, we can impose the the comoving gauge conveniently by $\tilde\pi=0$. Note that the linear gauge transformation $Q^a \to Q^a - \dot\phi^a_0\xi^0$ tells us $$\tilde\pi \to \tilde\pi - \xi^0 \quad \text{and} \quad Q^a_\bot \to Q^a_\bot \, .$$ This means that $\tilde\pi$ is the fluctuation in the direction of the time translation itself, and is thus interpreted as the Goldstone mode resulting from the spontaneous breaking of the time translation invariance [@Cheung:2007st]. Meanwhile, the orthogonal fluctuations $Q^a_\bot$, which are usually called “isocurvature” modes, are gauge invariant[^6]. Then, we can write the multi-field version of the Mukhanov-Sasaki variable as $$\label{eq:MS-comoving}
\tilde{Q}^a(t,\mathbi{x}) = Q^a_\bot(t,\mathbi{x}) - \frac{\dot\phi^a_0}{H} \left( \varphi - H\tilde\pi \right)(t,\mathbi{x}) \equiv Q^a_\bot(t,\mathbi{x}) - \frac{\dot\phi^a_0}{H} \pi(t,\mathbi{x}) \, .$$ Note that due to the orthogonality condition, $n-1$ out of total $n$ $Q_\bot^a$’s are independent in the comoving gauge: the remaining single degree of freedom is $\pi$, which is also gauge invariant. With this decomposition, the scalar quadratic action is rewritten in terms of gauge invariant variables $\pi$ and $Q^a_\bot$ as, using the time derivative of to eliminate $D_tQ^a$ in the mixing term with $\pi$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:S2scalar}
S_2 = \int d^4x \frac{a^3}{2} \bigg[ & G_{ab}D_t{Q}_\bot^aD_t{Q}_\bot^b - \frac{G_{ab}}{a^2}\partial^iQ_\bot^a\partial_iQ_\bot^b - M^2_{ab}Q_\bot^aQ_\bot^b
\nonumber\\
& \left. + 2\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \left( \dot\pi^2 - \frac{1}{a^2}\partial^i\pi\partial_i\pi \right) - \frac{4}{H}V_aQ^a_\bot\dot\pi \right] \, .\end{aligned}$$
We close this section by writing the curvature perturbation in a form convenient for computing higher order correlation functions that we will discuss later. We can non-linearly generalize the metric perturbation by exponentiating it as [@Lyth:2004gb] $$\label{eq:R}
\gamma_{ij} = a^2(t)e^{2\varphi(t,\mathbi{x})} \left[ e^{h^{TT}} \right]_{ij} \, ,$$ where $\text{det}\left[e^{h^{TT}}\right] = 1$, i.e. the matrix $h^{TT}$ is traceless and represents tensor perturbations, so that the scalar perturbation is isolated as $\varphi$. Notice that this form also means the scalar perturbation can be interpreted as the “local expansion rate” which can be written as the determinant of $\gamma_{ij}$: see . In the comoving gauge in which $\varphi = {{\cal R}}$, the transformation from $\pi$ to ${{\cal R}}$ is given by [@Maldacena:2002vr; @Noh:2004bc] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:pi->R}
{{\cal R}}& = \pi + \left( \epsilon-\frac{\delta}{2} \right)\pi^2 + \frac{1}{H}\pi \dot{\pi} - \frac{1}{4a^2H^2} \left[ \partial^i\pi\partial_i\pi - \partial^i\partial^j \Delta^{-1} \left( \partial_i\pi\partial_j\pi \right) \right]
\nonumber\\
& \quad + \frac{\epsilon}{H} \left[ \partial^i\pi \partial_i\Delta^{-1}\dot{\pi} - \partial^i\partial^j\Delta^{-1} \left( \partial_i\pi \partial_j\Delta^{-1} \dot{\pi} \right) \right] - \frac{1}{4H}\dot{h}_{ij}^{TT}\partial^i\partial^j \pi + \cdots \, .\end{aligned}$$ In terms of ${{\cal R}}$, the quadratic action remains the same with $\pi$ replaced by ${{\cal R}}$. But the transformation does give rise to additional contributions to the higher order action in terms of $\pi$ as we will see in Section \[sec:non-linear\].
Two-field case
--------------
Now we consider two-field case explicitly. Due to the orthogonality condition, we know that $Q_\bot^a$ is proportional to the normal vector $N^a$: $Q_\bot^a \propto N^a$. We denote the amplitude of $Q_\bot$ as ${{\cal F}}$, and use the (linear) relation to replace $\pi$ simply with ${{\cal R}}$. That is, the gauge-invariant variable $\tilde{Q}^a$ is written in terms of ${{\cal R}}$ and ${{\cal F}}$ as $$\tilde{Q}^a = N^a{{\cal F}}- \frac{\dot\phi_0^a}{H}{{\cal R}}\, .$$ Then the quadratic action becomes $$\label{eq:S2-R&F}
S_2 = \int d^4x \frac{a^3}{2} \left\{ 2\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \left[ \dot{{\cal R}}^2 - \frac{(\nabla{{\cal R}})^2}{a^2} \right] + \dot{{\cal F}}^2 - \frac{(\nabla{{\cal F}})^2}{a^2} - M_\text{eff}^2 {{\cal F}}^2 + 4\dot\theta\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}\dot{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}\right\} \, .$$ where $M_\text{eff}^2 = V_{NN} + \epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2\mathbb{R} - \dot\theta^2$. Identifying $u^T = -\dot\phi_0{{\cal R}}/H$ and $u^N = {{\cal F}}$, after some manipulations we can recover .
### Effective single field theory
Note that if a hierarchy of scales is present in the mass matrix, then we can compute a fairly reliable effective single field theory: see [@Chluba:2015bqa] for a concrete review on this subject. If we do not have any light mode other than ${{\cal R}}$, we can integrate out the heavy isocurvature modes ${{\cal F}}$ by performing formally the path integral over ${{\cal F}}$. Writing schematically as $$\label{eq:S2schematic}
S_2 = \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}}{{\cal R}}+ \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal F}}\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal F}}+ \int {{\cal F}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ we can evaluate the Gaussian integral over the heavy field ${{\cal F}}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-S_\text{eff}[{{\cal R}}]} & = \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}}{{\cal R}}\right) \int {{\cal D}}{{\cal F}}\exp \left( \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal F}}\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal F}}+ \int {{\cal F}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\right)
\nonumber\\
& = \exp \left\{ \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}}{{\cal R}}- \frac{1}{2} \int \Big[ \left( \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\right) \Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}^{-1} \left( \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\right) \Big] \right\} \text{det}\left[\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}\right]^{-1/2} \, .\end{aligned}$$ Then the effective action for ${{\cal R}}$ reads $$S_\text{eff}[{{\cal R}}] = \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}}{{\cal R}}- \frac{1}{2} \int d^4x d^4y \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}(x) \Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}^{-1}(x,y) \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}(y) + S_\text{counter} \, ,$$ where $S_\text{counter}$ denotes the contributions from the functional determinant and does not depend on ${{\cal R}}$. Note that instead of formally performing the Gaussian integral, we could solve for ${{\cal F}}$ via its equations of motion $$\label{eq:solF}
\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal F}}= -\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ which has the formal solution ${{\cal F}}= -\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}^{-1}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}$. Substituting this solution into gives $$S_\text{eff}[{{\cal R}}] = \frac{1}{2} \int {{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}}{{\cal R}}- \frac{1}{2} \int \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}}^{-1} \Delta_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal F}}}{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ with the only difference from the formal result being the absence of $S_\text{counter}$. Thus at quadratic order, we can simply substitute the solution for ${{\cal F}}$ back into the original action to obtain the desired effective action for ${{\cal R}}$ solely [@Achucarro:2012sm].
The effective action obtained in this manner is intrinsically non-local, as the operator $\Delta_{{{\cal F}}{{\cal F}}} = -\Box + M_\text{eff}^2$ contains derivative operators. However, given that the adiabaticity condition [@adia-condition] $$\left| \frac{\ddot\theta}{\dot\theta} \right| \ll M_\text{eff}$$ is satisfied, we can expand the solution of as a power series of $M_\text{eff}^2$ as $$\label{eq:F-expansion}
{{\cal F}}= \left( -\Box + M_\text{eff}^2 \right)^{-1} 2\dot\theta\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}\dot{{\cal R}}= \frac{1}{M_\text{eff}^2} \left( 1 + \frac{\Box}{M_\text{eff}^2} + \cdots \right) 2\dot\theta\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}\dot{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ making the non-local theory to the one with higher derivatives. Especially, the leading term gives a simple modified kinetic term: $$S_2 = \int d^4x a^3\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \left[ \left( 1 + \frac{4\dot\theta^2}{M_\text{eff}^2} \right)\dot{{\cal R}}^2 - \frac{(\nabla{{\cal R}})^2}{a^2} \right] \, ,$$ which is interpreted as the speed of sound $c_s^{-2}$ [@Achucarro:2010da; @Achucarro:2012sm; @singleeft-cs]. That is, the propagation speed of the adiabatic mode ${{\cal R}}$ is reduced by the interaction with the heavy isocurvature mode ${{\cal F}}$, as the kinetic energy of ${{\cal R}}$ is extracted to excite ${{\cal F}}$. Including higher order derivative operators in the expansion leads to a modified dispersion relation in such a way that the validity of the effective theory is improved [@single-eft-next].
Power spectrum {#sec:P}
==============
Free solutions of mode functions and power spectrum
---------------------------------------------------
Having discussed various forms of the quadratic action for perturbations, now we solve the derived equations of motion for those perturbations. What we have seen previously is that in general there are always interactions between different components. These mixing terms lead to the coupled set of differential equations, for example and . Thus finding exact solutions of these coupled equations is rather non-trivial. But given that the interactions are small enough, we can perturbatively find the solutions and corrections to the power spectrum of the perturbation of our interest. Presuming that the interactions are sufficiently small, we conveniently split the quadratic part of the action as $$S_2 = S_\text{2,free} + S_\text{2,int} \, ,$$ where $S_\text{2,free}$ contains only free, decoupled terms for a certain component $\Psi$ without interaction with other degrees of freedom, while $S_\text{2,int}$ includes quadratic interactions among them. The leading solution of a certain perturbation component $\Psi$ is coming from the decoupled free quadratic action for $\Psi$, which has the following schematic form as a harmonic oscillator: $$\label{eq:Sfree}
S_\text{free} = \int d\tau d^3x \frac{1}{2} \left[ {\Psi'}^2 - (\nabla\Psi)^2 - m^2\Psi^2 \right] \, ,$$ with $m^2$ being time-dependent in general. To obtain this form we need to perform further manipulations. For example, for the decoupled free part of the quadratic action for the curvature perturbation ${{\cal R}}$ \[or equivalently $\pi$ at quadratic order: see \] we rescale ${{\cal R}}$ as $$\Psi = \frac{a\dot\phi_0}{H} {{\cal R}}\equiv z{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ which gives $m^2 = z''/z$. The resulting equation of motion we can derive from is $$\label{eq:eom-Psi}
\Psi'' - \Delta\Psi - m^2\Psi = 0 \, .$$ We can write the Fourier mode $\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{k})$, which will be more convenient for the subsequent study, as $$\label{eq:Psi-Fourier}
\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{x}) = \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3} e^{i\mathbi{k}\cdot\mathbi{x}} \Psi(\tau,\mathbi{k}) \, ,$$ then the equation of motion becomes, for the Fourier mode, $$\label{eq:freeeq}
\Psi'' + (k^2 + m^2)\Psi = 0 \, .$$ Identifying $k^2 + m^2 \equiv \omega_k^2(\tau)$, we can see that describes a harmonic oscillator with time dependent frequency $\omega_k^2(\tau)$. Being a canonically normalized harmonic oscillator, we can follow the standard quantization procedure for $\Psi$. That is, we promote $\Psi$ and the conjugate momentum $\Pi_\Psi = \Psi'$ to operators $\widehat\Psi$ and $\widehat\Pi_\Psi$ and imposes the canonical commutation relations between them.
Since $\Psi$ is a free field, we can expand the operator $\widehat\Psi$ in terms of the creation and annihilation operators in the Fourier space. The Fourier mode given by is promoted to the operator $\widehat\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{k})$, which we can expand in terms of the creation and annihilation operators: $$\label{eq:Psi-opexp}
\widehat\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{k}) = a(\mathbi{k})\Psi_k(\tau) + a^\dag(-\mathbi{k})\Psi_k^*(\tau) \, ,$$ where the creation and annihilation operators satisfy the standard commutation relations $$\label{eq:commutation}
\left[ a(\mathbi{k}), a^\dag(\mathbi{q}) \right] = (2\pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}-\mathbi{q}) \, ,$$ otherwise zero. Now we require that the canonical conjugate variables $\widehat\Psi$ and $\widehat\Pi_\Psi$ satisfy the equal time canonical commutation relation $$\left[ \widehat\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{x}), \widehat\Pi_\Psi(\tau,\mathbi{y}) \right] = i\delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y}) \, .$$ Using the Fourier mode and the expansion with the commutation relation , we can see that the mode function $\Psi_k$ satisfies the normalization condition $$\label{eq:normalization}
\Psi_k\frac{d\Psi_k^*}{d\tau} - \frac{d\Psi_k}{d\tau}\Psi_k^* = i \, .$$
To determine the mode function $\Psi_k(\tau)$, which amounts to fix the vacuum state $|0\rangle$ defined by $$a(\mathbi{k})|0\rangle = 0 \quad \text{for all } k \, ,$$ we impose the vacuum boundary condition when the mode is deep inside the horizon $\tau \to -\infty$, i.e. $k \gg aH$ where the mode function solution is the positive frequency mode with $\omega_k = k$: $$\label{eq:boundary}
\Psi_k = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}} e^{-ik\tau} \, .$$ With this boundary condition and the normalization condition , the general solution for can be written in terms of the Bessel functions, and for later convenience we use the Hankel function: $$\label{eq:massivesol}
\Psi_k(\tau) = \sqrt{-\tau} \left[ c_1(k)H^{(1)}_\nu(-k\tau) + c_2(k)H^{(2)}_\nu(-k\tau) \right] \, ,$$ where $c_1(k)$ and $c_2(k)$ are coefficients to be determined, and $$\nu^2 \equiv \frac{9}{4} - \frac{m^2}{H^2}$$ is assumed to be constant. To fix the coefficients, we require that when the mode is deep inside the horizon $\tau \to -\infty$ we recover the vacuum boundary solution . This can be found by taking the argument of the Hankel function $-k\tau$ very large, $$H^{(1)}_\nu(z) \underset{z\gg1}{\longrightarrow} \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi z}} \exp \left[ i \left( z - \frac{\pi}{2}\nu - \frac{\pi}{4} \right) \right] \, ,$$ with $H^{(2)}_\nu$ being the complex conjugate of $H^{(1)}_\nu$. Thus, to match , $c_1(k)$ and $c_2(k)$ should be $$\label{eq:Hankel-coeff}
c_1(k) = \frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2} e^{i(\nu + 1/2)\pi/2} \quad \text{and} \quad c_2(k) = 0 \, .$$ A particularly important and simple case is when $\nu = 3/2$ exactly, which corresponds to the massless limit: $$\label{eq:massless-sol}
\Psi_k = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}} \left( 1-\frac{i}{k\tau} \right) e^{-ik\tau} \, .$$
Given the free solution of $\Psi_k$, now we can compute the power spectrum of $\Psi_k$, defined by $$\label{eq:Pdef}
\langle0| \Psi(\mathbi{k})\Psi(\mathbi{q}) |0\rangle \equiv (2\pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}+\mathbi{q}) \frac{2\pi^2}{k^3} {{\cal P}}_\Psi(k)\, ,$$ so that in terms of the mode function $\Psi_k$ $${{\cal P}}_\Psi(k) = \frac{k^3}{2\pi^2} \left| \Psi_k \right|^2 \, ,$$ which can be evaluated at a convenient time, e.g. the moment of horizon crossing. For example, the power spectrum of the curvature perturbation can be directly found from its free quadratic action as $${{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}=\frac{k^3}{2\pi^2} \left| \frac{\Psi_k}{z} \right|^2 = \left( \frac{H}{2\pi} \right)^2 \frac{1}{2\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, .$$ Alternatively, using the kinematic basis discussed in Sections \[sec:BG\] and \[sec:pert\] in which ${{\cal R}}$ is related to the tangential component $u^T$ in the standard manner as $${{\cal R}}= -\frac{H}{\dot\phi_0} Q^T = -\frac{H}{\dot\phi_0} \frac{u^T}{a} \, ,$$ we can write $${{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}(k,\tau) = \frac{H^2}{\dot\phi_0^2} {{\cal P}}_{TT}(k,\tau) = \frac{k^3}{4\pi^2a^2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2\epsilon} \left| {u}^T_k \right|^2 \, .$$ where $m^2$ for $u^T$ is given by, as can be read from , $m^2 = a^2M_{TT}^2 - {\theta'}^2$. Using the mass basis instead gives similar results.
Corrections to the power spectrum
---------------------------------
In the previous section, we have obtained the free power spectrum with the quadratic interactions between different components being ignored. Now we consider the effects of the interactions to the power spectrum perturbatively. Having perturbative interactions, we can compute readily the corrections due to the interaction terms between different fields using the in-in formalism [@in-in], which let us briefly recall here.
One crucial point when interactions exist, viz. the system is evolving, is that any (vacuum) expectation values should be taken with respect to the interaction vacuum state $|\Omega\rangle$, i.e. the [*actual*]{} vacuum state of the theory, [*not*]{} the free vacuum state $|0\rangle$ defined in the previous section. For this description, we resort to the interaction picture. In quantum mechanics, the interaction picture (or Dirac picture) is an intermediate between the Schrödinger picture and the Heisenberg picture. Whereas in the other two pictures either the state vector or the operators carry time dependence, in the interaction picture both carry part of the time dependence of observables. The purpose of the interaction picture is to shunt all the time dependence due to the free Hamiltonian $H_0$ onto the operators, leaving only the interaction Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{int}$ affecting the time-dependence of the state vectors.
Now, we denote by $\left\langle \widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) \right\rangle$ the expectation value evaluated at a time $t$ of a time-dependent operator $$\label{interaction_operator}
\widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) = \left( e^{-i\int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t H_0(t') dt'}
\right)^\dag \widehat{\mathcal{O}} \left( e^{-i\int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t H_0(t'') dt''}
\right) \, ,$$ where $t_\mathrm{in}$ is some early “in” time when the interaction is turned on. This expectation value is taken with respect to the vacuum state at that time $|\Omega(t)\rangle$ that has evolved from an “in” state, which we take as the vacuum $|0\rangle$, according to $$\label{eq:interaction_vector}
|\Omega(t)\rangle = e^{-i\int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t H_\mathrm{int}(t') dt'}|0\rangle \, .$$ Given appropriate normalizations, now let us consider $H_\mathrm{int}$ as a small perturbation to the free Hamiltonian $H_0$. Expanding the exponential in , in terms of $H_\mathrm{int}$, we obtain[^7] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:inin-expansion}
\left\langle \widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) \right\rangle = & \left\langle0\left|\left[ 1 -
i \int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t H_\mathrm{int}(t')dt' + \frac{1}{2} \left( -i
\int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t H_\mathrm{int}(t')dt' \right)^2 + \cdots \right]^\dag
\widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) \right.\right.
\nonumber\\
& \left.\left. \hspace{0.5cm} \times \left[ 1 - i \int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t
H_\mathrm{int}(t')dt' + \frac{1}{2} \left( -i \int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t
H_\mathrm{int}(t'')dt'' \right)^2 + \cdots \right] \right|0\right\rangle
\nonumber\\
= & \left\langle0\left| \widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) \right|0\right\rangle + i
\int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t dt_1 \left\langle0\left| \left[ H_\mathrm{int}(t'),
\widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t) \right] \right|0\right\rangle
\nonumber\\
& - \int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^t dt_2 \int_{t_\mathrm{in}}^{t_1} dt_2 \left\langle0\left|
\left[ H_\mathrm{int}(t_1), \left[ H_\mathrm{int}(t_2), \widehat{\mathcal{O}}(t)
\right] \right] \right|0\right\rangle + \cdots \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where for the last equality we have used the commutator identity $$AAB - 2ABA + BAA = [A,[A,B]] \, .$$
Having briefly recalled the in-in formalism, now we consider the corrections to the free power spectrum of $\Psi$ due to the interaction terms between different fields, which we collectively denote by $\Phi$. Schematically we write the interaction terms as $$\label{eq:quadratic-int}
S_\text{2,int} = \int d^4x a^3c(t) {{\cal O}}^{(\Phi)} \Phi {{\cal O}}^{(\Psi)} \Psi \, ,$$ where $c(t)$ is the time-dependent coupling between $\Psi$ and $\Phi$, and ${{\cal O}}^{(X)}$ is the possible derivative operator for the field $X$. Since the interaction Hamiltonian contains two free field contents, the first non-vanishing contribution to the two-point function comes from the interaction Hamiltonian squared. Correspondingly, the correction terms now involve two free propagators: one for $\Psi$ and the other for the coupled field $\Phi$. Thus, in terms of the free propagator $$i\Delta_{+-}^X(x,x') \equiv \left\langle 0 \left| X(x')X(x) \right| 0 \right\rangle \, ,$$ where the subscript $+$ ($-$) denotes forward (backward) in time with $i\Delta_{+-} = -i\Delta_{-+}^*$, from we can write as the two-point function of $\Psi$ including the leading corrections due to its interaction with $\Phi$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:general2point}
\left\langle \Omega \left| \Psi(t,\mathbi{x})\Psi(t,\mathbi{y}) \right| \Omega \right\rangle
& = i\Delta^\Psi_{+-}
-\int^t_{t_i} dt_1d^3x_1 \int^t_{t_i} dt_2d^3x_2 (a^3c)(t_1)(a^3c)(t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{5em} \times {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{+-}(t, t_1) {{\cal O}}_2^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{-+}(t,t_2) {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Phi)}{{\cal O}}_2^{(\Phi)} i\Delta^\Phi_{+-}(t_1, t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{1em} - \int^t_{t_i} dt_1 d^3x_1 \int^{t_1}_{t_i} dt_2 d^3x_2 (a^3c)(t_1)(a^3c)(t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{4em} \times \left[ {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{+-}(t_1, t) {{\cal O}}_2^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{+-}(t, t_2) {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Phi)}{{\cal O}}_2^{(\Phi)} i\Delta^\Phi_{+-}(t_1, t_2) \right.
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{5em} \left. + {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{-+}(t, t_1) {{\cal O}}_2^{(\Psi)} i\Delta^\Psi_{-+}(t_2, t) {{\cal O}}_1^{(\Phi)}{{\cal O}}_2^{(\Phi)} i\Delta^\Phi_{+-}(t_2, t_1) \right] \, .\end{aligned}$$ This is most general expression for the two-point correlation function of $\Psi$ including the leading corrections due to the interaction with $\Phi$. The corresponding power spectrum can be found by taking the Fourier transformation of $\left\langle \Omega \left| \Psi(t,\mathbi{x})\Psi(t,\mathbi{y}) \right| \Omega \right\rangle$.
### Two-field case
For definiteness, let us consider explicitly the corrections to the power spectrum of ${{\cal R}}$ due to the interaction with $Q_\bot^a$ in the simplest two-field case. The total quadratic action including the interaction is , from which we read the coefficient of the quadratic mixing term and the derivative operators as $$\label{Eq:quadmix}
c(t) = \sqrt{8\epsilon}{m_{\rm Pl}}\dot\theta \, , \quad {{\cal O}}^{({{\cal R}})} = \partial_t \, , \quad {{\cal O}}^{({{\cal F}})} = 1 \, .$$ Then the two-point correlation of ${{\cal R}}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \Omega \left| {{\cal R}}(t,\mathbi{x}){{\cal R}}(t,\mathbi{y}) \right| \Omega \right\rangle & = i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{+-}
-\int^t_{t_i} dt_1d^3x_1 \int^t_{t_i} dt_2d^3x_2 (a^3c)(t_1)(a^3c)(t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{5em} \times \partial_{t_1} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{+-}(t, t_1) \partial_{t_2} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{-+}(t,t_2) i\Delta^{{\cal F}}_{+-}(t_1, t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{1em} - \int^t_{t_i} dt_1 d^3x_1 \int^{t_1}_{t_i} dt_2 d^3x_2 (a^3c)(t_1)(a^3c)(t_2)
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{4em} \times \left[ \partial_{t_1} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{+-}(t_1, t) \partial_{t_2} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{+-}(t, t_2) i\Delta^{{\cal F}}_{+-}(t_1, t_2) \right.
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{5em} \left. + \partial_{t_1} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{-+}(t, t_1) \partial_{t_2} i\Delta^{{\cal R}}_{-+}(t_2, t) i\Delta^{{\cal F}}_{+-}(t_2, t_1) \right] \, .\end{aligned}$$ The power spectrum is obtained by performing the Fourier transformation of the above result. In the very simple limit of constant $c(t)$, which corresponds to a constant turn, using the massive mode function solution with for ${{\cal F}}$, we find $${{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}= \left( \frac{H}{2\pi} \right)^2 \frac{1}{2\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \left( 1 + \frac{4c^2C}{\epsilon{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2} \right) \, ,$$ where [@qsf] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:coeff-C-int}
C \equiv \frac{\pi}{4} \Re & \left\{ \int^\infty_0 dx_1 \int^\infty_{x_1} dx_2 \left[ x_1^{-1/2}H_\nu^{(1)}(x_1)e^{ix_1}x_2^{-1/2}H_\nu^{(2)}(x_2)e^{-ix_2} \right.\right.
\nonumber\\
& \left. \hspace{8em} - x_1^{-1/2}H_\nu^{(1)}(x_1)e^{-ix_1}x_2^{-1/2}H_\nu^{(2)}(x_2)e^{-ix_2} \right] \bigg\} \, .\end{aligned}$$ Especially, if ${{\cal F}}$ is also very light so that $\nu \to 3/2$, we can perform the integral analytically using the massless mode function solution to find $$\label{eq:coeff-C}
C = \frac{1}{2} (\alpha-\log{x})^2 + \frac{\pi^2}{8} - \frac{\gamma^2}{2} - \frac{3}{4} = \left. \frac{\alpha^2}{2} + \frac{\pi^2}{8} - \frac{\gamma^2}{2} - \frac{3}{4} \right|_{k=aH} \, ,$$ where $\alpha \equiv 2-\log2-\gamma \approx 0.729637$ with $\gamma \approx 0.577216$ being the Euler-Mascheroni constant, and for the second equality we have evaluated at the moment of horizon crossing $k=aH$[^8] \[see also \]. For the field fluctuations $Q^a$ in the flat gauge, we can find similar results.
Alternative solutions
---------------------
In the previous sections, we have considered the free, decoupled and interaction terms separately, and have regarded the latter as perturbations to apply the in-in formalism. This is because fully solving the coupled differential equations is a non-trivial task. We can, however, take a different approach to solve the equations of motion directly. As we will see, we still treat the interaction terms perturbatively, so in this sense it is equivalent to what we have seen in the previous sections. One advantage of the alternative we present here is that all the corrections, including the deviations from perfect de Sitter limit $\tau = -1/(aH)$, are systematically taken into account. We will solve for the field fluctuations $Q^a$ in the flat gauge, but it is straightforwardly extended to the curvature perturbation ${{\cal R}}$ in the comoving gauge.
Our starting point is the equation of motion for $Q^a$ . Defining $u^a \equiv aQ^a$ and $$\label{eq:variable-x}
x \equiv -k\tau = \frac{k}{aH} \left( 1 + \epsilon + \cdots \right) \, ,$$ we can rewrite as [@multi-eom] $$\label{eq:Qeom2}
D_x^2u^a + \left( 1 - \frac{2}{x^2} \right) u^a = \frac{3}{x^2} \zeta^a{}_bu^b \, ,$$ where $\zeta^{ab}$ is given by $$\label{eq:zeta-ab}
\zeta^{ab} = G^{ab}\epsilon + \frac{\dot\phi_0^a}{H}\frac{\dot\phi_0^b}{H} + \frac{\mathbb{R}^a{}_{cd}{}^b}{3} \frac{\dot\phi_0^c}{H}\frac{\dot\phi_0^d}{H} - \frac{V^{ab}}{3H^2} + \cdots \, .$$ Since $u^a$ canonically normalizes , we can apply the canonical commutation relations between $u^a$ and its conjugate momentum $D_\tau u^a$: $$\left[ u^a(\tau,\mathbi{x}), D_\tau u^b(\tau,\mathbi{y}) \right] = i\delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{x}-\mathbi{y})G^{ab} \, ,$$ otherwise zero.
What we can see from the rescaled equation of motion is that the left hand side describes the evolution of a single component $u^a$ in perfect de Sitter background, while everything else – including the deviations from perfect de Sitter background and mixing with other components – is placed on the right hand side. Thus we can solve the homogeneous part of , $$D_x^2u_0^a + \left( 1 - \frac{2}{x^2} \right)u_0^a = 0 \, ,$$ very easily with the boundary conditions, as in the previous sections, being imposed at $x\to\infty$ as $$u_0^a(x,\mathbi{k}) = a^a(\mathbi{k})u_0(x) + {a^a}^\dag(-\mathbi{k})u_0^*(x) \, ,$$ where the creation and annihilation operators satisfy the commutation relations $$\left[ a^a(\mathbi{k}), {a^b}^\dag(\mathbi{q}) \right] = (2\pi)^3\delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}-\mathbi{q})G^{ab}$$ and the mode function solution $u_0(x)$ is that of a massless field : $$u_0(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}} \left( 1 + \frac{i}{x} \right) e^{ix} \, .$$ With these boundary conditions, along with the same normalization condition as , we can apply the standard Green’s function method to solve the inhomogeneous equation as [@Gong:2001he] $$\label{eq:Green-sol}
u^a(x) = u_0^a(x) + \frac{3}{2}i \int_x^\infty \frac{du}{u^2} \zeta^a{}_b u^b(u) \left[ u_0^*(u)u_0(x) - u_0^*(x)u_0(u) \right] \, .$$ The first correction terms are obtained by computing the integral with $u^b(u)$ being the homogeneous solution $u_0$, and the next corrections by plugging the solution with leading correction terms, and so on. We can iterate as many times as we like to find more and more accurate solutions.
To implement the slow-roll approximation evaluated at, say, the moment of horizon crossing $k = aH$ which is different from $x=1$ by ${{\cal O}}(\epsilon)$ as can be read from , we take the ansatz $\zeta^{ab} = \zeta^{ab}(\log{x})$ and expand $\zeta^{ab}$ as a power series in $\log{x}$: $$\label{eq:zeta-expansion}
\zeta^{ab} = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\zeta_{n+1}^{ab}}{n!} (\log{x})^n \, ,$$ with $\zeta_n^{ab} = {{\cal O}}(\epsilon^n)$. This expansion is valid as long as the series converges, which is the case for a wide range of value for $x$ as $e^{-1/{{\cal O}}(\epsilon)} \ll x \ll e^{1/{{\cal O}}(\epsilon)}$. We can substitute the expansion ansatz into the Green’s function solution and integrate iteratively to find the desired solution for $\varphi^a$ explicitly in terms of the slow-roll parameters. Especially, we can find the asymptotic solution at later time $x\to0$ as $$\begin{aligned}
u^a(x) & \underset{x\to0}{\longrightarrow} \frac{i}{\sqrt{2k}x} \left\{ a^a(\mathbi{k}) - {a^a}^\dag(\mathbi{k}) + \left[ \left( \alpha + \frac{i\pi}{2} \right)\zeta_1^a{}_b - \zeta_1^a{}_b\log{x} + \cdots \right] a^b(\mathbi{k}) \right.
\nonumber\\
& \hspace{12em} \left. - \left[ \left( \alpha + \frac{i\pi}{2} \right)\zeta_1^a{}_b - \zeta_1^a{}_b\log{x} + \cdots \right]^* {a^b}^\dag(-\mathbi{k}) + \cdots \right\} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ with $\alpha$ being the same numerical factor as encountered in . This gives $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Q-2point}
\left\langle Q^a(\mathbi{k}) {Q^b}(\mathbi{q}) \right\rangle & = \frac{1}{2ka^2x^2} \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}+\mathbi{q}) \left( G^{ab} + 2\alpha\zeta_1^{ab} - 2\zeta_1^{ab}\log{x} + \cdots \right)
\nonumber\\
& = \left. \frac{H^2}{2k^3} \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}+\mathbi{q}) \Big[ (1-2\epsilon)G^{ab} + 2\alpha\zeta_1^{ab} + \cdots \Big] \right|_{k=aH} \, , \end{aligned}$$ where for the second equality we have evaluated the right hand side at the moment of horizon crossing $k=aH$. While we can proceed as much accurate as we like, what we have obtained is the power spectrum of the field fluctuations in the flat gauge, [*not*]{} that of the curvature perturbation ${{\cal R}}$. Thus we need additional manipulation that relates $Q^a$ and ${{\cal R}}$. Unlike single field case, in multi-field case it is non-trivial as we have seen from and . Fortunately, there is a very simple geometric identity called the $\delta{N}$ formalism that relates $Q^a$ and ${{\cal R}}$ in a very straightforward manner: see . We postpone more detailed discussions on the $\delta{N}$ formalism to the following section.
Towards non-linear perturbations {#sec:non-linear}
================================
Up to now, we have considered linear cosmological perturbations. They are described by quadratic action presented in many different forms in the previous section like . The structure of the action is, with appropriate manipulations, essentially that of a harmonic oscillator, so we can directly apply our conventional wisdom in quantum field theory. Being described as quantum harmonic oscillators, linear cosmological perturbations are free, leading to the conclusion that the power spectra are the only non-vanishing correlation functions. The rapid observational advances during the last decade, especially the most recent Planck mission for the CMB temperature anisotropies, have constrained the properties of the power spectra as [@Ade:2015oja]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:P-obsbound}
\log\left( 10^{10}{{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}\right) & = 3.094 \pm 0.034 \, ,
\\
\label{eq:nR-obsbound}
n_{{\cal R}}& \equiv \frac{d\log{{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}}{d\log{k}}+1 = 0.9645 \pm 0.0049 \, ,
\\
r & \equiv \frac{{{\cal P}}_T}{{{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}} \lesssim 0.12 \, .\end{aligned}$$ Indeed, these observational constraints have been very powerful in discriminating different models of inflation and in ruling out the models inconsistent with observations. For example, the simple quartic potential model is not favoured well beyond $2\sigma$ level, since this model predict too large tensor-to-scalar ratio of $r \gtrsim 0.2$.
With further developments in observations – including the polarization of the CMB, gravitational waves and distribution of galaxies on large scales – that allow us to probe a wide range of scales, we can hope to make use of higher-order correlation functions to constrain more tightly inflation models and to probe inflationary dynamics. The higher-order correlation functions, starting from three-point function or its Fourier transform, the bispectrum, incorporate non-linear perturbations described beyond quadratic action of the cosmological perturbations. Thus non-linear perturbations also tell us the “interactions” among the degrees of freedom participating in inflation, revealing the important physics underlying inflation that cannot be extracted from the power spectra[^9]. The amplitude of the bispectrum, the first non-zero probe of non-linear perturbations, is conveniently parametrized by the so-called non-linear parameter ${f_{\rm NL}}$ [@Komatsu:2001rj], which is roughly speaking the ratio of the bispectrum to the power spectrum squared, and the current observational constraints from the CMB on different configurations of the bispectrum are [@Ade:2015ava] $$\begin{aligned}
{3}
\label{eq:fNL-obsbound}
{f_{\rm NL}}^\text{local} & = 2.5 \pm 5.7 \qquad & & (0.8 \pm 5.0) \, ,
\nonumber\\
{f_{\rm NL}}^\text{equil} & = -16 \pm 70 \qquad & & (-4 \pm 43) \, ,
\\
{f_{\rm NL}}^\text{ortho} & = -34 \pm 33 \qquad & & (-26 \pm 21) \, ,
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the numbers in the parentheses are obtained by combining the polarization data. So currently our universe is largely consistent with free, linear, Gaussian cosmological perturbations. The importance of non-linear perturbations however does not diminish and we can expect to further constrain or even detect the deviation from perfect Gaussian nature of the primordial perturbations, viz. the primordial non-Gaussianity in near future. In this section, we discuss how to describe non-linear perturbations in multi-field inflation.
Issue of mapping
----------------
An important point we have to take care of when we discuss non-linear field fluctuations in multi-field inflation in the flat gauge is that, as emphasized previously, in the field space $\phi^a$ plays the role of coordinates. Thus, as we do in general relativity, it is of crucial convenience to maintain the covariance of the formulation: the field fluctuations $\delta\phi^a$ around the background trajectory $\phi_0^a = \phi_0^a(t)$ are coordinate dependent – for example, we are free to choose the time slicing condition as $\delta\phi^1 = 0$ – and is thus not covariant. How then to formulate $\delta\phi^a$ covariantly? We begin by noting that the two points, $\phi_0^a(t)$ and $\phi^a = \phi_0^a + \delta\phi^a$, can be connected by a unique geodesic with respect to the field space metric $G_{ab}$ [@Gong:2011uw; @Elliston:2012ab]. This geodesic is parametrized by $\lambda$ that runs from 0 to $\varepsilon$, corresponding to the two endpoints of the geodesic, $\phi_0^a$ and $\phi^a$ respectively. Here, $\varepsilon$ is a bookkeeping parameter to count the order of perturbation and we will set it to unity in the end. To specify the geodesic, we need the initial point $\phi_0^a$ and its velocity, which we denote by $Q^a$. This situation is depicted in Figure \[fig:field\_space\].
![A schematic figure showing a physical field $\phi^a$ in the field space around the background trajectory $\phi_0^a(t)$. The geodesic connecting $\phi^a$ and $\phi_0^a$ is parametrized $\lambda$, which runs from 0 to $\varepsilon$.[]{data-label="fig:field_space"}](fig_fieldspace.pdf){width="10cm"}
Denoting the covariant derivative with respect to $\lambda$ by $D_\lambda \equiv D/d\lambda$, we can write the geodesic equation for $\phi^a(\lambda)$ as $$\label{eq:geodesic}
D_\lambda^2\phi^a = \frac{d^2\phi^a}{d\lambda^2} + \Gamma^a_{bc}\frac{d\phi^b}{d\lambda}\frac{d\phi^c}{d\lambda} = 0 \, ,$$ with the following the initial conditions at $\lambda=0$: $$\begin{aligned}
\left. \phi^a \right|_{\lambda=0} = & \phi_0^a \, ,
\\
\left. D_\lambda\phi^a \right|_{\lambda=0} = & \left. \frac{d\phi^a}{d\lambda} \right|_{\lambda=0} \equiv Q^a \, .\end{aligned}$$ Expanding $\phi^a(\lambda=\varepsilon)$ as a power series with respect to $\varepsilon$ from $\lambda=0$, we find $$\label{eq:mapping}
\phi^a(\lambda=\varepsilon) = \left. \phi^a \right|_{\lambda=0} + \left. \frac{d\phi^a}{d\lambda} \right|_{\lambda=0} \varepsilon + \left. \frac{1}{2!}\frac{d^2\phi^a}{d\lambda^2} \right|_{\lambda=0} \varepsilon^2 + \left. \frac{1}{3!}\frac{d^3\phi^a}{d\lambda^3} \right|_{\lambda=0} \varepsilon^3 + \cdots \, .$$ Since the derivatives with respect to $\lambda$ here are [*not*]{} covariant ones, we can trade quadratic and higher derivatives with single ones by using the geodesic equation . That is, we can replace the quadratic derivative with $$\label{eq:geodesic3}
\frac{d^2\phi^a}{d\lambda^2} = -\Gamma^a_{bc}\frac{d\phi^b}{d\lambda}\frac{d\phi^c}{d\lambda} \, ,$$ and the third order derivative with $$\frac{d^3\phi^a}{d\lambda^3} = \left( \Gamma^a_{de}\Gamma^e_{bc} - \Gamma^a_{bc;d} \right) \frac{d\phi^b}{d\lambda}\frac{d\phi^c}{d\lambda}\frac{d\phi^d}{d\lambda} \, ,$$ and so on. Thus, we can write as $$\phi^a(\lambda=\varepsilon) = \phi^a_0 + Q^a\varepsilon - \frac{1}{2}\Gamma^a_{bc}Q^bQ^c \varepsilon^2 + \frac{1}{6} \left( \Gamma^b_{de}\Gamma^e_{bc} - \Gamma^a_{bc;d} \right) Q^bQ^cQ^d \varepsilon^3 + \cdots \, ,$$ Setting $\varepsilon = 1$, we finally obtain $$\label{eq:mapping2}
\phi^a-\phi_0^a \equiv \delta\phi^a = Q^a - \frac{1}{2}\Gamma^a_{bc}Q^bQ^c + \frac{1}{6} \left( \Gamma^a_{de}\Gamma^e_{bc} - \Gamma^a_{bc;d} \right) Q^bQ^cQ^d + \cdots \, .$$ We can see that at linear order, the field fluctuations $\delta\phi^a$ and the vector $Q^a$ are identical. However, going beyond linear order they are manifestly different as we can see from the above equation. Only when we write the equations in terms of $Q^a$, they can be expressed in a covariant manner.
Cubic order action
------------------
Having found the covariant description of the field fluctuations, we can straightly calculate the third and higher-order action of the field fluctuations $Q^a$ in the flat gauge. Given the higher-order action of our interest, we can use the in-in formalism discussed in the previous section to compute the corresponding higher-order correlation functions. For example, to compute the bispectrum, we need the third order action for the first non-zero contributions. It is straightforward after some arrangement to find the third order action as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:S3-fieldfluc}
S_3 = \int d^4x a^3 & \left\{ 3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2\alpha^3 + 2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H\alpha^2\frac{\Delta}{a^2}\chi - \frac{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{2a^4} \left[ \chi^{,ij}\chi_{,ij} - (\Delta\chi)^2 \right] \alpha \right.
\nonumber\\
& + (g_1)_{abc}Q^aQ^bQ^c + (g_2)_{abc}D_tQ^aQ^bQ^c + (g_3)_{abc}D_tQ^aD_tQ^bQ^c
\nonumber\\
& \left. + \alpha G_{ab}\dot\phi_0^a\partial_iQ^b\partial^i\chi - G_{ab}D_tQ^a\partial_iQ^b\partial^i\chi - \frac{1}{2}\alpha G_{ab} \frac{\partial^iQ^a\partial_iQ^b}{a^2} \right\} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficients $(g_i)_{abc}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
(g_1)_{abc} & = \frac{1}{6} \left( \mathbb{R}_{dabe;c}\dot\phi_0^d\dot\phi_0^e + V_{abc} \right) + \frac{1}{2}{{\cal N}}_c \left( -\mathbb{R}_{dabe}\dot\phi_0^d\dot\phi_0^e + V_{ab} \right) - \frac{\dot\phi_0^2}{2} {{\cal N}}_a{{\cal N}}_b{{\cal N}}_c \, ,
\\
(g_2)_{abc} & = \frac{1}{6} \left( \mathbb{R}_{dbca} + 3\mathbb{R}_{abcd} \right) \dot\phi_0^d + \dot\phi_{0a}{{\cal N}}_b{{\cal N}}_c \, ,
\\
(g_3)_{abc} & = -\frac{1}{2}G_{ab}{{\cal N}}_c \, ,\end{aligned}$$ and $\alpha$ (and ${{\cal N}}_a$) and $\chi$ are the linear solutions of the lapse and shift given by and respectively. Note that the first three terms of are coming from the gravity sector, while the rest from the matter sector. From we can compute the bispectrum of the field fluctuations $Q^a$, evaluated at the moment of the horizon crossing. We can calculate the bispectrum of the curvature perturbation by implementing the $\delta{N}$ formalism: see [@Seery:2005gb; @Elliston:2012ab].
In the comoving gauge, we have already singled out the curvature perturbation as in a non-perturbative manner. So we can straightforwardly expand the action in terms of ${{\cal R}}$ and the orthogonal modes $Q_\bot^a$. The only caution is that the Goldstone mode $\pi$, in terms of which the quadratic action is written, is related to ${{\cal R}}$ non-linearly as so that we have additional non-linear contributions from the quadratic action. Then we can find the leading action cubic in ${{\cal R}}$ the same as the standard single field case [@Maldacena:2002vr]: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}{{\cal R}}} = \int d^4x a^3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 \Bigg[ & \left (-\epsilon^2+2\epsilon\delta_1 \right){{\cal R}}\dot{{\cal R}}^2 - 2\epsilon^2 \dot{{\cal R}}\partial^i{{\cal R}}\Delta^{-1}\partial_i\dot{{\cal R}}+ \left( 3\epsilon^2-2\epsilon\delta_1 \right) {{\cal R}}\frac{(\nabla{{\cal R}})^2}{a^2}
\nonumber\\
& \left. + \frac14 \left( \frac{\epsilon V_{ab}\dot{\phi}_0^a \dot{\phi}_0^b}{H^2} + \frac{V_{abc}\dot{\phi}_0^a \dot{\phi}_0^b \dot{\phi}_0^c}{3H^3} + \frac{G_{ab}\ddot{\phi}_0^a\ddot{\phi}_0^b}{H^2} \right) {{\cal R}}^3 \right] + {\cal O}(\epsilon^3) \, .
\label{Eq:cubic}\end{aligned}$$ Meanwhile, the $\pi$-$Q^a_\bot$ mixing term in the quadratic action leads to the following ${{\cal R}}^2Q_\bot$ mixing in the cubic order action: $$\begin{aligned}
S_\text{quadratic mixing} = \int d^4x a^3 \frac{V_aQ_\bot^a}{H} \bigg\{ &
(3\epsilon-\delta_1){{\cal R}}\dot{{{\cal R}}} + \frac{1}{H} \left( {{\cal R}}\ddot{{{\cal R}}}+\dot{{{\cal R}}}^2 \right)
- \frac{1-\epsilon}{4a^2H} \left[ (\nabla{{\cal R}})^2 - \partial^i\partial^j \Delta^{-1} \left( \partial_i{{\cal R}}\partial_j{{\cal R}}\right) \right]
\nonumber\\
& + \frac{1}{2a^2H^2} \left[ \partial^i{{\cal R}}\partial_i\dot{{{\cal R}}} - \partial^i\partial^j \Delta^{-1} \left( \partial_i{{\cal R}}\partial_j\dot{{{\cal R}}} \right) \right]
\nonumber\\
& \left. + \frac{\epsilon}{H} \left( 1 - \partial^i\partial^j\Delta^{-1} \right) \left( \partial_i\dot{{{\cal R}}}\Delta^{-1}\partial_j{{\cal R}}+ \partial_i{{\cal R}}\Delta^{-1}\partial_j\dot{{{\cal R}}} \right) \right\} + {\cal O}(\epsilon^2) \, . \end{aligned}$$ We can also find the other mixing terms – $Q_\bot^3$, ${{\cal R}}Q_\bot^2$ and ${{\cal R}}^2Q_\bot$ – straightly as $$\begin{aligned}
S_\text{cubic mixing} = \int d^4x a^3 \bigg\{ & -\frac{V_{abc}}{6}Q_\bot^a Q_\bot^b Q_\bot^c -\frac{V_{abc}}{6 H^2} \left( Q_\bot^a \dot{\phi}_0^b \dot{\phi}_0^c+ \dot{\phi}_0^aQ_\bot^b \dot{\phi}_0^c+ \dot{\phi}_0^a \dot{\phi}_0^bQ_\bot^c \right) {{\cal R}}^2
\nonumber\\
& + \frac{V_{abc}}{6H} \left( Q_\bot^aQ_\bot^b\dot{\phi}_0^c + Q_\bot^a\dot{\phi}_0^bQ_\bot^c + \dot{\phi}_0^aQ_\bot^bQ_\bot^c \right) {{\cal R}}\nonumber\\
+ & \epsilon{{\cal R}}\left[
- \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H^2} \left( V_aQ_\bot^a \right)^2
+ \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2 H^2} \left( \Delta^{-1}\partial_i\partial_j \left( V_a Q_\bot^a \right) \right)^2 \right.
\nonumber\\
& \quad\quad - 4\epsilon{{\cal R}}(V_a Q_\bot^a)
+ \frac{2\epsilon}{H}\dot{{\cal R}}(V_a Q_\bot^a)
- \frac{2\epsilon}{H} \left( \Delta^{-1} \partial^i \partial^j\dot{{\cal R}}\right) \Delta^{-1} \partial_i \partial_j (V_a Q_\bot^a)
\nonumber\\
& \quad\quad - \frac{1}{2H}\dot{{\cal R}}\left( V_aQ_\bot^a \right) + \frac{1}{2H}{{\cal R}}\left( 3HV_aQ_\bot^a+V_a\dot{Q}_\bot^a \right)
\nonumber\\
& \quad\quad \left. + \frac12G_{ab} \left( \dot{Q}_\bot^a \dot{Q}_\bot^b - \partial^i Q_\bot^a \partial_i Q_\bot^b \right) - \frac12 M_{ab}^2 \left( Q_\bot^a Q_\bot^b - \frac{2\dot\phi^a_0}{H}{{\cal R}}Q_\bot^b \right) \right]
\nonumber\\
+ & \left[ G_{ab}\partial^i Q_\bot^a \dot{Q}_\bot^b - \frac{1}{H} \left( \partial^i {{\cal R}}V_a Q_\bot^a + {{\cal R}}V_a \partial^i Q_\bot^a \right) \right] \Delta^{-1}\partial_i \left( \epsilon\dot{{\cal R}}-\frac{V_aQ_\bot^a}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2H} \right)
\nonumber\\
+ & \left. \frac{2}{H} \left( \epsilon \dot{{\cal R}}\partial^i{{\cal R}}- \delta_1 H {{\cal R}}\partial^i {{\cal R}}\right) \Delta^{-1}\partial_i \left( V_aQ_\bot^a \right) \right\} \, .\end{aligned}$$ Again, we can straightly compute the bispectrum of the curvature perturbation and the corrections from the interaction with the orthogonal modes $Q^a_\bot$ using the in-in formalism as we did in the previous section.
Large-scale approximation
-------------------------
Until now, we have considered the standard cosmological perturbation theory. Here, “standard” means that our perturbative expansion is based on the order of perturbations we are interested in. For example, with the typical order of perturbations being denoted by $\zeta$, for linear perturbation theory we are interested in ${{\cal O}}(\zeta)$ and drop higher-order contributions, for second-order theory ${{\cal O}}(\zeta^2)$, and so on. While perfectly legitimate, it is not the only and most convenient approach. Especially, if we are interested in non-linear perturbations, we have to go to the higher-order action or Einstein equations of our interest since the contributions of, say, second-order perturbations are otherwise not captured. Furthermore, as we have seen, finding the higher-order action is very tedious and usually requires further manipulations including integrations by parts and the background equation of motion.
In this section, we briefly discuss an alternative approach based on large-scale approximation. The benefit of this approach is twofold. During inflation, physical scales expand faster than the Hubble horizon. Thus all scales of our observational interest were once far outside horizon during inflation so that taking large-scale approximation for them is making very good sense to track their evolution on super-horizon scales. More importantly, the fully non-linear perturbation equations to be solved become surprisingly simple [*irrespective*]{} of the order of perturbations of our interest. This means we can follow the full non-linear evolution of perturbations, not necessarily order by order as we do in the standard manner.
### Non-linear equations
First we decompose the energy-momentum tensor as measured by observers moving orthogonally (four-velocity is identical to the normal vector) to the slices set by the 3+1 decomposition of the ADM metric. Naturally, we can interpret the energy density ${{\cal E}}$ as the pure temporal part, i.e. two indices are all contracted with the normal vector, the momentum density ${{\cal J}}^i$ as one index contracted with the normal vector while the other projected, and the spatial energy-momentum tensor ${{\cal S}}_{ij}$ as the pure spatial part, i.e. two indices are all projected. In the ADM decomposition, we can write the unit timelike vector normal to the constant-time hypersurface $n^\mu$ has the components $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:normalvector}
n^\mu & = \left( \frac{1}{{{\cal N}}}, \frac{\beta^i}{{{\cal N}}} \right) \, ,
\\
n_\mu & = \left( -{{\cal N}}, 0 \right) \, .\end{aligned}$$ With this, if we choose to write in the simplest forms, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{{\cal E}}& = {{\cal N}}^2T^{00} \, ,
\\
{{\cal J}}_i & = {{\cal N}}T^0{}_i \, ,
\\
{{\cal S}}_{ij} & = T_{ij} \, .\end{aligned}$$
In the ADM decomposition scheme, we can also write the Einstein equation in terms of the components orthogonal and tangential to the constant-time hypersurface [@Bardeen:1980kt]. The two constraint equations follow from those involving temporal components, i.e. both or one of the indices of the Einstein equation is contracted with the normal vector. The geometric parts of them are the well-known Gauss-Codazzi equations, and the corresponding matter parts are precisely the energy and momentum density ${{\cal E}}$ and ${{\cal J}}_i$ found above. Further, these equations do not involve explicit time derivatives. Thus, they are equations of constraints which must be satisfied by the fundamental ADM variables, $\gamma_{ij}$ and $\dot\gamma_{ij}$, at all times. We can obtain the energy and the momentum constraints as $$\begin{aligned}
R^{(3)} + \frac{2}{3}K^2 - \overline{K}^i{}_j\overline{K}^j{}_i & = \frac{2}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{{\cal E}}\, ,
\\
\overline{K}^j{}_{i;j} - \frac{2}{3}K_{;i} & = \frac{{{\cal J}}_i}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ respectively, where $$\overline{K}_{ij} \equiv K_{ij} - \frac{1}{3}\gamma_{ij}K$$ is the traceless part of $K_{ij}$. The dynamical equations thus involve the spatial energy-momentum tensor ${{\cal S}}_{ij}$. They can be formally written as the Lie derivatives of $\gamma_{ij}$ and $K_{ij}$, or more explicitly, the trace and traceless evolution equations can be found as $$\begin{aligned}
K_{,0} - \beta^iK_{,i} & = -{{\cal N}}^{;i}{}_{;i} + {{\cal N}}\left( R^{(3)} + K^2 + \frac{1}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{{\cal S}}- \frac{3}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}{{\cal E}}\right) \, ,
\\
\overline{K}^i{}_{j,0} - \beta^k\overline{K}^i{}_{j,k} + \beta^i{}_{,k}\overline{K}^k{}_j - \beta^k{}_{,j}\overline{K}^i{}_k & = -{{\cal N}}^{;i}{}_{;j} + \frac{1}{3}\delta^i{}_j{{\cal N}}^{;k}{}_{;k} + {{\cal N}}\left( {\overline{R}^{(3)}}^i{}_j + K\overline{K}^i{}_j - \frac{1}{{m_{\rm Pl}}^2}\overline{{\cal S}}^i{}_j \right) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the trace and traceless parts of ${{\cal S}}_{ij}$, denoted by ${{\cal S}}$ and $\overline{{{\cal S}}}_{ij}$, are given in the same way as $K_{ij}$, i.e. ${{\cal S}}\equiv \gamma^{ij}{{\cal S}}_{ij}$ and $\overline{{\cal S}}_{ij} \equiv {{\cal S}}_{ij} - \gamma_{ij}{{\cal S}}/3$. The local energy and momentum conservation equations, given by $T^{0\mu}{}_{;\mu} = 0$ and $T^{\mu}{}_{i;\mu} = 0$ are $$\begin{aligned}
{{\cal E}}_{,0} - \beta^i{{\cal E}}_{,i} & = {{\cal N}}K \left( {{\cal E}}+ \frac{{{\cal S}}}{3} \right) + {{\cal N}}\overline{K}^i{}_j\overline{S}^j{}_i + \frac{1}{{{\cal N}}} \left( N^2{{\cal J}}^i \right)_{;i} \, ,
\\
{{\cal J}}_{i,0} - \beta^j{{\cal J}}_{i,j} - \beta^j{}_{,i}{{\cal J}}_j & = {{\cal N}}K{{\cal J}}_i - \left( {{\cal E}}\delta^j{}_i + {{\cal S}}^j{}_i \right){{\cal N}}_{;j} - {{\cal N}}{{\cal S}}^j{}_{i;j} \, .\end{aligned}$$ With these non-linear equations with the energy-momentum tensor given by , we now can apply the large-scale approximation. That is, we assume a certain smoothing scale $1/k$ greater than which we can approximate well the actual observable universe. Then identifying $$\varepsilon \equiv \frac{k}{aH}$$ as the fictitious parameter associated with a spatial gradient $\partial_i$, we can expand the exact non-linear equations as a power series in $\varepsilon$. For more careful accounts on the conditions for this expansion, see e.g. [@Lyth:2004gb].
Before we proceed further, let us pause for a minute and consider the geometry set by the time slicing. A choice of a time coordinate determines a family of constant-time hypersurfaces $\Sigma$ in the perturbed space-time, which we refer to as time slicing. With each time slicing there are three important geometrical quantities: namely, the intrinsic scalar curvature of each $\Sigma$, the expansion rate $\theta$ and the shear $\sigma$ of the unit vector field normal to $\Sigma$. The “curvature perturbation” represents the amplitude of perturbation in the intrinsic curvature of $\Sigma$. The remaining two quantities $\theta$ and $\sigma$ are both connected with the behaviour of the vector normal to $\Sigma$. Here, we concentrate on the expansion rate $\theta$ being given by the divergence of the normal vector . Then we can identify $\theta$ as the extrinsic curvature : $$\theta = n^\mu{}_{;\mu} = -K \, .$$ As $\theta$ denotes the expansion rate, we can interpret the extrinsic curvature $K$ as the “local” Hubble parameter $H = H(t,\mathbi{x})$: $$\label{eq:localH}
K(t,\mathbi{x}) \equiv -3H(t,\mathbi{x}) \, .$$ Then, by neglecting the second-order spatial gradient terms, the [*fully non-linear*]{} energy constraints, ADM trace and the scalar field equations of motion become [@Salopek:1990jq] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:gradexp1}
& H^2 = \frac{1}{3{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \left( \frac{G_{ab}}{2} \frac{\partial\phi^a}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} \frac{\partial\phi^b}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} + V \right) \, ,
\\
\label{eq:gradexp2}
& \frac{\partial{H}}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} = -\frac{G_{ab}}{2{m_{\rm Pl}}^2} \frac{\partial\phi^a}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} \frac{\partial\phi^b}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} \, ,
\\
\label{eq:gradexp3}
& \frac{D}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} \left( \frac{\partial\phi^a}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} \right) + 3H\frac{\partial\phi^a}{{{\cal N}}\partial{t}} + G^{ab}V_b = 0 \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus, in terms of the proper time ${{\cal N}}dt$ the above equations are precisely the same as the [*background*]{} equations , and . That is, on sufficiently large scales, the information on the evolution of non-linear perturbations can be described by essentially background equations [@Sasaki:1998ug].
Another important point is that from , and the local Hubble parameter, which is essentially a geometric quantity, is related to the background-like field evolution. From the non-perturbative form of the spatial metric , using the identity $$K = -\frac{d}{Ndt}\log\sqrt{\gamma} \, ,$$ from we notice $$\label{eq:localH2}
H(t,\mathbi{x}) = \frac{d}{Ndt}\log\left(ae^\varphi\right) \, .$$ Now, for each spatial point $\mathbi{x}$ we can define the integral with respect to the proper time: $$N \equiv \int H {{\cal N}}dt \, ,$$ which is, with $H$ being the volume expansion rate of the three-hypersurfaces, the total expansion of the spatial volume, vix. the number of $e$-folds. From , given one and another moments $t_1$ and $t_2$, we can trivially obtain $$N = \int_1^2 H {{\cal N}}dt = \log \left[ \frac{a(t_2)}{a(t_1)} \right] + \varphi(t_2) - \varphi(t_1) \equiv N_0 + \varphi(t_2) - \varphi(t_1) \, .$$ Thus the total number of $e$-folds is given by the background number of $e$-folds $N_0$ given solely by the background scale factor, and the difference between the curvature perturbations evaluated at each moment. That is, $$\delta{N} \equiv N - N_0 = \Delta\varphi \, .$$ Notice that we have not specified the gauge conditions on the hypersurfaces at $t_1$ and $t_2$. Thus we are free to choose in such a way that the initial hypersurface at $t_1$ is flat, on which by definition $\varphi(t_1)=0$, and the final one at $t_2$ is comoving, $\varphi(t_2) = {{\cal R}}(t_2)$. Then $$\delta{N}(t_1,t_2) = {{\cal R}}(t_2) \, ,$$ i.e. the perturbation in the number of $e$-folds is identical to the non-linear final comoving curvature perturbation.
With multi-field inflation in our mind, let us take the initial time $t_1$ to be some time during inflation when all the modes of our interest are sufficiently outside the horizon so that the large-scale approximation is valid, and the final time $t_2$ to be some time after inflation when ${{\cal R}}$ has reached its constant value. Then the dependence of $\delta{N}$ on $t_1$ appears through the phase space variable[^10] $\phi^a(t_1)$ and $\dot\phi^a(t_1)$. But if we further make use of the slow-roll approximation since $t_1$ is some time during inflation, we can eliminate the dependence on $\dot\phi^a(t_1)$ so that $\delta{N}$ depends only on $\phi^a(t_1)$. Thus, we can relate the field fluctuations on the initial flat hypersurface $Q^a(t_1)$ and the final comoving curvature perturbation ${{\cal R}}(t_2)$ as $$\label{eq:deltaN}
{{\cal R}}(t_2) = \delta{N} = N_a(t_1)Q^a(t_1) + \frac{1}{2}N_{ab}(t_1)Q^a(t_1)Q^b(t_1) + \cdots \, ,$$ where $N_a \equiv \partial{N}/\partial\phi^a$ and so on and we have explicitly expanded up to second order. This is the so-called [*$\delta{N}$ formalism*]{} [@multi-eom; @Salopek:1990jq; @Sasaki:1998ug; @deltaNold].
### Scale dependence in the $\delta{N}$ formalism
In the previous section, we have seen that the $\delta{N}$ formalism is implemented in the configuration space with two fixed initial and final moments $t_1$ and $t_2$ respectively. These moments are common to all modes of observational interest, and hence the momentum dependence which is of crucial observational importance is not explicit. This however becomes manifest by taking into account the moment of horizon crossing for each mode as follows [@deltaN_k-dep]. For a certain mode with $k$, the horizon crossing happens at $t_0 < t_1$, i.e. $k = (aH)_0$. Then, the number of $e$-folds elapsed between $t_0$ and $t_1$ is obviously $k$-dependent as $$\Delta{N}_k \equiv \log \left( \frac{a_1}{a_0} \right) \approx \log \left[ \frac{(aH)_1}{k} \right] \, .$$ Therefore, the field fluctuations at the initial moment $Q^a(t_1)$ in terms of which the $\delta{N}$ formalism is written as in can be expanded as $$\label{eq:Q_eq1}
Q^a(N_1 = N_0 + \Delta{N}_k) = Q^a(N_0) + \Delta{N}_k D_NQ^a(N_0) + \frac{1}{2} \left( \Delta{N}_k \right)^2 D_N^2Q^a(N_0) + \cdots \, ,$$ where $N_0$ and $N_1$ are the numbers of $e$-folds corresponding to $t_0$ and $t_1$ respectively, and $D_N$ is a covariant derivative with respect to $N$. Thus, we can see that the non-trivial $k$-dependence is gained between the moment of horizon crossing $t_0(k)$ which is different mode by mode, and the initial moment for the $\delta{N}$ formalism $t_1$ which is common to all modes. In some sense, $t_1$ is an intermediate reference moment from which the evolution of each mode until $t_2$ is identical. Figure \[fig:deltaN\] shows $t_0(k)$, $t_1$ and $t_2$ and the evolution of the curvature perturbation.
For practical purpose, we have to find explicitly the derivatives $D_NQ^a$, $D_N^2Q^a$ and so on. From the equation of motion for $Q^a$ on very large scales with $N$ being the time variable [@Elliston:2012ab], $$\begin{aligned}
D_NQ^a & = w^a{}_bQ^b + \cdots \, ,
\\
w_{ab} & = u_{(a;b)} + \frac{\mathbb{R}_{c(ab)d}}{3} \frac{\dot\phi_0^c}{H}\frac{\dot\phi_0^d}{H} \, ,
\\
w_{a(bc)} & = u_{(a;bc)} + \frac{1}{3} \left[ \mathbb{R}_{(a|de|b;c)}\frac{\dot\phi^d_0}{H}\frac{\dot\phi^e_0}{H} - 4\mathbb{R}_{a(bc)d}\frac{\dot\phi^d_0}{H} \right] \, ,
\\
u_a & = -\frac{V_{a}}{3H^2} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where the indices between vertical bars are excluded from the symmetrization, then becomes $$\label{eq:Qevolution2}
Q^a(N_1) = Q^a + \Delta{N}_k \left( w^a{}_b Q^b + \frac{1}{2} w^a{}_{bc} Q^bQ^c + \cdots \right) + \frac{1}{2} \left( \Delta{N}_k \right)^2 \left[ \left( D_Nw^a{}_b \right)Q^b + w^a{}_bw^b{}_cQ^c \right] + \cdots \, .$$ where all terms on the right hand side are evaluated at $N_0$, and $$D_Nw^{ab} = w^{ab}{}_{;c}\frac{\dot\phi_0^c}{H} \, .$$ Note that $\Delta{N}_k$ spans 5 - 10 for the current observational range of the CMB, but as we can see the coefficients of $(\Delta{N}_k)^2$ are of second order in slow-roll, so it is safely suppressed compared to $\Delta{N}_k$ terms as long as the expansion or remains valid.
### Correlation functions in the $\delta{N}$ formalism
Now using the $\delta{N}$ formalism, we compute the correlation functions of the final comoving curvature perturbation ${{\cal R}}(t_2)$. We first move to the Fourier space, where from we can write the Fourier component of ${{\cal R}}(t_2)$ as $$\label{eq:deltaNformula}
{{\cal R}}_k(t_2) = N_a(t_1)Q_k^a(t_1) + \frac{1}{2}N_{ab}(t_1) \left[ Q^a(t_1)\star Q^b(t_1) \right]_k + \cdots \, ,$$ where star denotes a convolution. We first calculate the power spectrum ${{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}$ and its momentum dependence, viz. the spectral index $n_{{\cal R}}$. For the power spectrum it is sufficient to work to linear order in $Q^a$, in which case it is identical to $\delta\phi^a$. The two-point correlation function of ${{\cal R}}(t_2)$ is, from , related to that of $Q^a$ as $$\left\langle {{\cal R}}_\mathbi{k}(t_2){{\cal R}}_\mathbi{q}(t_2) \right\rangle = N_a(t_1)N_b(t_1) \left\langle Q_\mathbi{k}^a(t_1)Q_\mathbi{q}^b(t_1) \right\rangle \, .$$ Using , the two-point correlation function of $Q^a$ at $t_1$ can be written in terms of that at the moment of horizon crossing $t_0$ as $$\label{eq:QQt1-QQt0}
\left\langle Q_\mathbi{k}^a(t_1)Q_\mathbi{q}^b(t_1) \right\rangle = \left\langle Q_\mathbi{k}^a(t_0)Q_\mathbi{q}^b(t_0) \right\rangle + 2\Delta{N}_k w^a{}_c \left\langle Q_\mathbi{k}^b(t_0)Q_\mathbi{q}^c(t_0) \right\rangle \, ,$$ where [*assuming*]{} that $Q^a$ is light and follows slow-roll dynamics, $\left\langle Q_\mathbi{k}^aQ_\mathbi{q}^b \right\rangle$ is given by . Thus, from the definition of the power spectrum , we can read the leading power spectrum of the curvature perturbation in the $\delta{N}$ formalism as $${{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}= \left( \frac{H}{2\pi} \right)^2 N^aN_a \, .$$ To compute the scale dependence to leading order in slow-roll, there are obvious two leading contributions: the scale dependence of $H^2(t_0)$ which gives rise to $-2\epsilon$, and $w^a{}_c$ which is multiplied by $\Delta{N}_k$. The other terms, e.g. the derivative of $\zeta^{ab}$, are further slow-roll suppressed so are sub-leading. Hence we can straightforwardly calculate the spectral index as $$n_{{\cal R}}-1 = \frac{D \log{{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}}{d\log k} = -2\epsilon - 2\frac{N_aN_bw^{ab}}{N_cN^c} \, .$$ An obvious new contribution is the field space curvature $\mathbb{R}_{abcd}$ contained in $w^{ab}$. This term must be ${{\cal O}}(\epsilon)$ to be consistent with the observational constraint , barring an accidental cancellation with other terms.
The bispectrum of ${{\cal R}}$ is defined in a similar manner to the power spectrum by $$\label{eq:Bdef}
\left\langle {{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_1}(t_2){{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_2){{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_2) \right\rangle \equiv (2\pi)^3\delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}_1+\mathbi{k}_2+\mathbi{k}_3)B_{{\cal R}}(k_1,k_2,k_3) \, .$$ As we have seen, the $\delta{N}$ formalism concerns the evolution on super-horizon scales thus can describe the non-Gaussianity generated by non-linear evolution on very large scales. It is however blind to what happens on smaller scales, including the moment of horizon crossing. We thus usually assume when we compute the bispectrum using the $\delta{N}$ formalism that the intrinsic non-Gaussianity of the fields at the moment of horizon crossing is negligible, $$\left\langle Q^a_{\mathbi{k}_1}(t_0)Q^b_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_0)Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_0) \right\rangle = 0 \, .$$ This is however not necessarily the case always, since there are models of inflation where the intrinsic non-Gaussianity at the horizon crossing is not negligible. Therefore to make a proper account of non-Gaussianity using the $\delta{N}$ formalism, we should make use of the form that gives the intrinsic non-Gaussianity as small as possible, by e.g. appropriate field redefinition [@Domenech:2016zxn].
From , we can see that the three-point function consists of two terms, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:RRR}
\left\langle {{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_1}(t_2){{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_2){{\cal R}}_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_2) \right\rangle = & N_aN_bN_c \left\langle Q^a_{\mathbi{k}_1}Q^b_{\mathbi{k}_2}Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_3} \right\rangle + \frac{1}{2} \left\{ N_{ab}N_cN_d \left\langle \left[ Q^a\star Q^b \right]_{\mathbi{k}_1}Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_2}Q^d_{\mathbi{k}_3} \right\rangle + \text{2 perm} \right\} \, .\end{aligned}$$ We can compute these terms very easily: for the first term, using and , we can easily find $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:B-1st}
& N_a(t_1)N_b(t_1)N_c(t_1) \left\langle Q^a_{\mathbi{k}_1}(t_1)Q^b_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_1)Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_1) \right\rangle
\nonumber\\
& = N_a(t_1)N_b(t_1)N_c(t_1) \left\{ \frac{1}{2}\Delta{N}_{k_1}w^a{}_{de} \left\langle \left[ Q^d(t_0)\star Q^e(t_0) \right]_{\mathbi{k}_1}Q^b_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_0)Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_0) \right\rangle + \text{2 perm} \right\}
\nonumber\\
& = (2\pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}_1+\mathbi{k}_2+\mathbi{k}_3) N_a(t_1)N_b(t_1)N_c(t_1) \frac{H^4(t_0)}{4k_1^3k_2^3k_3^3} w^{abc} \left( k_1^3\Delta{N}_{k_1} + \text{2 perm} \right) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Likewise, for the second term using trivially gives $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:B-2nd}
& \frac{1}{2} N_{ab}(t_1)N_c(t_1)N_d(t_1) \left\langle \left[ Q^a(t_1)\star Q^b(t_1) \right]_{\mathbi{k}_1}Q^c_{\mathbi{k}_2}(t_1)Q^d_{\mathbi{k}_3}(t_1) \right\rangle
\nonumber\\
& = (2\pi)^3\delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}_1+\mathbi{k}_2+\mathbi{k}_3) N_{ab}(t_1)N_c(t_1)N_d(t_1) \frac{H^4(t_0)}{4k_1^3k_2^3} \left( \gamma^{ac}\gamma^{bd} + 2\Delta{N}_{k_1}w^{ac}\gamma^{bd} + 2\Delta{N}_{k_2}\gamma^{ac}w^{bd} \right) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Thus putting both terms together, the leading bispectrum reads $$\label{eq:B1}
B_{{\cal R}}(k_1,k_2,k_3) = \frac{N^{ab}N_aN_b}{(N^cN_c)^2} \left[ P_{{\cal R}}(k_1)P_{{\cal R}}(k_2) + \text{2 perm} \right] \, ,$$ where we have defined the dimensionfull power spectrum $$P_{{\cal R}}\equiv \frac{2\pi^2}{k^3}{{\cal P}}_{{\cal R}}\, ,$$ so that the definition of the power spectrum reads similar to : $$\left\langle {{\cal R}}(\mathbi{k}){{\cal R}}(\mathbi{q}) \right\rangle \equiv (2\pi)^3 \delta^{(3)}(\mathbi{k}+\mathbi{q}) P_{{\cal R}}(k) \, .$$
A convenient way of parametrizing non-Gaussianity is to introduce a set of so-called non-linear parameters. It is defined by the local expansion of the curvature perturbation around its linear, Gaussian component [@Komatsu:2001rj]: $$\label{eq:fNL}
{{\cal R}}= {{\cal R}}_g + \frac{3}{5}{f_{\rm NL}}{{\cal R}}_g^2 + \cdots \, .$$ Using the $\delta{N}$ formalism, we are interested in the form of the non-linearity generated during the super-horizon evolution of the curvature perturbation. On super-horizon scales, perturbations at different locations cannot communicate with each other, and in this sense the non-linearity produced during this stage is local. Conversely, in the Fourier space, the momenta that constitute the momentum triangle of the Fourier transformation of the three-point correlation function, i.e. the bispectrum, are very different. Typically, one of three momenta is very small in magnitude, and the remaining two are pointing almost the opposite directions with nearly equal magnitude. Because of the form of the triangle these momenta constitute, it is frequently referred to as the “squeezed limit”. From the expansion , we can easily compute the bispectrum as $$\label{eq:B2}
B_{{\cal R}}(k_1,k_2,k_3) = \frac{6}{5}{f_{\rm NL}}\left[ P_{{\cal R}}(k_1)P_{{\cal R}}(k_2) + \text{2 perm} \right] \, ,$$ where we have assumed for simplicity that ${f_{\rm NL}}$ is a constant. Comparing and , we can read the leading, scale-independent ${f_{\rm NL}}$ as [@Lyth:2005fi] $$\frac{6}{5} {f_{\rm NL}}= \frac{N^{ab}N_aN_b}{(N^cN_c)^2} \, .$$ Furthermore, as we did for the power spectrum, we can also compute the scale dependence of ${f_{\rm NL}}$ by incorporating $\Delta{N}_k$ term explicitly. In the equilateral configuration in which we are sensibly calculate $n_{{f_{\rm NL}}}$, the running of ${f_{\rm NL}}$ [@fNLrunning], we can trivially find $$\label{eq:nfNL}
n_{{f_{\rm NL}}} \equiv \frac{D\log{f_{\rm NL}}}{d\log{k}} = -\frac{N_aN_bN_cw^{abc}}{N^{de}N_dN_e} + 4w^{ab} \left( \frac{N_aN_b}{N^dN_d} - \frac{N_{ac}N_bN^c}{N^{de}N_dN_e} \right) \, .$$ The first term in comes from , i.e. the non-linearity generated during the evolution of the field fluctuations between $t_0$ and $t_1$, while the other terms in arises from the non-linear couplings.
Conclusions {#sec:conc}
===========
Inflation offers a simple and consistent framework in which both the homogeneity and isotropy of the current observable universe as well as the tiny initial perturbations as can be observed from the temperature anisotropies in the CMB. Indeed, with the recent observations on the CMB we have entered the era of data-driven cosmology and the concordance cosmological model, $\Lambda$CDM, provide a very good fit to the power spectrum of the CMB anisotropies. The constraints on the properties of the primordial perturbations, - , tell us that the primordial adiabatic perturbation has nearly scale-invariant power spectrum and follows almost perfect Gaussian statistics, with the contribution of the tensor perturbation, i.e. the primordial gravitational waves, occupying less than a few percent of power on large scales relevant for the CMB observations. These are mostly consistent with the predictions of simple single field inflation models.
While single field inflation provides the best fit to the data without free parameters, then what should be the merit to consider multi-field inflation? As mentioned at the beginning of this article, multi-field inflation can open a rich possibilities beyond the predictions in single field models that could be constrained and even detected by observations. Some of them include the isocurvature perturbations, correlated or anti-correlated with the curvature perturbation, detectable level of non-Gaussianity that may have non-trivial scale dependence, and possibly residual signatures that survive elusive post-inflationary dynamics such as reheating. Beyond these exciting observational possibilities there are a number of theoretical motivations to study multi-field inflation. The early universe is a huge particle accelerator, and the trail of yet unknown parent physics, whose low-energy effective theory is the standard model of particle physics, should be left on cosmic scales with a multiple number of inflaton fields. In this article we have considered a few basic bricks to understand the dynamics of multi-field inflation.
With advanced observation programs in operation and in plan on the CMB as well as large-scale structure, we are entering the precision era for cosmological observations with unprecedented quality and quantity of data in the coming decade. By that time we should a good understanding about the inflationary dynamics with strong observational supports and/or constraints, along with further lessons about the nature of the physics underlying inflation. At the same time we may well witness the interesting possibilities of multi-field inflation, with further observational and theoretical opportunities widely open.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
----------------
I thank Ana Achucarro, Christian Byrnes, Ki-Young Choi, Xian Gao, Jai-chan Hwang, Donghui Jeong, Gonzalo Palma, Subodh Patil, Misao Sasaki, David Seery, Min-Seok Seo, Gary Shiu, Ewan Stewart, Spyros Sypsas and Takahiro Tanaka for sharing their insights with me on the subjects discussed in this article. I am also grateful to Misao Sasaki and Takahiro Terada for helpful comments on earlier drafts. I acknowledge the support from the Korea Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Gyeongsangbuk-Do and Pohang City for Independent Junior Research Groups at the Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics. I am also supported in part by a Starting Grant through the Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (2013R1A1A1006701) and by a TJ Park Science Fellowship of POSCO TJ Park Foundation.
Gauge transformations {#app:gauge}
=====================
In this appendix section, we address the issue of gauge transformation which was not discussed in the main text. For that, we first consider the issue of “background” and “perturbation”. In the background universe $U$, there is no ambiguity in choosing the time coordinate on the homogeneous and isotricpic spatial hypersurfaces in such a way that time is constant: $t=t_1$ corresponds to the moment when the homogeneous scalar field has a specific value of $\phi(t=t_1)$, and so on. However, in a perturbed universe $\widehat{U}$, our choice of time is arbitrary in the sense that we can choose arbitrary coordinate system where the deviation from homogeneity and isotropy is small. In different coordinate systems, the notion of perturbations is different too. For example, we can choose spatial hypersurfaces on which the density perturbation vanishes. Thus, just saying that the density perturbation is such and such is not enough. We have to also specify the coordinate system in describing the density perturbation.
Let us consider in a more detail. How can we define the perturbation in a scalar quantity $\widehat\phi$ at a point $p$ in the perturbed universe $\widehat{U}$? To define the perturbation, we need to specify the corresponding background value $\phi_0$: the difference between $\widehat\phi$ and $\phi_0$ is the perturbation $\delta\phi(p)$. But what is the corresponding background $\phi_0$? For this, we have to specify a coordinate system, or [*mapping*]{} in such a way that each point in the perturbed universe $\widehat{U}$ is associated with the corresponding point $x^\mu$ in the background universe $U$. Once this mapping is specified, the perturbation $$\label{scalar_pert}
\delta\phi(p) = \widehat\phi(p) - \phi_0(x^\mu)$$ is meaningful.
So to specify perturbations we only need to specify the coordinate system, or the mapping between $\widehat{U}$ and $U$. The problem is, as stated before, there is no natural choice of this mapping and one is as good (or bad) as the others. Thus we need to know how one mapping is related to another. It is very important to note that any change induced by a change in the mapping is [*not*]{} physical: it is simply a transformation because we have changed the coordinate, or “gauge”, to describe the same thing. In this sense, this non-physical change is called [*gauge transformation*]{}. Suppose two coordinate systems, $x^\mu$ and $\hat{x}^\mu$, which map $p$ in $\widehat{U}$ to the corresponding [*different*]{} points in $U$, are related by $$\label{coordinate_transformation}
\widehat{x}^\mu(p) = x^\mu(p) + \xi^\mu(x^\nu(p)) \, .$$ If this transformation is infinitesimal, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\widehat{\delta\phi}(p) & = \widehat\phi(p) - \phi_0(\hat{x}^\mu(p))
\nonumber\\
& = \delta\phi(p) - \left[ \phi_0(\hat{x}^\mu(p)) - \phi_0(x^\mu(p)) \right]
\nonumber\\
& = \delta\phi(p) - \xi^\nu \frac{\partial\phi_0}{\partial{x}^\nu}(x^\mu(p)) \, .\end{aligned}$$ Since the background universe $U$ is spatially homogeneous and isotropic, $\phi_0 = \phi_0(x^0)$ so we simply have $$\label{scalar_transformation}
\widehat{\delta\phi}(p) = \delta\phi(p) - \dot\phi_0(t(p))\xi^0(x^\mu(p)) \, ,$$ where we have taken $x^0 = t$. It is very important to note that we are comparing two different mappings, $x^\mu(p)$ and $\hat{x}^\mu(p)$, from the [*same*]{} point $p$ in $\widehat{U}$. It is schematically shown in Figure \[fig:gauge\_transformation\].
Note that we can extract the gauge transformations of the metric perturbations by requiring that $ds^2$ be invariant under the gauge transformation[^11]: with the coordinate transformations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{transformation_t}
t & \to \widehat{t} = t + \xi^0(t,\mathbi{x}) \, ,
\\
\label{transformation_x}
x^i & \to \widehat{x^i} = x^i + \xi^i(t,\mathbi{x}) \, ,\end{aligned}$$ we can easily see that in the linear order $$\begin{aligned}
a\left(\hat{t}\right) \equiv \widehat{a} & = \left( 1 + H\xi^0 \right) a(t) \, ,
\\
\widehat{dt} & = \left( 1 + \dot{\xi^0} \right)dt + \xi^0_{,i}dx^i \, ,
\\
\widehat{dx^i} & = dx^i + \dot\xi^idt + \xi^i{}_{,j}dx^j \, .\end{aligned}$$ From the fact that the line element in space-time is the same irrespective of the coordinate transformation, we can write using the perturbed metric $$\begin{aligned}
\widehat{ds}^2 = & -\left( 1 + 2\widehat{A} \right) \widehat{dt}^2 + 2\widehat{a}\widehat{\mathcal{B}}_i\widehat{dt}\widehat{dx^i} + \widehat{a}^2 \left[ \left( 1 + 2\widehat{\varphi} \right) \delta_{ij} + 2\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{ij} \right] \widehat{dx^i}\widehat{dx^j}
\nonumber\\
= & -\left[ 1 + 2 \left( \widehat{A} + \dot{\xi^0} \right) \right] dt^2 + 2a \left( \widehat{\mathcal{B}}_i - \frac{\xi^0{}_{,i}}{a} + a\dot\xi_i \right)dtdx^i
\nonumber\\
& + a^2 \left\{ \left[ 1 + 2 \left( \widehat{\varphi} + H\xi^0 \right) \right] \delta_{ij} + 2 \left( \widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{ij} + \frac{\xi_{i,j}+\xi_{j,i}}{2} \right) \right\} dx^idx^j \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where $\xi_i = \delta_{ij}\xi^j$. Equating this expression with , we can find that under the coordinate transformation given by and , the new metric perturbations are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\widehat{A} & = A - \dot\xi^0 \, ,
\\
\widehat{{{\cal B}}}_i & = {{\cal B}}_i + \frac{\xi^0_{,i}}{a} - a\dot\xi_i \, ,
\\
\widehat\varphi & = \varphi - H\xi^0 \, ,
\\
\widehat{{\cal E}}_{ij} & = {{\cal E}}_{ij} - \frac{\xi_{i,j}+\xi_{j,i}}{2} \, .\end{aligned}$$ Further, we can decompose the spatial gauge transformation vector $\xi^i$ into the scalar and transverse vector components as we did for the metric perturbation, $$\xi^i = \delta^{ij}\xi_{,j} + \xi^{\text{(tr)}i} \, ,$$ where $\xi^{\text{(tr)}i}{}_{,i} = 0$. Then, we can find trivially that the scalar, vector and tensor components of ${{\cal B}}_i$ and ${{\cal E}}_{ij}$ given by and transform as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gauge_transformation:g0i}
\widehat{B} & = B + \frac{\xi^0}{a} - a\dot\xi \, ,
\\
\widehat{S}_i & = S_i - a\dot\xi^\text{(tr)}_i \, ,
\\
\label{gauge_transformation:gij}
\widehat{H}_T & = H_T - \xi \, ,
\\
\widehat{F}_i & = F_i - \xi^\text{(tr)}_i \, ,
\\
\widehat{h}^{TT}_{ij} & = h^{TT}_{ij} \, .\end{aligned}$$ Notice that the tensor perturbation $h^{TT}_{ij}$ as well as the combination $S_i - a\dot{F}_i$ remain the same under the gauge transformation, i.e. it is [*gauge-invariant*]{}. Thus, when we consider the vector and tensor perturbations, we need not worry about the gauge ambiguity because the variables we are dealing with are from the beginning gauge invariant. Gauge ambiguity only matters for scalar perturbations, and we will explicitly discuss this issue in the following section. Also, it is fruitful to notice that for the scalar components of the Einstein equation, $B$ and $H_T$ only appear in the specific combination $aB-a^2\dot{H}_T$ [@Noh:2004bc]. From (\[gauge\_transformation:g0i\]) and (\[gauge\_transformation:gij\]), we can see that $$\label{shear_transform}
\widehat{a}\widehat{B} - \widehat{a}^2\dot{\widehat{H}}_T = a \left( B + \frac{\xi^0}{a} - a\dot\xi \right) - a^2 \frac{d}{dt} \left( H_T - \xi \right) = aB- a^2\dot{H}_T + \xi^0 \, ,$$ so that although the transformations of $B$ and $H_T$ include the spatial component of the gauge transformation $\xi$, in practice only $\xi^0$, the time translation matters.
[99]{}
A. Einstein, Annalen Phys. [**49**]{}, 769 (1916) \[Annalen Phys. [**14**]{}, 517 (2005)\].
G. Lemaitre, Annales Soc. Sci. Brux. Ser. I Sci. Math. Astron. Phys. A [**47**]{}, 49 (1927) ; Gen. Rel. Grav. [**29**]{}, 641 (1997) \[Annales Soc. Sci. Brux. Ser. I Sci. Math. Astron. Phys. A [**53**]{}, 51 (1933)\].
E. Hubble, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. [**15**]{}, 168 (1929).
A. A. Penzias and R. W. Wilson, Astrophys. J. [**142**]{}, 419 (1965).
R. H. Dicke, P. J. E. Peebles, P. G. Roll and D. T. Wilkinson, Astrophys. J. [**142**]{}, 414 (1965).
C. W. Misner, Astrophys. J. [**151**]{}, 431 (1968).
A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D [**23**]{}, 347 (1981) ; A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. B [**108**]{}, 389 (1982) ; A. Albrecht and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**48**]{}, 1220 (1982).
E. B. Gliner, Sov. Phys. JETP [**22**]{}, 378 (1966) \[Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**49**]{}, 542 (1966)\].
K. Sato, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**195**]{}, 467 (1981) ;
A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Lett. B [**91**]{}, 99 (1980).
V. F. Mukhanov and G. V. Chibisov, JETP Lett. [**33**]{}, 532 (1981) \[Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**33**]{}, 549 (1981)\].
P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1502.02114 \[astro-ph.CO\].
See e.g. D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Phys. Rept. [**314**]{}, 1 (1999) \[hep-ph/9807278\] ; D. Baumann and L. McAllister, arXiv:1404.2601 \[hep-th\].
H. P. Nilles, Phys. Rept. [**110**]{}, 1 (1984).
For an incomplete collection of articles, see e.g. H. Kodama and M. Sasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. [**78**]{}, 1 (1984) ; R. H. Brandenberger, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**57**]{}, 1 (1985) ; V. F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman and R. H. Brandenberger, Phys. Rept. [**215**]{}, 203 (1992) ; J. E. Lidsey, A. R. Liddle, E. W. Kolb, E. J. Copeland, T. Barreiro and M. Abney, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**69**]{}, 373 (1997) \[astro-ph/9508078\] ; A. Riotto, hep-ph/0210162 ; B. A. Bassett, S. Tsujikawa and D. Wands, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**78**]{}, 537 (2006) \[astro-ph/0507632\] ; D. Wands, Lect. Notes Phys. [**738**]{}, 275 (2008) \[astro-ph/0702187 \[ASTRO-PH\]\] ; K. A. Malik and D. Wands, Phys. Rept. [**475**]{}, 1 (2009) \[arXiv:0809.4944 \[astro-ph\]\] ; D. Langlois, Lect. Notes Phys. [**800**]{}, 1 (2010) \[arXiv:1001.5259 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; Y. Wang, Commun. Theor. Phys. [**62**]{}, 109 (2014) \[arXiv:1303.1523 \[hep-th\]\] ; J. Martin, C. Ringeval and V. Vennin, Phys. Dark Univ. [**5-6**]{}, 75 (2014) \[arXiv:1303.3787 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, “The Early Universe,” Front. Phys. [**69**]{}, 1 (1990) ; A. D. Linde, “Particle physics and inflationary cosmology,” Contemp. Concepts Phys. [**5**]{}, 1 (1990) \[hep-th/0503203\] ; A. R. Liddle and D. H. Lyth, “Cosmological inflation and large scale structure,” Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (2000) 400 p ; V. Mukhanov, “Physical Foundations of Cosmology,” Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (2005) 421 p ; S. Weinberg, “Cosmology,” Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Pr. (2008) 593 p ; D. H. Lyth and A. R. Liddle, “The primordial density perturbation: Cosmology, inflation and the origin of structure,” Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Pr. (2009) 497 p.
R. Adam [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1502.01582 \[astro-ph.CO\].
J. c. Hwang and H. Noh, Phys. Lett. B [**495**]{}, 277 (2000) \[astro-ph/0009268\] ; J. c. Hwang and H. Noh, Class. Quant. Grav. [**19**]{}, 527 (2002) \[astro-ph/0103244\] ; J. c. Hwang and H. Noh, Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 103527 (2007) \[arXiv:0704.1927 \[astro-ph\]\] ; J. c. Hwang, H. Noh and C. G. Park, arXiv:1511.01360 \[gr-qc\].
See e.g. T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**82**]{}, 451 (2010) \[arXiv:0805.1726 \[gr-qc\]\] ; A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Living Rev. Rel. [**13**]{}, 3 (2010) \[arXiv:1002.4928 \[gr-qc\]\] ; S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rept. [**505**]{}, 59 (2011) \[arXiv:1011.0544 \[gr-qc\]\].
C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour and V. F. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B [**458**]{}, 209 (1999) \[hep-th/9904075\] ; J. Garriga and V. F. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B [**458**]{}, 219 (1999) \[hep-th/9904176\].
S. Groot Nibbelink and B. J. W. van Tent, hep-ph/0011325 ; S. Groot Nibbelink and B. J. W. van Tent, Class. Quant. Grav. [**19**]{}, 613 (2002) \[hep-ph/0107272\] ; C. M. Peterson and M. Tegmark, Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{}, 023522 (2011) \[arXiv:1005.4056 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; C. M. Peterson and M. Tegmark, Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{}, no. 10, 103507 (2013) \[arXiv:1111.0927 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
C. Gordon, D. Wands, B. A. Bassett and R. Maartens, Phys. Rev. D [**63**]{}, 023506 (2001) \[astro-ph/0009131\] ; G. I. Rigopoulos, E. P. S. Shellard and B. J. W. van Tent, Phys. Rev. D [**73**]{}, 083521 (2006) \[astro-ph/0504508\] ; D. Langlois and F. Vernizzi, Class. Quant. Grav. [**27**]{}, 124007 (2010) \[arXiv:1003.3270 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; X. Gao, JCAP [**1310**]{}, 039 (2013) \[arXiv:1307.2564 \[hep-th\]\].
A. Achucarro, J. O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma and S. P. Patil, JCAP [**1101**]{}, 030 (2011) \[arXiv:1010.3693 \[hep-ph\]\].
R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser and C. W. Misner, Gen. Rel. Grav. [**40**]{}, 1997 (2008) \[gr-qc/0405109\].
D. Seery and J. E. Lidsey, JCAP [**0509**]{}, 011 (2005) \[astro-ph/0506056\].
D. Langlois and S. Renaux-Petel, JCAP [**0804**]{}, 017 (2008) \[arXiv:0801.1085 \[hep-th\]\].
J. O. Gong and T. Tanaka, JCAP [**1103**]{}, 015 (2011) Erratum: \[JCAP [**1202**]{}, E01 (2012)\] \[arXiv:1101.4809 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
J. Elliston, D. Seery and R. Tavakol, JCAP [**1211**]{}, 060 (2012) \[arXiv:1208.6011 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
X. Gao, D. Langlois and S. Mizuno, JCAP [**1210**]{}, 040 (2012) \[arXiv:1205.5275 \[hep-th\]\] ; X. Gao, D. Langlois and S. Mizuno, JCAP [**1310**]{}, 023 (2013) \[arXiv:1306.5680 \[hep-th\]\].
C. P. Burgess, M. W. Horbatsch and S. P. Patil, JHEP [**1301**]{}, 133 (2013) \[arXiv:1209.5701 \[hep-th\]\].
X. Gao and J. O. Gong, JHEP [**1508**]{}, 115 (2015) \[arXiv:1506.08894 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
S. Anderegg and V. F. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B [**331**]{}, 30 (1994) \[hep-th/9403091\] ; T. Prokopec and G. Rigopoulos, Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 023529 (2010) \[arXiv:1004.0882 \[gr-qc\]\] ; J. O. Gong, M. S. Seo and G. Shiu, JHEP [**1607**]{}, 099 (2016) \[arXiv:1603.03689 \[hep-th\]\]. See also J. Garriga, X. Montes, M. Sasaki and T. Tanaka, Nucl. Phys. B [**513**]{}, 343 (1998) \[astro-ph/9706229\].
See e.g. M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, “Quantization of gauge systems,” Princeton, USA: Univ. Pr. (1992) 520 p ; S. Weinberg, “The Quantum theory of fields. Vol. 1: Foundations,” Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (1995), 640 p.
J. M. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. D [**22**]{}, 1882 (1980).
V. F. Mukhanov, JETP Lett. [**41**]{}, 493 (1985) \[Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**41**]{}, 402 (1985)\] ; M. Sasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**76**]{}, 1036 (1986).
A. Achucarro, J. O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma and S. P. Patil, JHEP [**1205**]{}, 066 (2012) \[arXiv:1201.6342 \[hep-th\]\].
C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan and L. Senatore, JHEP [**0803**]{}, 014 (2008) \[arXiv:0709.0293 \[hep-th\]\].
See e.g. D. I. Kaiser and E. I. Sfakianakis, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**112**]{}, no. 1, 011302 (2014) \[arXiv:1304.0363 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; K. Schutz, E. I. Sfakianakis and D. I. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. D [**89**]{}, no. 6, 064044 (2014) \[arXiv:1310.8285 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
T. Chiba and M. Yamaguchi, JCAP [**0810**]{}, 021 (2008) \[arXiv:0807.4965 \[astro-ph\]\] ; J. O. Gong, J. c. Hwang, W. I. Park, M. Sasaki and Y. S. Song, JCAP [**1109**]{}, 023 (2011) \[arXiv:1107.1840 \[gr-qc\]\] ; T. Kubota, N. Misumi, W. Naylor and N. Okuda, JCAP [**1202**]{}, 034 (2012) \[arXiv:1112.5233 \[gr-qc\]\].
D. S. Salopek, J. R. Bond and J. M. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. D [**40**]{}, 1753 (1989) ; J. c. Hwang, Class. Quant. Grav. [**14**]{}, 1981 (1997) \[gr-qc/9605024\].
J. White, M. Minamitsuji and M. Sasaki, JCAP [**1207**]{}, 039 (2012) \[arXiv:1205.0656 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; J. White, M. Minamitsuji and M. Sasaki, JCAP [**1309**]{}, 015 (2013) \[arXiv:1306.6186 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
D. H. Lyth, K. A. Malik and M. Sasaki, JCAP [**0505**]{}, 004 (2005) \[astro-ph/0411220\].
J. M. Maldacena, JHEP [**0305**]{}, 013 (2003) \[astro-ph/0210603\].
H. Noh and J. c. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{}, 104011 (2004) \[astro-ph/0305123\].
J. Chluba, J. Hamann and S. P. Patil, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**24**]{}, no. 10, 1530023 (2015) \[arXiv:1505.01834 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
S. Cespedes, V. Atal and G. A. Palma, JCAP [**1205**]{}, 008 (2012) \[arXiv:1201.4848 \[hep-th\]\] ; A. Achucarro, V. Atal, S. Cespedes, J. O. Gong, G. A. Palma and S. P. Patil, Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{}, 121301 (2012) \[arXiv:1205.0710 \[hep-th\]\].
A. J. Tolley and M. Wyman, Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 043502 (2010) \[arXiv:0910.1853 \[hep-th\]\] ; A. Achucarro, J. O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma and S. P. Patil, Phys. Rev. D [**84**]{}, 043502 (2011) \[arXiv:1005.3848 \[hep-th\]\].
R. Gwyn, G. A. Palma, M. Sakellariadou and S. Sypsas, JCAP [**1304**]{}, 004 (2013) \[arXiv:1210.3020 \[hep-th\]\] ; J. O. Gong, M. S. Seo and S. Sypsas, JCAP [**1503**]{}, no. 03, 009 (2015) \[arXiv:1407.8268 \[hep-th\]\].
J. S. Schwinger, J. Math. Phys. [**2**]{}, 407 (1961) ; L. V. Keldysh, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**47**]{}, 1515 (1964) \[Sov. Phys. JETP [**20**]{}, 1018 (1965)\] ; for extensive discussions on the application to inflationary cosmology, see e.g. S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D [**72**]{}, 043514 (2005) \[hep-th/0506236\].
X. Chen and Y. Wang, JCAP [**1004**]{}, 027 (2010) \[arXiv:0911.3380 \[hep-th\]\]. See also X. Chen and Y. Wang, JCAP [**1209**]{}, 021 (2012) \[arXiv:1205.0160 \[hep-th\]\].
J. O. Gong and E. D. Stewart, Phys. Lett. B [**510**]{}, 1 (2001) \[astro-ph/0101225\].
T. T. Nakamura and E. D. Stewart, Phys. Lett. B [**381**]{}, 413 (1996) \[astro-ph/9604103\] ; J. O. Gong and E. D. Stewart, Phys. Lett. B [**538**]{}, 213 (2002) \[astro-ph/0202098\].
E. Komatsu and D. N. Spergel, Phys. Rev. D [**63**]{}, 063002 (2001) \[astro-ph/0005036\].
P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1502.01592 \[astro-ph.CO\].
D. S. Salopek and J. R. Bond, Phys. Rev. D [**42**]{}, 3936 (1990).
M. Sasaki and T. Tanaka, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**99**]{}, 763 (1998) \[gr-qc/9801017\].
G. N. Remmen and S. M. Carroll, Phys. Rev. D [**88**]{}, 083518 (2013) \[arXiv:1309.2611 \[gr-qc\]\].
A. A. Starobinsky, JETP Lett. [**42**]{}, 152 (1985) \[Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**42**]{}, 124 (1985)\] ; M. Sasaki and E. D. Stewart, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**95**]{}, 71 (1996) \[astro-ph/9507001\].
C. T. Byrnes and J. O. Gong, Phys. Lett. B [**718**]{}, 718 (2013) \[arXiv:1210.1851 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; J. O. Gong, JCAP [**1505**]{}, no. 05, 041 (2015) \[arXiv:1409.8151 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
G. Domenech, J. O. Gong and M. Sasaki, arXiv:1606.03343 \[astro-ph.CO\].
D. H. Lyth and Y. Rodriguez, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**95**]{}, 121302 (2005) \[astro-ph/0504045\].
X. Chen, Phys. Rev. D [**72**]{}, 123518 (2005) \[astro-ph/0507053\] ; C. T. Byrnes, K. Y. Choi and L. M. H. Hall, JCAP [**0902**]{}, 017 (2009) \[arXiv:0812.0807 \[astro-ph\]\] ; C. T. Byrnes, S. Nurmi, G. Tasinato and D. Wands, JCAP [**1002**]{}, 034 (2010) \[arXiv:0911.2780 \[astro-ph.CO\]\] ; C. T. Byrnes, M. Gerstenlauer, S. Nurmi, G. Tasinato and D. Wands, JCAP [**1010**]{}, 004 (2010) \[arXiv:1007.4277 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. See also Z. Kenton and D. J. Mulryne, JCAP [**1510**]{}, no. 10, 018 (2015) \[arXiv:1507.08629 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
[^1]: The idea of exponential expansion was known even in 1960s [@gliner], and just before the term “inflation” appeared it was discussed in different contexts, e.g. phase transition [@Sato:1980yn] or singularity problem [@Starobinsky:1980te].
[^2]: In terms of the general hydrodynamical matter fluid, the energy-momentum tensor is written as $$\label{energy-momentum_tensor_HDmatter}
T_{\mu\nu} = (\rho+p)u_\mu u_\nu + pg_{\mu\nu} \, ,$$ where $u^\mu$ is the fluid 4-velocity which satisfies $$\label{4-velocity_constraint}
u^\mu u_\mu = g_{\mu\nu}u^\mu u^\nu = -1 \, ,$$ so that $u^\mu$ is a time-like, unit 4-vector. Thus we can set $u^\mu = (1,0,0,0)$. Using these we can trivially find .
[^3]: The relations between fluid quantities in terms of one or more scalar fields are highly non-trivial. See [@field-fluid] for example.
[^4]: This is of particular caution when we discuss non-linear perturbations, for which we will further return to this point in Section \[sec:non-linear\].
[^5]: We may write the scalar components as $2H_L\delta_{ij} + 2 ( \partial_i\partial_j - \Delta\delta_{ij}/3 )H_T$ so that $H_L$ is the only longitudinal contribution [@Bardeen:1980kt]. Note that in this decomposition $\varphi = H_T - \Delta{H_T}/3$.
[^6]: Note that in models with non-minimal couplings to gravity [@nm-multi-models], for single field case the curvature perturbation remains invariant [@single-conformalinv] under the conformal transformation by which the gravitational sector becomes the minimal Einstein-Hilbert one [@conformal], but for multi-field this is not the case [@multi-conformalinv].
[^7]: Here, we omit for simplicity $\lim_{t_\mathrm{in}\to-\infty(1-i\varepsilon)}$ with $\varepsilon \ll 1$, but $t_\mathrm{in}$ is evaluated in this limit after all.
[^8]: In fact, if we integrate the outermost integral of from $x_e \equiv -k\tau_e$, we may interpret $-\log(-k\tau_e) = N_k $ as the number of $e$-folds elapsed between the moment of horizon crossing for the mode of our interest and the end of inflation $\tau_e$ [@Gong:2001he]. This seems diverging as $x_e\to0$, but see the discussion below .
[^9]: Of course higher-order correlation functions may well contribute to the power spectrum as loop corrections.
[^10]: As can be read from and , $\dot\phi^a$ is to be precise not the conjugate momentum of $\phi^a$. See [@Remmen:2013eja] for more careful discussions on the phase space for inflationary dynamics.
[^11]: Generic gauge transformation law for an arbitrary tensor quantity $Q$ under the coordinate transformation $x^\mu \to \hat{x}^\mu = x^\mu+\xi^\mu$ can be written in terms of the Lie derivatives as $$\widehat{\delta{Q}} -\delta{Q} = -{{\cal L}}_\xi Q \, ,$$ where ${{\cal L}}_\xi$ is the Lie derivative in the direction of the vector $\xi$. By component, a Lie derivative on a tensor $T^{\alpha_1\cdots}{}_{\beta_1\cdots}$ is given by $${{\cal L}}_\xi \left( T^{\alpha_1\cdots}{}_{\beta_1\cdots} \right) = \xi^\gamma \partial_\gamma T^{\alpha_1\cdots}{}_{\beta_1\cdots} - \left( \partial_\gamma\xi^{\alpha_1} \right) T^{\gamma\alpha_2\cdots}{}_{\beta_1\cdots} + \left( \partial_{\beta_1}\xi^\gamma \right) T^{\alpha_1\cdots}{}_{\gamma\beta_2\cdots} + \cdots \, .$$ For example, the perturbations in the metric tensor transform as $$\widehat{\delta{g}_{\mu}} - \delta{g}_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu,\rho}\xi^\rho - g_{\rho\nu}\xi^\rho{}_{,\nu} - g_{\mu\rho}\xi^\rho{}_{,\mu} \, .$$
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In recent years, deep learning (DL) has contributed significantly to the improvement of motor-imagery brain–machine interfaces (MI-BMIs) based on electroencephalography (EEG). While achieving high classification accuracy, DL models have also grown in size, requiring a vast amount of memory and computational resources. This poses a major challenge to an embedded BMI solution that guarantees user privacy, reduced latency, and low power consumption by processing the data locally. In this paper, we propose [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, a novel temporal convolutional network (TCN) that achieves outstanding accuracy while requiring few trainable parameters. Its low memory footprint and low computational complexity for inference make it suitable for embedded classification on resource-limited devices at the edge. Experimental results on the BCI Competition IV-2a dataset show that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} achieves 77.35% classification accuracy in 4-class MI. By finding the optimal network hyperparameters per subject, we further improve the accuracy to 83.84%. Finally, we demonstrate the versatility of [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} on the Mother of All BCI Benchmarks (MOABB), a large scale test benchmark containing 12 different EEG datasets with MI experiments. The results indicate that successfully generalizes beyond one single dataset, outperforming the current state-of-the-art (SoA) on MOABB by a meta-effect of 0.25.'
author:
- '[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'misc.bib'
title: 'EEG-TCNet: An Accurate Temporal Convolutional Network for Embedded Motor-Imagery Brain–Machine Interfaces '
---
brain–machine interface, motor-imagery, deep learning, convolutional neural networks, edge computing.
Introduction
============
Brain–machine interfaces (BMIs) allow direct communication between humans and external devices by analyzing neural activity of the human brain, typically recorded with noninvasive electroencephalography (EEG) [@graimann_braincomputer_2010_short]. One promising approach is based on motor-imagery (MI), which is the cognitive process of thinking about the motion of a body part, e.g., the left hand, without actually performing it. MI-BMIs assist people with impairments to regain independence, e.g., by steering a wheelchair [@xiong_low-cost_2019_short], controlling a prosthesis [@condori_embedded_2016; @cho_classification_2019], or by enabling motor rehabilitation [@cho_motor_2018]. However, successful decoding of MI-based EEG signals remains a challenging task, mainly due to a low signal-to-noise ratio and high variance among different subjects, which prohibits the use of a single MI-BMI model for all subjects [@lotte_review_2018]. Conventional approaches rely on domain-specific knowledge, mostly using handcrafted feature extractors, such as filter bank common spatial pattern (FBCSP) [@ang_filter_2008] or Riemannian covariance [@hersche_fast_2018] features in combination with robust classifiers like linear discriminant analysis (LDA) or support vector machines (SVMs) [@lotte_review_2018].
Recently, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have gained increasing attention in the MI-BMI field, reducing the data pre-processing steps and eliminating the procedure of handcrafting features. One of the first successful CNN in MI classification was Shallow ConvNet [@schirrmeister_deep_2017], which was inspired by FBCSP. The more compact and generally applicable EEGNet [@lawhern_eegnet_2018], as well as more complex and accurate models [@li_densely_2019; @zhao_improvement_2017], have extended the landscape of CNNs in MI classification. The most complex network is TPCT [@li_novel_2020], which achieves the state-of-the-art (SoA) accuracy of 88.87% on the 4-class MI BCI Competition IV-2a dataset [@Brunner2008BCIA].
These networks are commonly deployed on desktop platforms or cloud servers, however, running MI classification on remote computers raises serious concerns in terms of latency, availability, and privacy [@Landau2020; @8661604; @8668446]. Processing the data near the sensor on a low-power microcontroller unit (MCU) allows us to mitigate these concerns. However, accurate networks such as the TPCT model have 7.78M trainable parameters and require 1.73 billion multiply-accumulate (MAC) operations per inference, which is out of reach of a typical low-power MCU with few MB of Flash and few hundreds of kB of RAM [@wang_fann--mcu_2020]. Alternatively, more compact models such as EEGNet with 2.5k parameters and 13MMACs can come to the rescue and have been successfully implemented on MCUs [@wang_accurate_2020; @schneider_2020]. Still, they come at the cost of significantly lower classification accuracy of 72.40%. A model that combines the best of both worlds (i.e., compactness at high accuracy) is highly desirable. One viable option to boost the performance in accuracy is to use temporal convolutional networks (TCNs), which are achieving SoA accuracy on many time series classification and modeling tasks [@bai_empirical_2018; @lu_deep_2020]. TCNs are capable to exponentially extend their receptive field size with only a linear increase in the number of parameters and number of MACs, unlike traditional CNNs, which show only a linear increase in the receptive field size. Moreover, in contrast to other time series classification networks, like recurrent neural networks (RNNs), TCNs do not suffer from exploding or vanishing gradient issues particularly, when training on long input sequences.
In this paper, we introduce [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, which features both the compactness of EEGNet and the high accuracy of TCNs. The main contributions of the paper are as follows:
- We propose [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, which requires only 4272 trainable parameters and 6.8 MMACs per inference, making it suitable for resource-limited embedded devices.
- We evaluate the proposed [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} on the BCI Competition IV-2a dataset [@Brunner2008BCIA], where it achieves a high accuracy of 77.35%. Our model requires significantly fewer parameters, MACs, and memory during inference compared to other networks with similar accuracy.
- We further improve [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} by 6.49% classification accuracy, reaching 83.84%, by finding the optimal network hyperparameters per subject based on a grid search in cross-validation on the training data. This outperforms most of the current SoA networks. We then analyze accuracy vs. parameter counts and accuracy vs. number of MAC operations for our proposed model, and obtain that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} achieves Pareto optimality in both cases.
- We extensively benchmark our methods on the Mother of All BCI Benchmarks (MOABB) [@jayaram_moabb_2018], where outperforms the current SoA by a meta-effect of 0.25. To best of our knowledge, this work is the first external submission to MOABB, which will pave the way for reproducible results required to benchmark new BMI classifiers reliably.
Our code and the trained models are available online under a permissible open-source license for reproducibility[^2].
Background
==========
BCI Competition IV-2a Dataset
-----------------------------
The BCI Competition IV-2a dataset [@Brunner2008BCIA] consists of recordings from nine different subjects using 22 EEG electrodes. The data was collected by bandpass filtering the signals between 0.5Hz and 100Hz and sampling them at 250Hz. All subjects were requested to perform imagined movements of four different body parts: left hand, right hand, both feet, and tongue. Besides, three electrooculography (EOG) channels give information about eye movements. The dataset consists of two sessions per subject recorded on different days, where we use one for training and the other for testing, and each session contains 288 trials. Trials containing artifacts (9.41% of the data) were excluded from the dataset after an expert marked them based on EOG data. In order to go by the rules of the BCI Competition IV-2a, we make no further use of the EOG data. Each trial lasted 7.5s and was recorded according to the timing scheme shown in Fig \[fig:timing\].
Mother of All BCI Benchmarks {#chap:MOABB}
----------------------------
The Mother of All BCI Benchmarks (MOABB) [@jayaram_moabb_2018] is an aggregation of many publicly available EEG datasets, converted to a common format, and bundled in a software package. It was initiated because of several problems currently present in the BMI research community. One of those is that while many BMI datasets are made freely available, researchers do not publish code, and reproducing results required to benchmark new algorithms turns out to be more tricky than it should be. Moreover, performance can be significantly impacted by parameters of the pre-processing steps, toolboxes used, and implementation tricks that are rarely reported in the literature.
MOABB aims to provide solutions to these problems by building a comprehensive benchmark of popular BMI algorithms applied on an extensive list of freely available EEG datasets. The code is available online on GitHub; algorithms can be ranked and promoted on a website, providing a clear picture of the different solutions available in the field. MOABB provides a variety of different datasets, both for MI and event-related potential (ERP) classification. In this paper, we consider all MI datasets consisting of 2–4 classes MI experiments. Due to internal errors in the current MOABB package, we had to replace the dataset of Zhou *et al*. 2016 for the high-gamma dataset described in [@schirrmeister_deep_2017]. The used MI datasets are summarized in Table \[tab:MOABB\_datasets\].
Related Work
------------
The BCI Competition IV-2a submissions [@tangermann_review_2012] are various, but one frequent feature used by many submissions was common spatial patterns (CSP) on bandpass filtered data. Ang et al. [@ang_filter_2008], the winners of the competition, proposed filter bank common spatial pattern (FBCSP), which enhanced the performance of the original CSP algorithm and achieved 67.75% classification accuracy. After the competition, a linear support vector machine (SVM) on Riemannian covariance matrices [@hersche_fast_2018] has achieved an accuracy of 75.74%. More recent studies [@li_avoiding_2019] have shown that FBCSP combined with highway networks, random forests, and multiple binary classifiers can further enhance the accuracy to 78.00%, 80.00%, and 81.02%, respectively. We categorize deep learning-based MI classification into two classes: feature input (FI) networks and raw signal input (RSI) networks. The latter combine and train feature extraction and classification processes simultaneously. In particular, CNN-based RSI networks have been shown to achieve excellent results in MI-BMIs [@lotte_review_2018]. EEGNet [@lawhern_eegnet_2018] and Shallow ConvNet [@schirrmeister_deep_2017] have achieved high accuracy with a relatively small network size; EEGNet has 1716 trainable parameters at 66.70% accuracy, and Shallow ConvNet has 47324 parameters at 74.31%. The main difference between the two architectures is that was explicitly designed for oscillatory signal classification and hence utilizes log-band power to extract features, making it ill-suited for other similar tasks such as event-related potential (ERP) classification. In contrast, EEGNet is not only applicable to MI classification but also ERP tasks. By changing the pooling layers and expanding the network to 2036 trainable parameters, the accuracy of EEGNet has been increased to 72.40% [@uran_applying_2019].
Another competitive RSI-network is the MSFBCNN [@wu_parallel_2019], which utilizes multi-scale temporal convolution to extract features and achieves an accuracy of 75.80%. CNN++ [@zhao_improvement_2017] uses not only the 22 EEG channels but also the 3 EOG channels, which in the original competition was strictly forbidden. Inspired by CSP, CNN++ starts with a linear layer applied to each time sample, expanding the 25 channels to 30. It is followed by a CNN, which finally achieves an accuracy of 81.1%. In FI-networks, the MI classification is achieved in two stages. First, features are extracted from EEG signals with various approaches (e.g., CSP, spectrograms, or wavelets), and then fed into a classifier model. DFFN [@li_densely_2019] makes use of CSP to extract unique spatial filters. Temporal log-power features of the spatially filtered signal are then fed into a CNN that considers the correlation between adjacent layers and cross-layer features. This architecture closely resembles *Dense Net* [@huang_densely_2018]. Network architecture hyperparameters were altered for each subject separately, achieving an accuracy of 79.71%. TPCT [@li_novel_2020] uses the information of electrode locations to improve classification results. The MI time frame was divided into 10 time windows and three sub-bands. Then, for each channel, the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) was employed to transform each time window to a spectrum, and its inverse FFT was calculated for each sub-band. The time-domain power features of the 10 time windows are then averaged for the same sub-band. Hence, three average power features are generated as the time-frequency features of each electrode and fed into the Clough-Tocher interpolation algorithm to generate an image with electrode information that was then classified with a VGG-like CNN. TPCT achieved an accuracy of 88.87%, at the cost of 7.78M parameters and 1.73GMACs per inference.
Temporal Convolutional Networks
-------------------------------
In the following, we describe the generic architecture concept known as the temporal convolutional network (TCN) [@bai_empirical_2018], depicted in Fig. \[fig:resblocks\]. Three properties distinguish TCNs from conventional CNNs:
### Causal Convolutions
TCNs produce an output of the same length as the input. To this end, TCNs use a 1D fully-convolutional network (FCN) architecture [@long_fully_2015], where each hidden layer is the same size as the input layer, and zero-padding of length (kernel size - 1) is added to keep subsequent layers the same length as the previous ones. Further, causal convolutions are used to force no information flow from the future to the past. Simply put, the output at time *t* depends only on inputs from time *t* and earlier.
### Dilated Convolutions
A regular causal convolution is only able to increase its receptive field size linearly in the depth of the network. This is a major disadvantage since either an extremely deep network or one with a huge kernel size is needed to obtain a large receptive field size. To combat this problem, TCNs use a sequence of dilated convolutions [@oord_wavenet_2016], which allows the network to increase its receptive field exponentially in size proportional to the network depth by employing a scheme of exponentially increasing dilation factors $d$.
### Residual Blocks
The residual block of a TCN consists of two layers of dilated convolutions, with batch normalization, non-linearity, and a dropout layer in-between the convolutions. Even though TCNs feature only 1D convolutions, they are still capable of processing 2D feature maps by considering the second dimension as the depth dimension. The skip connection adds the input to the output feature map, with the check that if the depth of the input and output is different, a 1x1 convolution is put in place. See Fig. \[fig:resblocks\] for an illustration of a residual block and the stacking of two residual blocks together.
By stacking residual blocks, the receptive field size increases exponentially with each residual block, as the dilation in each subsequent block is exponentially larger. The receptive field size ($\mathrm{RFS}$) of the TCN is determined by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathrm{RFS} = 1 + 2 \cdot (\textit{$K_T$} - 1)\cdot(2^{\textit{L}} - 1),\end{aligned}$$ where $K_T$ is the kernel size and $L$ the number of residual blocks.
The TCN described here slightly differs from the one explained in [@bai_empirical_2018], in the residual block in the following ways:
- Batch normalization is used between convolutions instead of weight normalization as batch normalization has been shown to give higher accuracy than weight normalization on various large scale networks [@gitman_comparison_2017].
- We use the exponential linear unit (ELU) activation instead of the rectified linear unit (ReLU). This was done since [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} showed better performance with a ELU activation function than ReLU.
- Instead of spatial dropout, normal dropout is used. As the TCN is applied after various convolutions the adjacent frames withing feature maps are not strongly correlated, and therefore it is beneficial to drop individual elements instead of entire 1D feature maps to regularize the activations.
Methodology
===========
In this section, we present the main contribution of the paper. We show how to combine the shallow, yet discriminative feature extraction layers of EEGNet with a TCN, making use of the temporal information present in the features, which would be ignored otherwise. We introduce our model, named [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, and analyze it either with a *fixed* set of hyperparameters for all subjects, or *variable* optimal subject-specific hyperparameters.
Data Pre-processing
-------------------
The time frame used for both training and inference on EEG data of the BCI Competition IV-2a is 0.5 seconds before the MI-cue until the end of the MI [@schirrmeister_deep_2017], resulting in a time series of 4.5s length, or 1125 samples. The sampling rate is kept at 250Hz, and no additional bandpass filtering is applied. Optionally, we apply standardization by removing mean and scaling to unit-variance per channel, based on the statistics of the training set.
[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fig. \[fig:EEG-TCNet\] illustrates the architecture of [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} with a more detailed description of the layers in Table \[tab:EEG-TCNet\_Table\]. The network is, in part, inspired by the EEGNet architecture [@lawhern_eegnet_2018]. The network starts with a 2D temporal convolution to learn frequency filters, then uses a depthwise convolution to learn frequency-specific spatial filters. The separable convolution learns a temporal summary for each feature map individually and then mixes the feature maps. The output feature map of the separable convolution still contains temporal information; therefore, the addition of a TCN further exploits temporal information. The first TCN block expands the $F_2$ feature maps after the separable convolution to $F_T$ feature maps. Overall, we stack $L$ residual blocks and select the receptive field size such that $\mathrm{RFS}\geq$ 17, allowing the TCNs to capture all temporal information available. Finally, the last time steps of each of the $F_T$ feature maps of the last residual block are read out and fed to a fully-connected layer for classification.
***Layer*** ***Type*** ***\#Filters*** ***Output***
------------- ------------ ----------------- -- --------------
(1,$C$,$T$)
$\phi^4$ $F_T$
: [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} architecture[]{data-label="tab:EEG-TCNet_Table"}
$C$ = number of EEG channels, $T$ = number of time samples, $F_1$ = number of temporal filters, $F_2$ = number of spatial filters, $K_E$ = kernel size in first convolution, $K_T$ = kernel size in TCN module, and $F_T$ = number of filters in TCN module. For dropout in EEGNet inspired layers we use $p_e$, and in the TCN module we use $p_t$.
-- ------- -- ------- -- ------------ -- ------------ -- ------------ -- ------------
*Accuracy* *Accuracy* *Accuracy* *Accuracy*
84.34 85.77 86.48 89.32 83.46
54.06 65.02 61.84 72.44 69.30
87.54 88.89 94.51 93.41 97.44 90.29
63.59 64.91 73.25 75.87 71.07
67.39 57.29 75.36 76.81 83.69 65.41
54.88 53.82 61.40 59.07 70.69 69.45
88.80 91.67 87.36 90.25 93.14 88.18
76.75 81.25 83.76 87.45 86.71 86.76
74.24 79.17 78.03 82.95 85.23 93.54
72.40 74.31 **77.35** 79.06 **83.84** 79.71
13.27 14.54 **11.57** 12.28 **9.20** 10.79
-- ------- -- ------- -- ------------ -- ------------ -- ------------ -- ------------
Reproduced
### Fixed [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}
A global architecture method involves choosing global hyperparameters for all subjects, then training and testing each subject separately. A cross-validated grid search on the training set over the hyperparameters yields the following optimal architecture that performed best for all subjects: $F_1 =$ 8, $F_2 =$ 16, $K_E=$ 32, $K_T =$ 4, $L =$ 2, $F_T =$ 12, $p_e =$ 0.2, $p_t =$ 0.3, and with data standardization.
### Variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}
The accuracy of most classifiers on the BCI Competition IV-2a highly varies among individual subjects, e.g., EEGNet achieves accuracies ranging from 54.06%–88.80%. This might originate from the rigid network and training structure, applying the same network as well as optimizing hyperparameters to all subjects. Hence, we propose to find optimal subject-specific network parameters (e.g., kernel size, number of filters, or use of data standardization) and training hyperparameters (e.g., dropout rate) of [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} using cross-validated grid search on the training for every individual subject. The test set is not touched for determining the optimal parameters, thus keeping it compatible with the rules of the BCI Competition IV-2a. For comparison, the same procedure is applied to EEGNet.
Training Procedure
------------------
Models were trained and tested in a Tensorflow environment on an NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti GPU. The networks were developed with Keras. We use the same training configuration when training the models proposed in this paper, where categorical cross-entropy loss is used, and the filter kernels are uniformly initialized following the procedure introduced in [@he_deep_2016]. The models are trained for 750 epochs with an Adam optimizer at a learning rate of 0.001 and a batch size of 64. These training hyperparameters are determined via cross-validation on the training set.
Experimental Results
====================
Performance Metrics
-------------------
We evaluate the models according to the classification accuracy, which is the ratio between correctly classified trials and the total number of trials in the test set. Additionally, we report Cohen’s $\kappa$-score defined as: $$\begin{aligned}
\kappa = \frac{p_o - p_e}{1-p_e},\end{aligned}$$ where $p_o$ stands for the observed agreement ratio (e.g., accuracy) and $p_e$ for the hypothetical probability of chance agreement or random classification rate.
We also report the number of parameters in each model and the number of MACs for inference. The calculation of MACs for a couple of different convolutional layers can be seen below: $$\begin{aligned}
\textnormal{Conv2D} &= K_1 \cdot K_2 \cdot C_{in} \cdot C_{out} \cdot H_{out} \cdot W_{out}, \\
\textnormal{Conv1D} &= K \cdot C_{in} \cdot C_{out} \cdot W_{out}, \\
\textnormal{SeparableConv2D} &= (K_1 \cdot K_2 + C_{out}) \cdot C_{in} \cdot H_{out} \cdot W_{out},\\
\textnormal{DepthWiseConv2D} &= K_1 \cdot K_2 \cdot C_{in}\cdot D \cdot H_{out} \cdot W_{out}, $$ where $K$ stands for the kernel size, $C$ stands for the total number of channels. Then, the $H$ and $W$ are the height and width of the tensors, respectively.
Finally, we compare the memory footprint of the models during inference, which is defined here as the size of the two largest consecutive feature maps. For the calculation of the memory size, we assume that both the feature maps and weights of all the networks can be quantized to 8 bits at negligible accuracy loss based on literature [@schneider_2020].
BCI Competition IV-2a
---------------------
Table \[tab:acc\_and\_kappa\] summarizes the accuracy and $\kappa$-scores for both fixed and variable EEGNet and [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}. Moreover, the table includes also the accuracy and $\kappa$-scores of the reproduced fixed Shallow ConvNet [@schirrmeister_deep_2017], and the accuracy of variable DFFN [@li_densely_2019], since detailed results were reported in the paper. By first comparing the fixed networks, [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} shows high robustness in classifying the nine subjects and achieves 77.35% accuracy and a $\kappa$-score of 0.70. This is an increase of 4.95% accuracy compared to EEGNet; moreover, the standard deviation of accuracy scores between subjects is 11.57%, which is significantly lower than the one for EEGNet (13.27%) and Shallow ConvNet (14.54%).
When focusing on the variable networks in Table \[tab:acc\_and\_kappa\], we see that the addition of subject-specific hyperparameters increased the performance of [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} by 6.49%, achieving the highest accuracy of 83.84%. Similarly, the introduction of variable hyperparameters in EEGNet improves the accuracy by 6.66%. Variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} outperforms variable DFFN by 4.13%. Again it is noteworthy that variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} exhibits the lowest standard deviation between subjects in both accuracy scores and $\kappa$-scores than other variable models. This underlines that our variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} not only improves on already well-performing subjects, but enables higher accuracy for otherwise poorly performing subjects, e.g., Subject 2, Subject 5, or Subject 6.
Table \[tab:variable\_parameters\] summarizes the optimal subject-specific parameters for variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} and EEGNet. Except for Subject 2, variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} always makes use of data standardization, whereas variable EEGNet consistently classifies the raw data without standardization. Interestingly, variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} requires, in general, a smaller number of temporal filters $F_1$ and filter size $K_E$ than EEGNet. The temporal filters pose the most restrictive limitations in terms of computational complexity and memory footprint since the temporal convolution requires the vast majority of MACs and memory to store the resulting feature maps [@wang_accurate_2020]. Therefore, variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} has more potential to be embedded on a resource-limited device.
Table \[tab:accuracies\] compares the current SoA networks on the BCI Competition IV-2a in terms of accuracy, the number of trainable parameters, MACs, and memory requirements. For the variable models, we report the maximum number of parameters and memory requirements, as they pose a hard requirement when considering the embedding to an MCU. By first looking at the parameter count and MACs of fixed networks, we see that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} requires only 6.8MACs, which is 1.9$\times$ lower than EEG-Net, while being 4.95% more accurate. The large reduction in complexity comes from the smaller temporal filter size, where fixed [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} uses $K_T=$32 instead of $K_T=$64. When allowing subject-specific network hyperparameters in the variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, the maximum number of parameters increases by 4.80$\times$ and the MACs by 1.78$\times$, compared to fixed . TPCT achieves the highest accuracy of 88.87%. However, this comes at the cost of a 380$\times$ higher number of parameters and 143$\times$ more MACs than variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}.
Another consideration is the maximum memory requirements of the networks, which—assuming layer-by-layer inference—is the sum of the two largest consecutive feature maps. Due to their residual structure, DFFN [@li_densely_2019] and MSFBCNN [@wu_parallel_2019] are calculated differently; DFFN needs to store the first five feature maps in the first dense block, and MSFBCNN [@wu_parallel_2019] the first five feature maps as later layers depend on all of these feature maps rather than the immediately preceding layer’s output. This results in MSFBCNN having the largest feature map size while DFFN manages to keep it relatively low despite the network architecture. Interestingly, TCPT has the fourth-smallest feature map size despite having the largest parameter count and most number of MACs. TPCT’s overall memory footprint is 8.304MB, and thus far beyond the on-chip memory capacity available in an ARM M7 processor. Its compute effort of 1.73GMACs would take approximately 50s/inference—17$\times$ below real-time when requiring a new classification at least every 3s—where we refer to the throughput of 34.45MMAC/s of an ARM M7 processor [@wang_accurate_2020]. In comparison, the proposed EEG-TCNet has a memory footprint of 400kB, and its compute effort of 6.8MMACs would take approximately 197ms. and variable [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} are the best candidates for an embedded implementation; both parameter count and inference cost are kept reasonable while still achieving very high accuracy scores.
Fig. \[fig:accvspara\_mac\] visualizes the trade-off between the accuracy, number of parameters, and MACs of all models. We also include FBCSP and Riemannian [@hersche_fast_2018]; the Riemannian model has a square shape in Fig. \[fig:accvspara\] and is not included in Fig. \[fig:accvsmacs\] as the number of MACs is not clear as its compute workload is not predominantly based on MAC operations. We further experiment with limiting the number of parameters that the variable models are allowed to have in each network. Specifically, we limit [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} to 2k, 2.5k, 3.5k, and 8k parameters and EEGNet to 1.5k, 5.7k, and 13.5k. We recognize that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} achieves Pareto optimality by spanning almost the entire Pareto front in both the parameter and MAC comparison.
Mother of All BCI Benchmarks {#mother-of-all-bci-benchmarks}
----------------------------
We benchmark [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} and EEGNet on MOABB by comparing them to three other pipelines included in MOABB [@jayaram_moabb_2018]. These pipelines are:
- CSP + LDA: where trial covariances were estimated via maximum-likelihood with unregularized CSP. Features were log-variance of the filters belonging to the six most diverging eigenvalues and then classified with LDA.
- TS + optSVM: where trial covariances were estimated via oracle approximating shrinkage, then projected into the Riemannian tangent space to obtain features and classified with a linear SVM with identical grid search.
- AM + optSVM: where features are the log-variance in each channel and then classified with a linear SVM with grid search.
Fig. \[fig:meta\_analysis\] shows the meta-analysis of the comparison between [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} and TS + optSVM, which is the current SoA on MOABB. The meta-effect reports the combined standardized mean differences across all datasets. The standardized mean difference is combined with a weighting given by the square root of the number of subjects. Then, the p-value of a one-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test for the hypothesis that is more accurate is also reported. While we observe a high variance among different datasets that could give contradictory results if the methods were evaluated on one dataset in isolation, the overall trend shows that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} outperforms TS + optSVM with a final meta-effect of 0.25.
Fig. \[fig:MOABB\_ordering\] summarizes the comparisons between all methods, showing the meta-effect in case that the method on the vertical axis significantly outperforms the method on the horizontal axis, according to the one-tailed Wilcoxon signed-rank test. [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} outperforms all other methods; thus, it is becoming the new SoA on MOABB. This experiment underlines that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} generalizes well outside a single MI dataset, where it was modeled on.
Conclusion
==========
We have proposed [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{}, a novel model for accurate MI-BMI classification. Thanks to its low memory footprint and limited computational complexity, it can be easily operated on low-power resource-limited devices at the edge. It achieves 77.35% accuracy on the BCI Competition IV-2a dataset, improving the SoA of similarly-sized networks by 4.95%. We then further enhance the model by performing a subject-specific hyperparameter search, which yields an additional 6.49% accuracy increase, achieving a high accuracy of 83.84%. Moreover, it requires a low number of parameters, MACs, and memory usage during inference. Large scale benchmark tests on MOABB confirm that [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">EEG-TCNet</span>]{} generalizes well to other MI datasets, becoming the new SoA on the MOABB framework outperforming the old SoA by a final meta-effect of 0.25.
[^1]: Corresponding emails: {thoriri, herschmi, xiaywang}@iis.ee.ethz.ch
[^2]: Will be released on GitHub after review.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this article we introduce the notion of [*Polyhedral Kähler*]{} manifolds, even dimensional polyhedral manifolds with unitary holonomy. We concentrate on the $4$-dimensional case, prove that such manifolds are smooth complex surfaces, and classify the singularities of the metric. The singularities form a divisor and the residues of the flat connection on the complement of the divisor give us a system of cohomological equations. Parabolic version of Kobayshi-Hitchin correspondence of T. Mochizuki permits us to characterize polyhedral Kähler metrics of non-negative curvature on $\mathbb CP^2$ with singularities at complex line arrangements.'
author:
- Dmitri Panov
title: 'Polyhedral K[ä]{}hler Manifolds'
---
Introduction and results
========================
First, we recall the notion of a [*polyhedral metric*]{}, a [*polyhedral manifold*]{}, and give some basic facts about them. Consider a piecewise linear manifold $M^d$ with a fixed simplicial decomposition. Let $\Delta_i^d$ be the simplices of highest dimension of this decomposition. Choose a flat metric on every $\Delta_i^d$ in such a way that every two simplices that have a common face are glued by an isometry. This gives a metric on $M^d$, which is called [*polyhedral*]{}, and $M^d$ is called a [*polyhedral manifold*]{}.
For every point $x$ of a polyhedral manifold $M^d$ we canonically associate its [*tangent cone*]{}, i.e., a cone with polyhedral metric such that a neighborhood of its origin is isometric to a neighborhood of $x$. At the non-singular points of $M^d$ the tangent cone is the Euclidean space $\mathbb R^{d}$. A polyhedral metric has no singularities at faces of codimension $1$, but may have singularities at faces of codimension $2$. The tangent cone of the points in the interior of such faces is isometric to the direct product of a $2$-cone and the flat space $\mathbb R^{d-2}$. The angle of the $2$-cone is called the [*conical angle*]{} at the face.
The singular locus of a polyhedral metric is naturally stratified. A point of $M^d$ is called a [*metric singularity of codimension at least $k$*]{} if its tangent cone is not isometric to the direct product of $\mathbb R^{d-k+1}$ and a $(k-1)$-dimensional polyhedral cone. The set of all metric singularities of codimension at least $k$ is denoted by $M_s^{d-k}$.
The complement to the singular locus of the metric is connected and we can consider the holonomy of the metric on it. This gives us a representation $\pi_1 (M^{d}\setminus M_s^{d-2})\to SO(d)$ (we will consider only orientable manifolds). For a generic choice of a polyhedral metric this representation has an everywhere dense image in $SO(d)$.
In this work we study even dimensional polyhedral manifolds $M^{2n}$ whose holonomy group is contained in a subgroup of $SO(2n)$ conjugate to $U(n)$. On the complement to the singularities of the metric these manifolds have a complex structure $J$ parallel with respect to the flat metric and compatible with it. In addition to the unitarity of the holonomy we impose one condition. For any face $F$ of codimension $2$ consider a simplex $\Delta^{2n}$ that contains $F$ in its border. The parallel complex structure $J$ defined in the interior of $\Delta^{2n}$ naturally extends to the whole $\Delta^{2n}$ and we say that $F$ [*has a holomorphic direction*]{} if $F$ is a piece of a holomorphic hyperplane with respect to $J$.
\[gooddefinition\] A polyhedral manifold $M^{2n}$ is called a [*Polyhedral Kähler manifold*]{} ($PK$ manifold) if the holonomy of its metric belongs to a subgroup of $SO(2n)$ conjugate to $U(n)$ and every codimension $2$ face with conical angle $2k\pi$, $k\ge 2$ has a holomorphic direction.
Codimension $2$ faces with conical angle different form $2k\pi$ automatically have complex direction ([*cf*]{}. section 3) so we don’t need to impose this condition on them. If we don’t impose the condition on the faces with conical angle $2k\pi$, $k\ge 2$ we obtain Thurston’s $(X,G)$-cone-manifolds modeled on $X=\mathbb C^n$ with $G$ the group of unitary isometries of $\mathbb C^n$ \[Th\].
In this work simplicial decompositions are used only to define the class of $PK$ manifolds and play a secondary role. We will mostly think about $PK$ manifolds as spaces with a specific metric, and will not distinguish manifolds that are isometric but have different simplicial decompositions.
A $2$-dimensional oriented polyhedral surface is automatically K[ä]{}hler (since $SO(2)=U(1)$) and complete classification of such structures is given in \[Tr\] (we recall this classification in Section 2). In the rest of this work we deal mostly with $4$-dimensional polyhedral K[ä]{}hler manifolds. In Section 2 several elementary examples of such manifolds are given.
A polyhedral metric is called [*non-negatively curved*]{} if the conical angle at every singular face of codimension 2 is smaller than $2\pi$. The original motivation for our study of $PK$ metrics is due to the following remark of Anton Petrunin. [*The holonomy of a non-negatively curved polyhedral $\mathbb{C}P^n$ preserves a symplectic form*]{} (this is a partial case of a vanishing theorem proved in \[Ch\]). This means that a non-negatively curved $\mathbb CP^{n}$ is $PK$, we discuss this subject in Section 2.
[**Known examples.**]{} An explicit example of a non-negatively curved polyhedral $\mathbb CP^2$ can be provided by Kühnel’s $9$ vertices triangulation \[BK\]. This polyhedral $\mathbb CP^2$ can be obtained as a finite isometric quotient of a flat complex $2$-torus, and the holonomy of the metric on $\mathbb CP^2$ is finite. In general for any $n$ there exist a series of polyhedral metrics on $\mathbb CP^n$ that are obtained as quotients of complex tori (\[KTM\]).
Couwenberg, Heckman, and Looijenga \[CML\] study geometric structures that are more general than $PK$ metrics. They obtain constant holomorphic curvature metrics on $\mathbb CP^n$, having as singular locus complex reflection hyperplane arrangements. Their approach is different, in particular from the very beginning they start with a holomorphic manifold. It should be possible to prove that in the case when curvature is zero their metrics are $PK$.
[**Acknowledgments.**]{} This article contains a revised part of my PhD written at École Polythechnique under supervision of Maxim Kontsevich and defended in 2005. I am very indebted to Maxim for his insight, inspiration, guidance, and help during my PhD, many of his ideas are contained in this work. The remark of Anton Petrunin started this research, Misha Gromov gave me the first example of a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb CP^2$, discussion with Dima Zvonkine and Christophe Margerin helped to go on and explanation of Takuro Mochizuki of some of his result permitted me to finish this work. I would also like to thank Eduard Looijenga, Nikita Markarian, Carlos Simpson, Misha Verbitski, and Jean Yves Welschinger. Without discussions, comments and encouragement of all these people this article would not be written. Finally I would like to thank members of the geometry group at Imperial for the excellent environment. This work is supported by EPSRC grant EP/E044859/1.
Local properties of $PK$ metrics
--------------------------------
A $PK$ manifold has a natural complex structure defined outside the singular locus, it is constant in the local flat coordinates. We will prove that for a $4$-dimensional $PK$ manifold $M^4$ this complex structure can be extended to the whole manifold.
\[defhol\] Let $M^4$ be a $PK$ manifold. [*Holomorphic functions*]{} on $M^4$ are defined as continuous functions on $M^4$ that are holomorphic on the complement to the singularities $M^4\setminus M^2_s$.
A [*holomorphic chart*]{} in $M^4$ is an open subset $U$ with an injective map $\varphi=(f,g): U\to \mathbb C^2$ with $f$ and $g$ holomorphic as above and such that $\varphi(M^2_s\cap U)$ is an analytic subset of $\varphi(U)\subset\mathbb C^2$.
The following theorem justifies this definition by proving that [*holomorphic functions*]{} and [*holomorphic charts*]{} on $M^4$ define together a genuine complex structure on $M^4$.
\[pkcomplex\] Every point of a $4$-dimensional $PK$ manifold is contained in a holomorphic chart. Holomorphic charts form together a holomorphic atlas on $M^4$ and induce on it a structure of a smooth complex surface. The singular set $M^2_s$ is a complex curve for the defined holomorphic structure.
We don’t consider any intermediate smooth structure on $M^4$ in order to define a complex structure on it. At the same time, it is known that $PL$ manifolds of dimension up to $6$ have a canonical smooth structure.
The main step in Theorem \[pkcomplex\] is the construction of holomorphic charts for the singularities of the $PK$ metric. A neighborhood of every singularity embeds isometrically into its tangent cone, and it is possible to introduce on the tangent cone the structure of a single holomorphic chart. We call these cones [*polyhedral Kähler cones*]{}, and denote by $C_K^4$. All $PK$ cones have a natural [*holomorphic Euler vector field*]{} $e$ ([*cf*]{}. Section 3.1) that acts by dilatations of the metric, and this field is crucial for us.
\[th:linearization\] Let $C_K^4$ be a $4$-dimensional polyhedral K[ä]{}hler cone. There exists a homeomorphism $\varphi: C_K^4 \to \mathbb{C}^2$ holomorphic outside the singularities of the cone and satisfying the following property: The Euler field $e$ written in coordinates $(z,w)$ of $\mathbb{C}^2$ is given by $$\frac{1}{\alpha} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z} +
\frac{1}{\beta} w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are positive real numbers. The image of the singular locus of $C_K^4$ under the map $\varphi$ is given by a union of curves $c_1z^{\alpha}=c_2w^{\beta}$.
The singularity is called [*irrational*]{} if $\frac{\alpha}{\beta}\in \mathbb{R}\setminus \mathbb{Q}$. In this case its tangent cone is isometric to the direct product of two $2$-cones $C_1\times C_2$ with conical angles $2\pi\alpha$ and $2\pi\beta$.
The singularity is called [*rational of type $(p,q,\alpha)$, $p,q\in \mathbb{N}$*]{} if its Euler field is equal to $e=\frac{p}{\alpha} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+
\frac{q}{\alpha}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$ in coordinates $(z,w)$. Here $p$ and $q$ are relatively prime, $p\le q$ and $\alpha$ is a positive real number. Sometimes, when the choice of $\alpha$ is not important, we may also say that the singularity is of type $(p,q)$. Since $e$ acts by dilatation of the metric, it preserves the singular locus of the metric. Thus, in the neighborhood of $x$ any irreducible component of the singular locus is a curve given by one of the equations: $cz^q=w^p$, $c\ne 0$; $z=0$; or $w=0$. All these curves are flat with respect to the induced $PK$ metric. Each curve $cz^q=w^p$ has a conical point at the origin with the [*same*]{} angle $2\pi\alpha$, the line $z=0$ has conical angle $\frac{2\pi}{p}\alpha$, and the line $w=0$ has conical angle $\frac{2\pi}{q}\alpha$.
The next theorem gives a description of the set [*$S(p,q,\alpha)$*]{} of equivalence classes of singularities of type $(p,q,\alpha)$. There is a slight difference between the cases $(1=p=q)$, $(1=p<q)$, $(1<p<q)$. The triple $(p,q,\alpha)$ does not determine the singularity uniquely, the singularities of a given type form an infinite-dimensional space.
\[Thm:Spq\] On a $2$-sphere, consider the set of metrics (up to isometry) of curvature $4$, with area $\frac{\pi\alpha}{pq}$, and having an arbitrary number of conical points. Moreover if $p>1$ and $q>1$ we mark two conical points, while if $p=1$, $q>1$ we mark one conical point. This set of metrics on the sphere is in natural 1-to-1 correspondence with the set $S(p,q,\alpha)$.
Consider a $(p,q,\alpha)$ singularity, let $(2\pi\beta_1,...,2\pi\beta_n)$ be the conical angles of the $PK$ metric at the singular branches $c_kz^q=w^p,\; (c_k\ne 0)$. Let $2\pi\beta_z$ be the angle at $z=0$ and $2\pi\beta_w$ the angle at $w=0$.
\[Thm:alpha=\] The following relation holds:
$$\alpha=\frac{pq}{2}\left(\sum_k (\beta_k-1)+\frac{\beta_z-1}{p}+
\frac{\beta_w-1}{q}\right)+\frac{p+q}{2}$$
Theorems \[pkcomplex\] - \[Thm:alpha=\] are proven in Section 3.
Flat connection and topological relations
-----------------------------------------
By Theorem \[pkcomplex\] every $4$-dimensional $PK$ manifold is a complex surface and the singular locus of the $PK$ metric forms a complex curve on it. Further on will denote the surface by $S$ and the complex curve by $\Gamma$.
The $PK$ metric on $S$ defines a flat meromorphic connection on the tangent bundle of $S$ with first order poles at $\Gamma$. In Section 4 we study this connection, especially in the neighborhood of singularities of complex codimension $2$. We give a list of conditions that imply that a connection on the tangent bundle to a surface is a connection of a $PK$ metric (Theorem \[connectionPK\]). Using the residues of the connection we write down a system of topological relations on the pair $(S,\Gamma)$. This is done in Section 5.
Let us fix some notations. Irreducible components of $\Gamma$ will be denoted by $\Gamma_j$. For every component $\Gamma_j$ we denote by $2\pi\beta_j$ the conical angle at $\Gamma_j$, i.e., the angle of a $2$-cone orthogonal to any nonsingular point of $\Gamma_j$. The singularities of $\Gamma$ that are not normal crossings are denoted by $x_i$ and their type is denoted by $(p_i,q_i,\alpha_i)$.
For any surface $S$ a collection of divisors $\Gamma_j$ with positive weights $\beta_j$ is called a weighted arrangements. In the case when there exists a $PK$ metric on $S$ with singularities at $\Gamma_j$ of angles $2\pi\beta_j$ we call $(\Gamma_j, \beta_j)$ the [*weighted arrangement of the $PK$ metric*]{} or the [*$PK$ arrangement*]{}. Sometimes we will mean by weighted arrangement the whole data $(\Gamma_j,\beta_j; x_i,p_i,q_i,\alpha_i)$.
Define two numbers related to the behavior of $\Gamma_j$ in the neighborhood of $x_i$. Denote by $\tilde d_{ij}$ the number of branches (local irreducible components) of $\Gamma_j$ at $x_i$. Additionally let $d_{ij}$ be the number of branches, except counting branches $z=0$ and $w=0$ with weights $\frac{1}{p}$ and $\frac{1}{q}$. Denote by $B_{jk}$, $j\ne k$, the number of intersections of curves $\Gamma_j$ and $\Gamma_k$ that represent the normal crossing singularity and define $B_{jj}$ by $$B_{jj}=-\Gamma_j\cdot \Gamma_j+\sum_i p_iq_i(d_{ij})^2,$$
where $\Gamma_j\cdot \Gamma_j$ is the self-intersection number of $\Gamma_j$.
\[Thm:chernclasses\] Any weighted arrangement $(\Gamma_j,\beta_j; x_i,p_i,q_i,\alpha_i)$ of a $PK$ metric satisfies the following relations:
$$\label{bgderive}
\forall j \quad \sum_k B_{jk}(\beta_k-1)=
-2\chi(\Gamma_j)-K_S\cdot\Gamma_j-\sum_i (d_{ij}(p_i+q_i)-2\tilde d_{ij})$$
$$-c_1(TS)=K_S=\sum_j (\beta_j-1)[\Gamma_j]\in H_2(S,\mathbb R)$$
Moreover in the case when for every $i$ $p_i=q_i=1$ we have the following expression for the second Chern class: $$c_2(TS)=\sum_i(\alpha_i-1)^2+
\sum_{j\ne k}\frac{1}{2}B_{jk}(\beta_j-1)(\beta_k-1)$$
Here $K_S$ is the canonical class of $S$ and $\chi(\Gamma_j)$ is the Euler characteristic of the normalization of $\Gamma_j$.
These relations have the following nature. Relation (1) is a consequence of the Gauss-Bonnet formula applied to the curve $\Gamma_j$. For every $\Gamma_j$ the sum of the defects of its conical points is equal to its Euler characteristic. Relations (2) and (3) express the Chern classes of $TS$ in terms of the residues of the flat connection on $TS$ corresponding to the $PK$ metric \[Oh\].
Construction of weighted arrangements satisfying Equations \[Thm:chernclasses\] (1-3) is a problem of independent interest. It can lead to combinatorial questions of the following type:
[*Problem. Classify arrangements of $3n$ lines on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ such that every line intersect other lines exactly at $n+1$ points.*]{}
It is easy to see that such line arrangements with weights $\beta_j=\frac{n-1}{n}$ satisfy Equations \[Thm:chernclasses\] (1-3). This problem appeared previously in \[Hir\] and the list of two infinite series and several exceptional arrangements satisfying these conditions was given (all these arrangements are complex reflection arrangements). Additional combinatorial questions (about [*simplicial*]{} and limit $PK$ arrangements with a [*cusp*]{}) are formulated in Section 5.
Reconstruction of non-negatively curved $PK$ metrics from weighted arrangements
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the main results of this paper is the following theorem.
\[th:existence\] Consider a weighted arrangements of lines $(L_j,\beta_j)$ in $\mathbb{C}P^2$ satisfying the following conditions
$$\label{stabin}
\sum_j(\beta_j-1)=-3,\;\;\;\; 0<\beta_j<1,\;\;\;\;
\sum_i d_{ij}(\beta_j-1)>-2$$
Then the following inequality holds:
$$\label{cp2gieseker}
\sum_k(\alpha_i-1)^2-\sum_j\frac{1}{2}(1-\beta_j)^2B_{jj}-
\frac{3}{2}\le 0$$
Moreover, if the equality holds then there exists a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb CP^2$ with conical angles $2\pi\beta_j$ at $L_j$ (i.e., $(L_j, \beta_j)$ is a $PK$ arrangement.)
We prove this theorem in Section 7 after recalling (Section 6) the technique of parabolic bundles. To every arrangement that satisfies condition of the theorem we associate a parabolic structure on the pull-back of the tangent bundle of $\mathbb CP^2$ to the blow up of $\mathbb CP^2$ at the multiple points of the arrangement. We prove that constructed parabolic bundle is stable and calculate its parabolic Chern characters. Inequality (\[cp2gieseker\]) is a consequence of Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality \[M2\] (see also \[Li\]). The existence of a $PK$ metric in the case of equality follows form the parabolic version of Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence from \[M2\] and additional statements about logarithmic connection the we prove in Section 4.
Examples of polyhedral K[ä]{}hler manifolds
===========================================
In this section we recall the classification of $PK$ structures on complex curves \[Tr\] and give several examples of polyhedral K[ä]{}hler manifolds of higher dimension.
Flat metrics on surfaces
------------------------
[**Structures on a $2$-dimensional polyhedral cone.**]{} A $2$-dimensional polyhedral cone is a very simple object but already it supports the majority of geometric structures that are essential for this work. Let us describe these structures. Consider a $2$-cone $C^2$ with conical angle $2\pi\alpha$. Note first that the flat metric on $C^2\setminus 0$ defines a conformal and hence a [*holomorphic structure*]{} on $C^2\setminus 0$. Moreover $C^2\setminus 0$ is by-holomorphic to $\mathbb C^*$, so we can chose a [*holomorphic coordinate $z$*]{} on it (defined up to a multiplicative constant). This coordinate can be used to extend the complex structure from $C^2\setminus 0$ to $C^2$. We have a natural action of $\mathbb R^*$ on $C^2$ by homotheties, corresponding vector field can be complexified and we call it [*Euler field*]{}. This field is given in the coordinate $z$ by the formula $\frac{z}{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial z}$, the imaginary part of the field acts by isometries of the cone. The metric induces a [*flat meromorphic connection*]{} on the tangent bundle to the cone and it is given by $\nabla=d+(\alpha-1)\frac{dz}{z}$. The multi-valued flat coordinate on the cone, i.e., a coordinate in which the connection on $C^2$ is trivial, is given by $z^{\alpha}$.
Next theorem classifies polyhedral metrics on surfaces.
[**(Troyanov \[Tr\])**]{} Consider a complex curve $\Gamma$ of genus $g$ with pairwise distinct marked points $x_1,...,x_n$. Let $\alpha_1,...,\alpha_n$ be real positive numbers such that $\sum (\alpha_i-1)=2g-2$. Then there is a unique (up to a real multiplication constant) complete flat metric on $\Gamma$ with conical points of angles $2\pi\alpha_i$ at $x_i$ whose conformal structure on $\Gamma\setminus\{x_1,...,x_n\}$ is the same as of $\Gamma$ itself.
For completeness we give here a proof of the theorem.
For every real $\beta_1,...,\beta_n$ such that $\sum_i \beta_i=0$, there exists a unique meromorphic 1-form $\eta$ on $\Gamma$ with simple poles with residues $\beta_1,...,\beta_n$ at the points $x_1,...,x_n$, having purely imaginary periods (i.e., for every closed path $\gamma\in\Gamma$ we have $\int_{\gamma}\eta\in i\mathbb{R}$).
[**Proof**]{}. By Dirichlet’s theorem there exists a unique (up to a constant) real harmonic function $f$ on $\Gamma$, satisfying the equation $\Delta f=\sum_i \beta_i\delta_{x_i}$. This function has logarithmic poles at $x_1,...,x_n$. The 1-form $\eta$ is then given by $\eta(\overrightarrow{u})=df(\overrightarrow{u})+idf(J\overrightarrow{u})$, where $J$ defines the complex structure on $T\Gamma$.
$\square$
#### Proof of Theorem 2.1.
[**Existence.**]{} Let $\xi$ be a holomorphic differential on $\Gamma$ with simple zeros $y_1,...,y_{2g-2}$. It defines a flat metric $\xi\otimes \bar \xi$ on $\Gamma$ with conical points of angle $4\pi$ at the points $y_i$. Denote by $\nabla$ the corresponding connection. Consider the 1-form $\eta$ on $\Gamma$ with purely imaginary periods that has residue $-1$ at any point $y_i$ and residue $(\alpha_j-1)$ at any point $x_j$.
Let us prove that the connection $\nabla+\eta$ on $\Gamma$ is unitary. Indeed, the holonomy of $\nabla+\eta$ along a closed path $\gamma$ is given by the formula $${\rm hol}_{\gamma}(\nabla+\eta)=
{\rm hol}_{\gamma}(\nabla)\exp(-\int_{\gamma}\eta)
=\exp(-\int_{\gamma}\eta).$$
The first equality follows from the definition of holonomy and the second follows from the fact that the holonomy of $\nabla$ is trivial. The connection $\nabla+\eta$ defines a unique (up to a real multiplication constant) flat metric on $\Gamma$. In order to define it one should fix the metric at any point of $\Gamma$ different from $x_j$ and translate it by means of $\nabla+\eta$ to other points of $\Gamma$. The metric constructed this way has singularities exactly at $x_j$, and the conical angles at $x_j$ are defined by the poles of $\eta$.
[**Uniqueness.**]{} Suppose that we have two metrics $g_1$ and $g_2$ satisfying the conditions of the theorem. Then the 1-form $\nabla_{g_1}-\nabla_{g_2}$ should be holomorphic and it should have purely imaginary periods (since both $\nabla_{g_1}$ and $\nabla_{g_2}$ are unitary), i.e., it is identically zero. Thus $g_1$ and $g_2$ coincide.
$\square$
Polyhedral K[ä]{}hler manifolds of higher dimension
---------------------------------------------------
Recall that a polyhedral manifold is called [*non-negatively curved*]{} if the conical angles at all faces of codimension $2$ are at most $2\pi$.
\[positiveCP\] Let $M^{2n}$ be a non-negatively curved manifold that has a second cohomology class $h\in H^2(M^{2n})$ such that $h^n$ is non zero in $H^{2n}(M^{2n})$. Then the holonomy of $M^{2n}$ is contained in $U(n)$, i.e., such a manifold is $PK$.
This proposition is a simple corollary of results of J. Cheeger (see \[Ch\]), which we will now describe. We don’t need these results in full generality; instead, we give a version sufficient for our considerations.
Let $M^n$ be a polyhedral manifold, and let $M_s^{n-2}$ be the subset of all its metric singularities. Denote by $H_{L_2}^i(M^n)$ the space of $L_2$-harmonic forms on $M^n\setminus M_s^{n-2}$ that are closed and co-closed.
[**Theorem A.**]{} $\mathrm{dim}(H_{L_2}^i(M^n))=b^i(M^n)$.
[**Theorem B.**]{} Suppose that the manifold $M^n$ is non-negatively curved. Then every harmonic form $h$ in $H^i(M^n)$ is parallel, i.e., $\nabla h=0$.
As it is stated in \[Ch\] the Theorem [**B**]{} indicates that non-negatively curved polyhedral manifolds are analogs of smooth Riemannian manifolds with nonnegative curvature operator (rather then smooth manifolds with non-negative sectional curvature).
Let us deduce Proposition \[positiveCP\] from theorems [**A**]{} and [**B**]{}. We need a simple fact from linear algebra.
\[trivial\] Consider an Euclidean space $V^{2n}$ with a non-degenerate 2-form $w$, $w^n\ne 0$. Denote by $S_w$ the subgroup of $SO(2n)$ that preserves $w$. Then the group $S_w$ is contained in a subgroup of $SO(2n)$ conjugate to $U(n)$.
[**Proof.**]{} We can find orthonormal coordinates $(x_i,y_i)$ in $V^{2n}$ such that $w=\sum_i a_i dx_i\wedge dy_i$ ($a_i\ne 0$). It is easy to see that every element of $SO(2n)$ that preserves $w$ preserves the form $w'=\sum_i dx_i\wedge dy_i$. The stabilizer of $w'$ in $SO(2n)$ is exactly $U(n)$.
$\square$
[**Proof of Proposition \[positiveCP\].**]{} Let $g$ be a non-negatively curved polyhedral metric on $M^{2n}$. By Theorem [**A**]{} there exists a harmonic 2-form $w$ on $M^{2n}$ such that $\int_M w^n\ne 0$. By Theorem [**B**]{} $w$ parallel in the flat metric. It has constant rank outside of the singularities, and since $\int_M w^n\ne 0$, $w$ should be non-degenerate. The holonomy of $g$ preserves $w$, thus by Lemma \[trivial\] the holonomy is contained in a subgroup of $SO(2n)$ conjugate to $U(n)$, i.e., g is a polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metric.
$\square$
This proposition indicates that it should be difficult to construct an explicit simplicial decomposition on $\mathbb CP^n$ that defines a non-negatively curved metric. All examples of $PK$ metrics on $\mathbb CP^n$ that we know come from algebraic geometry, and produce a metric without a chosen simplicial decomposition.
[**Examples of non-negatively curved polyhedral $\mathbb{C}P^n$.**]{}
[**Example 1.**]{} Choose any non-negatively curved polyhedral metric on $\mathbb{C}P^1$. Consider the $n$-th symmetric power ${\rm Sym^n}(\mathbb{C}P^1)$ of $\mathbb{C}P^1$ with induced polyhedral metric. We have $ \rm{Sym^n}(\mathbb{C}P^1)\simeq \mathbb{C}P^n$, and it is clear that the constructed polyhedral metric on $\mathbb {C}P^n$ is non-negatively curved. This is the first nontrivial example of a higher-dimensional $PK$ manifold that I learned and it was proposed to me by M. Gromov.
For $n=2$ we obtain a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ with singularities at a conic and several lines tangent to it. The conical angle at the conic is equal to $\pi$ and the sum of defects of the conical angles at the lines is equal to $-4\pi$. The conic is the image of the diagonal of $\mathbb{C}P^1\times \mathbb{C}P^1$.
[**Example 2.**]{} Let $T^2$ be a $2$-torus with a flat metric. Consider the $(n+1)$-th power of $T^2$, $T^{2n+2}=(T^2)^{n+1}$. Let $T^{2n}$ be a subtorus of $T^{2n+2}$ given by the equation $\sum_i x_i=0, x_1,...,x_{n+1}\in T^2$. Let $S_{n+1}$ be the permutation group acting on $T^{2n+2}$.
The quotient $T^{2n}/S_{n+1}$ is a $\mathbb{C}P^n$ with a non-negatively curved polyhedral metric.
[**Proof.**]{} Let $E$ be the unique elliptic curve with the same conformal structure as $T^2$. Let $L_n$ be a complex line bundle over $E$ with first Chern class $n+1$. Then $T^{2n}/S_{n+1}$ can be identified with the space of zero divisors of sections of $L_n$.
$\square$
For $n=2$ we obtain a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ singular along an elliptic curve of degree $6$ with $9$ cusps. This curve is projectively dual to a smooth cubic.
$S^4$ and $\mathbb CP^2$ are the only orientable $4$-dimensional manifolds that admit a non-negatively curved polyhedral metric with irreducible holonomy. The case of $S^2\times S^2$ was treated in \[Or\] using the theory of Alexandrov spaces, the results of this paper can be obtained in a different way using complex geometry.
[**$PK$-metrics via branched covering.**]{}
One can construct polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metrics via branched coverings. Let $f:S_2\to S_1$ be a branched covering of a smooth complex surface $S_1$ by a smooth complex surface $S_2$. Suppose that $S_1$ has a polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metric and $f$ is ramified over a set of flat curves on $S_1$. Then the pull-back of the metric on $S_2$ is a polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metric.
Consider the map $f:\mathbb{C}P^2\to \mathbb{C}P^2$, $f(x:y:z)=(x^n:y^n:z^n)$. This map is ramified at the lines $x=0,y=0,z=0$. The following two examples use this map to produce new $PK$ metrics.
[**Example 3.**]{} $7$ lines.
Consider a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ with the singular locus given by the lines $x=0,y=0,z=0$ and a conic tangent to these lines ([*cf*]{}. Example 1). The conical angle at the conic is $\pi$ and the conical angles at the lines are equal to $2\pi\alpha$, $2\pi\beta$, $2\pi\gamma$, $\alpha+\beta+\gamma=1$. Consider the branched covering $f(x:y:z)=(x^2:y^2:z^2)$. Then the singular locus of the pullback metric is composed of 7 lines, 4 of which have conical angle $\pi$ and three of which have angles $4\pi\alpha$, $4\pi\beta$, $4\pi\gamma$.
[**Example 4.**]{} A metric on a symmetric $K3$ surface.
Consider a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ with the singular locus given by the lines $x=0$, $y=0$, $z=0$, $x+y=z$ (all of them having conical angle $\pi$) and a conic tangent to these lines (Example 1). Consider the pull-back metric on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ under the map $f(x:y:z)=(x^6:y^6:z^6)$. The preimage of the line $x+y=z$ is given by the equation $x^6+y^6=z^6$. The double cover of $\mathbb{C}P^2$ ramified over the curve $x^6+y^6=z^6$ is a $K3$ surface. This construction gives a polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metric on it.
[**Example 5.**]{} $PK$ metrics on algebraic Kummer surfaces.
Recall that a Kummer $K3$ surface is obtained from a complex torus $T^2$ by the quotient with respect to the involution $I: x\to -x$ and successive blow up of $16$ fixed points. If we first blow up the points on $T^2$ fixed by $I$, we get a surface that is a double cover of the Kummer surface. So in order to get a $PK$ metric on a Kummer surface it will be sufficient to construct any $I$-invariant $PK$ metric on $T^2$ blown up at $16$ invariant points.
Let $\Gamma$ be a genus $2$ curve, $\sigma$ its hyperelliptic involution, and $\mathrm{Jac}_2(\Gamma)$ the Jacobian of degree $2$ line bundles on $\Gamma$. Let $g$ be a flat metric with conical points on $\Gamma$, invariant under $\sigma$ (we suppose that the conformal structure of $g$ is that of $\Gamma$). The metric $g$ induces a $PK$ metric $\widetilde g$ on the symmetric square $\mathrm{Sym}^2(\Gamma)$ of $\Gamma$.
Recall that $\mathrm{Sym}^2(\Gamma)$ is naturally isomorphic to the blow up of $\mathrm{Jac}_2(\Gamma)$ at the point corresponding to the canonical class of $\Gamma$. Moreover the involution $\sigma$ on $\Gamma$ induces the involution $I$ on the blown up of $\mathrm{Jac}_2(\Gamma)$. Consider the degree $16$ cover of $\mathrm{Sym}^2(\Gamma)$ corresponding to the subgroup $(2\mathbb Z)^4\subset H_1(\mathrm{Sym}^2(\Gamma))$. One can check that the involution $I$ lifts to this cover and it fixes $16$ exceptional curves. Moreover, $I$ fixes the lift of $\widetilde g$. This finishes the construction.
Singularities of polyhedral K[ä]{}hler manifolds in dimension 4
===============================================================
Starting from this section we deal only with $4$-dimensional $PK$ manifolds. In the next two subsections we will prove Theorems \[pkcomplex\] and \[th:linearization\]. Before doing this let us explain why existence of holomorphic charts (Definition \[defhol\]) on a polyhedral Kähler manifold $M^4$ implies immediately that $M^4$ is a complex surface.
Indeed, suppose that $M^4$ can be covered by holomorphic charts $(U_{\alpha},\varphi_{\alpha})$. To prove that $(U_{\alpha},\varphi_{\alpha})$ is a holomorphic atlas on $M^4$ we need to show that for every $\alpha$ and $\beta$ the gluing map
$$\varphi_{\alpha}\varphi_{\beta}^{-1}:
\varphi_{\beta}(U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta})\to
\varphi_{\alpha}(U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta})$$ is holomorphic. By Definition \[defhol\] the map $\varphi_{\alpha}\varphi_{\beta}^{-1}$ is continuous on $\varphi_{\beta}(U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta})$ and holomorphic on the complement to an analytic subset. So by standard results it is holomorphic on the whole domain $\varphi_{\beta}(U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta})$.
$\square$
The same argument gives us the following lemma.
\[halfextend\] For $i=0,1$ suppose that every point of $M^4\setminus M_s^i$ has a holomorphic chart. Then the space $M^4\setminus M_s^i$ has a well-defined holomorphic structure.
The proof of Theorem \[pkcomplex\] will be done in $3$ steps. First we show that every point in $M_s^2\setminus M_s^1$ is contained in a holomorphic chart. Then we prove that singularities of pure codimension $3$ don’t exit, i.e, $M_s^1=M_s^0$. And finally for singularities of codimension $4$ the existence of a holomorphic chart is claimed by Theorem \[th:linearization\].
Complex structure in codimension $4$ and the Euler field.
---------------------------------------------------------
\[extend\] Every point $x\in M_s^2\setminus M_s^1$ is contained in a holomorphic chart. In particular the space $M^4\setminus M_s^1$ has a well-defined holomorphic structure.
[**Proof.**]{} It is sufficient to prove this lemma for tangent cones of points in $M_s^2\setminus M_s^1$, i.e. for $PK$ manifolds that are the direct products of a $2$-cone $C^2$ and the Euclidean plane $\mathbb R^2$.
By Definition \[gooddefinition\] the complex structure on $\mathbb R^2\times (C^2\setminus 0)$ is constant with respect to the flat connection of the metric and invariant with respect to the holonomy around $(\mathbb R^2,0)$. If the conical angle $2\pi\beta$ of $C^2$ is not divisible by $2\pi$ then this holonomy is nontrivial, it rotates the tangent planes of the horizontal fibers $(*,C^2\setminus 0)$ by the angle $2\pi\{\beta\}$. So these fibers are holomorphic with respect to the complex structure. The fibers $(\mathbb{R}^2,*)$ are orthogonal to $(*,C^2\setminus 0)$ and so they are holomorphic, since $J$ preserves the metric. Thus the complex structure on $M^4=\mathbb R^2\times (C^2\setminus 0)$ is given by the product of the natural complex structures on $\mathbb
R^2$ and $C^2\setminus 0$. Finally we note that $C^2\setminus 0$ is bi-holomorphic to $\mathbb C^*$, so there is a coordinate $z$ on $C^2$ holomorphic on $C^2\setminus 0$ and continuous on $C^2$. The coordinate $z$ together with a holomorphic coordinate $w$ on $\mathbb R^2$ define the structure of a chart on $\mathbb R^2\times C^2$. The existence of the complex structure on $M^4\setminus M_s^1$ follows now from Lemma \[halfextend\]. The case $2\pi\beta=2\pi k$, $k\ge 2$ is similar, the holonomy is trivial this time but by Definition \[gooddefinition\] the vertical fiber $\mathbb R^2\times 0$ has a holomorphic direction.
$\square$
We proved that every $2$-face of a $4$ dimensional polyhedral Kähler manifold that belongs to the singular locus has a [*holomorphic direction*]{}. We need to impose the condition on the faces with conical angle $2k\pi$, $k\ge 2$, in order to be able to extend the complex structure on these faces. Indeed, for a degree $k$ ramified cover of $\mathbb{C}^2$ with a branching of order $k$ over a totally real two-dimensional plane, the complex structure on the cover can not be extended on the branching locus.
Let $M^4$ be a $PK$ manifold and let $U$ be the universal cover of $M^4\setminus M_s^2$. The [*enveloping map*]{} $E$ of $M^4$ is defined as a locally isometric map $E: U \to \mathbb C^2$. Equivalently this map can be seen as a multi-valued map from $M^4$ to $\mathbb C^2$ that is locally isometric outside of $M_s^2$ and has infinite ramification at $M_s^2$. The image of $M_s^2$ under the map is called [*branching set*]{} $B(E)$ of $E$, it is composed of linear holomorphic faces. Note that $B(E)$ is usually everywhere dense in $\mathbb C^2$ but in the case when $B(E)$ is closed the restriction map $E: E^{-1}(\mathbb C^2\setminus B(E))\to \mathbb C^2\setminus B(E)$ is a covering map.
\[pr1=0\] Any $PK$ cone $C_K^4$ that is a product of $\mathbb R$ with a $3$-cone is isometric to the product of $\mathbb C$ with a $2$-cone. So $4$-dimensional $PK$ manifolds can not have singularities of pure codimension $3$.
[**Proof**]{}. Suppose that $C_K^4$ is isometric to $\mathbb R\times P^3$. Denote by $v$ the constant vector field on $C_K^4$ tangent to the vertical lines $(\mathbb{R},*)$. This field is acting on $\mathbb R\times (P^3\setminus 0)$ preserving the complex structure defined by Lemma \[extend\]. Consider the field $J(v)$ obtained from $v$ by the complex rotation and let $v_{\mathbb C}=v+iJ(v)$ be the complexification of $v$. The field $v_{\mathbb C}$ is constant in the flat holomorphic coordinates on the complement to the singularities. Moreover, since the singularities of $C_K^4$ are tangent to $v$ and they are holomorphic on $\mathbb R\times (P^3\setminus 0)$, $v_{\mathbb C}$ is also tangent to the singularities.
Consider now the enveloping map $E$ of $C_K^4$ and let us show that its branching locus is contained in a complex line through $E(0)$ (note that the image of the center $0$ of $C_K^4$ is well defined). Indeed, the singularities of $C_K^4$ are of the form $\mathbb R\times r_i$, where $r_i$ is a singular ray of $P^3$. The image of $\mathbb R\times r_i$ under $E$ in $\mathbb C^2$ is a complex half-line containing $E(0)$ at its boundary. At the same time it is clear that the field $v_{\mathbb C}$ descends to a constant filed $E(v_{\mathbb C})$ on $\mathbb C^2$, and so all half-lines of $B(E)$ are contained in the line $L$ through $E(0)$ tangent to $E(v_{\mathbb C})$.
Since $B(E)\subset L$, the map $E: E^{-1}(\mathbb C^2\setminus L)\to \mathbb C^2\setminus L$ is a covering map. But the set $E^{-1}(\mathbb C^2\setminus L)$ is also a cover of the complement in $C_K^4$ to all half-planes $\mathbb R\times r$ tangent to $v_{\mathbb C}$ (including all singular half-planes). We deduce that the last complement is isometric to a product of a punctured $2$-cone with $\mathbb C$ and the proposition follows.
$\square$
Let us sketch an alternative proof of this proposition where instead of studying the enveloping map we work directly with the cone $P^3$. Consider the restriction of the field $J(v)$ on $0\times P^3=P^3$. The field $J(v)$ is well defined on $P^3\setminus 0$, it is preserved by the holonomy of the metric and it is tangent to the singular rays of $P^3$. We will show that $P^3$ has at most $2$ singular rays.
Let $S^2$ be the unit sphere centered at the origin of $P^3$. Consider the following function on $S^2$: $$f:S^2\to [-1,1]; \; f(x)=\mathrm{cos}(\angle(e_r(x), I(v(x)))$$
We claim that the critical values of this function must be equal to $1$ or $-1$. Indeed, if $x$ is a nonsingular point and $e_r(x)$ is not tangent to $J(v(x))$, then $f$ has nonzero differential at $x$. If $x$ is singular (i.e., $ x\in r_i$ ), then $J(v(x))$ is tangent to $r_i$, thus $f(x)=\pm 1$. It follows from Morse theory that $f$ must have exactly two critical points. Thus the number of conical points on $S^2$ is at most $2$. A further analysis shows that $S^2$ is either the unit sphere or a sphere with $2$ conical points admitting an isometric $S^1$ action preserving the points. This proves the proposition.
$\square$
\[symp\] Let $S^2$ be a unit sphere and $p$ and $q$ be two points on it. Consider a ramified degree $n$ cover of $S^2$ by a sphere $\tilde S^2$ with ramifications of order $n$ at $p$ and $q$. Then the pull-back metric to $\tilde S^2$ has $2$ conical points of angles $2\pi n$. Let $P^3$ be a cone over $\tilde S^2$ and consider the polyhedral cone $\mathbb R\times P^3$. The holonomy of the metric on $\mathbb R\times P^3$ is trivial for all choices of $p$ and $q$, but the cone admits a $PK$ structure only if $p$ and $q$ are opposite points on $S^2$. Otherwise, the line $\mathbb R \times 0$ forms the singular locus of codimension $3$.
Let $C_K^4$ be a polyhedral Kähler cone. The group $\mathbb R^*$ is acting on $C_K^4$ by dilatations (since $C_K^4$ is a cone). It is clear that this action preserves the holomorphic structure on $C_K^4\setminus 0$ defined by Proposition \[pr1=0\]. So the vector field $e_r$ generating this action can be complexified and the obtained holomorphic vector field is called [*Euler vector field*]{} and denoted by $e$. The imaginary part of the field $e$ is called the spherical component $e_s=J(e_r)$. It is important that $e_s$ is acting on $C_K^4$ by [*isometries*]{}.
Consider the cone $C_K^4$ that is the direct product of two $2$-cones with conical angles $2\pi\alpha$ and $2\pi\beta$. Choose holomorphic coordinates $z$ and $w$ on each $2$-cone as in the beginning of Section 2.1. Then the Euler field is given by $e=\frac{1}{\alpha}z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}
+\frac{1}{\beta}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$. Let us decompose $e$ as above in the radial and spherical components $e=e_r+ie_s$. If $\frac{\alpha}{\beta}\in
\mathbb{Q}$, then all orbits of the field $e_s$ are closed, and the field $e_s$ generates an action of $S^1$ on $C_K^4$. For $\frac{\alpha}{\beta}$ irrational, the closure of a generic orbit of $e_s$ is a $2$-torus.
Linear coordinates on $PK$ cones
--------------------------------
In this subsection we prove Theorem \[th:linearization\]. In particular, we introduce a holomorphic chart in a neighborhood of every singularity of codimension $4$. So, this also finishes the proof of Theorem \[pkcomplex\].
Let $C_K^4$ be a $4$-dimensional $PK$ cone. We will consider the isometric action generated by $e_s$ on $C_K^4$ and will distinguish two case.
\(1) [*Irrational.*]{} There exists at least one non-closed orbit.
\(2) [*Rational.*]{} All orbits of the action are closed.
\[ircone\] If at least one of the orbit of the $e_s$ action on $C_K^4$ is non-closed then $C_K^4$ is isometric to the product of two $2$-cones.
Consider the group of isometries of $C_K^4$ preserving its origin. This is a compact Lie group, and the field $e_s$ generates its subgroup isomorphic to $\mathbb R^1$ (because at least one orbit of the action on $S^3$ is non-closed). The closure of this subgroup in the group of isometries is a compact connected Abelian group, i.e., a torus of dimension at least two. Thus we have a faithful action of $T^2$ on $C_K^4$ by isometries.
Let us show that the branching locus of the enveloping map $E$ of $C_K^4$ is contained in the union of two orthogonal lines in $\mathbb C^2$. Indeed, $T^2$ is acting on $C_K^4$ and this action induces an action of $\mathbb R^2$ on $\mathbb C^2$ equivariant with respect to $E$ and fixing the point $E(0)$ in $\mathbb C^2$. This action factors through the standard action of $T^2$ on $\mathbb C^2$ and it leaves invariant two orthogonal lines $L_1$ and $L_2$ through $E(0)$. The branching locus of $E$ is a union of lines trough $E(0)$ invariant under $T^2$ action. Thus the map $$E: E^{-1}(\mathbb C^2\setminus L_1\cup L_2)\to
\mathbb C^2\setminus L_1\cup L_2$$ is a covering map. It follows that $C_K^4$ is isometric to a product of two $2$-cones.
$\square$
Theorem \[th:linearization\] holds for $PK$ cones isometric to the direct product of two $2$-cones (see the example above). So the first case of the theorem is proved. To treat the second case we will study the action of $e_s$ on the unit sphere $S^3$ of $C_K^4$ ($S^3$ it the set of points lying at distance $1$ from the origin). This action is isometric and we suppose this time that all orbits are closed.
\[s1s3\] Suppose that all orbits of the action of $e_s$ on $S^3$ are closed. Then there exists $\alpha>0$ such that all orbits except at most two have period $2\pi\alpha$, and the exceptional orbits have periods $\frac{2\pi\alpha}{p}$, $\frac{2\pi\alpha}{q}$, where $p$ and $q$ are co-prime numbers. Moreover the action is conjugate to the action $(z,w)\to (e ^{i\theta p}z, e ^{i\theta q}w)$, $\theta\in\mathbb R/2\pi\mathbb Z$ on the unit sphere in $\mathbb C^2$, $|z|^2+|w|^2=1$.
[**Proof.**]{} This lemma is standard and follows essentially form the fact that $e_s$ is acting on $S^3$ by isometries, we will just indicate the proof. It is sufficient to show that the action induces on $S^3$ the structure of a Seifert fibration, in particular all orbits apart from a finite number have period $2\pi\alpha$ and the periods of all exceptional orbits divide $2\pi\alpha$. Then the lemma follows from the classification of Seifert fibrations on $S^3$.
Let $o$ be an orbit of $e_s$ on $S^3$, denote by $2\pi\alpha_1$ its length. Consider the flow on $S^3$ generated by $e_s$ in time $2\pi\alpha_1$. It is identical on $o$ and induces a self-map on an invariant slice transversal to $o$. This self-map of the slice is an isometry and it has finite period $n$ (otherwise there exist orbits of $e_s$ that are not closed). It follows that the flow generated by $e_s$ in time $2n\pi\alpha_1$ induces the identity map on $S^3$ thus the period of every orbit divides $2n\pi\alpha_1$. Since every orbit has a neighborhood where all other orbits have period $2n\pi\alpha_1$, the number of exceptional orbits is finite.
$\square$
Now, we are ready to give the proof of Theorem \[th:linearization\] in the second case. Note first that since the field $e_s$ defines an $S^1$ action on $C_K^4$, the field $e=e_r+ie_s$ defines a holomorphic $\mathbb C^*$ action on $C_K^4\setminus 0$.
Suppose first that all orbits of the action of $S^1$ on $S^3$ have the same length, i.e., the pair $(p,q)$ from Lemma \[s1s3\] is $(1,1)$. Then the quotient space $(C_K^4\setminus 0)/\mathbb{C}^*$ is a complex curve homeomorphic to $S^2$, hence it is $\mathbb{C}P^1$. Thus $C_K^4\setminus 0$ is isomorphic to a holomorphic $\mathbb C^*$ fibration over $\mathbb{C}P^1$. This fibration can be completed in a unique way to a line bundle by adding the zero section. The completed line bundle has first Chern class $-1$, (indeed, the associate $S^1$ bundle is homeomorphic to the Hopf fibration of $S^3$). We conclude that $C_K^4\setminus 0$ can be identified with $\mathbb{C}^2\setminus 0$ and the Euler field has the form $\frac{1}{\alpha} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+
\frac{1}{\alpha}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$.
Consider now the case $2\le p<q$. Let us reduce it to the case $(p,q)=(1,1)$. According to Lemma \[s1s3\] there are two orbits of the action of $S^1$ on $S^3$ of lengths $2\pi\frac{\alpha}{p}$ and $2\pi\frac{\alpha}{q}$. Consider the corresponding orbits $O_p$ and $O_q$ of the action of $\mathbb{C}^*$ on $C_K^4$. It follows from Lemma \[s1s3\] that the triple $(C_K^4,O_p,O_q)$ is homeomorphic to a triple $(\mathbb{C}^2,\mathbb{C}^1,\mathbb{C}^1)$ composed of a complex plane and two transversal lines. Thus there exists a unique ramified covering of the cone $C_K^4$ by another polyhedral K[ä]{}hler cone $\widetilde{C_K^4}$ of degree $pq$ that has ramifications of orders $p$ over $O_p$ and $q$ over $O_q$. It is easy to see that constructed cone $\widetilde{C_K^4}$ has type $(1,1)$ and that there are holomorphic coordinates $(x,y)$ on $\widetilde{C_K^4}$ such that the Euler field equals $\frac{1}{\alpha}x \frac{\partial}{\partial
x}+ \frac{1}{\alpha}y\frac{\partial}{\partial y}$. The holomorphic coordinates on $C_K^4$ will then be $z=x^p,w=y^q$ and the Euler field is $e=\frac{p}{\alpha} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+
\frac{q}{\alpha}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$.
$\square$
The coordinates $z$ and $w$ constructed above are called [*linear coordinates*]{} of a $PK$ cone. A $PK$ cone is called [*rational of type $(p,q,\alpha)$*]{} ($p,q\in \mathbb{N}$) if its Euler field is equal to $e=\frac{p}{\alpha} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+
\frac{q}{\alpha}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$ in the linear coordinates. The number $\alpha$ is called the [*conical angle*]{} of the cone. A cone is called [*irrational of type $(\alpha_1,\alpha_2)$*]{}, $\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}\in \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Q}$, if its Euler field is equal to $e=\frac{1}{\alpha_1} z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+
\frac{1}{\alpha_2}w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}$.
For a rational polyhedral K[ä]{}hler cone of type $(p,q,\alpha)$, all the orbits of the Euler field action are given by the equations $\frac {z^p}{w^q}=\mathrm{const}$. These curves are flat with respect to the $PK$ metric and all of them (except the curves $z=0,w=0$) have the same conical angle at $0$ equal to $2\pi \alpha$.
The proof of the following corollary is contained the second part of the proof of Theorem \[th:linearization\].
\[coverpq\] For a polyhedral K[ä]{}hler cone $C_1$ of type $(p,q,\alpha)$ there exists a unique cone $C_2$ of type $(1,1,\alpha)$ with a holomorphic map $f:C_2\to C_1$ of degree $pq$ that is a local isometry outside the branching locus.
Finally, we describe all $PK$ cones whose singular locus is a union of two lines in linear coordinates.
\[2linecone\] Let $C_K^4$ be a $PK$ cone with linear coordinates $(z,w)$ and such that the singular locus is the union of the lines $z=0$ and $w=0$. Then either $C_K^4$ is isometric to the product of two $2$-cones, or the metric on $C_K^4$ is the pull-back of a constant metric on $\mathbb C^2$ under the map $\mathbb C^2\to \mathbb C^2$, $(z,w)\to (z^n,w^m)$.
[**Proof.**]{} We can suppose that $C_K^4$ is a rational cone, irrational case is treated by Proposition \[ircone\]. Using Corollary \[coverpq\] we can assume that the cone is of type $(1,1)$, i.e., conical angles at the lines $z=0$ and $w=0$ are both equal $2\pi\alpha$. Now, consider two cases.
1\) $\alpha$ is not integer. Fix a non-singular point $x$ in $C_K^4$ and consider the holonomy of the metric based at $x$. This holonomy is generated by two commuting operators $H_z$ and $H_w$ corresponding to two pathes around lines $z=0$ and $w=0$ (both operators are non-trivial, since $\alpha$ is non integer). Then on $C_K^4\setminus\{zw=0\}$ we have two holomorphic rank $1$ sub-bundle of $TC_K^4$ invariant under parallel translation and orthogonal at every point.
Consider the enveloping map $E: C_K^4\to \mathbb C^2$. Invariant sub-bundles are mapped by $E$ to constant orthogonal sub-bundles of $T\mathbb C^2$. It is clear that the ramification locus is composed of two lines through $E(0)$, tangent to one of the constant fields. These lines are orthogonal and so $C_K^4$ is a direct product of two $2$-cones.
2\) $\alpha$ is integer. Then it is clear that the enveloping map from $C_K^4$ is in fact not multivalued but is a finite degree ramified covering of $\mathbb C^2$ with ramifications of degree $\alpha$ at the lines $z=0$, $w=0$. Moreover, the images of both lines are lines in $\mathbb C^2$ containing $E(0)$, so we are in the second case described by the lemma.
$\square$
$4_{\mathbb R}$ $PK$ cones and $2_{\mathbb R}$ spheres with conical points (proof of Theorems \[Thm:Spq\], \[Thm:alpha=\])
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We start the proof of Theorem \[Thm:Spq\] and associate to every $PK$ cone of type $(1,1,\alpha)$ a metric on a sphere $S^2$, of curvature 4, having conical singularities.
Denote by $S^3$ the unit sphere around the origin of the cone and by $S^2$ the quotient of $S^3$ by the action of $e_s$. Locally, outside the singularities, the action of $e_s$ on $S^3$ is isometric to the action of the Euler field on the standard (nonsingular) unit sphere. Therefore, locally, outside the singularities, the quotient metric on $S^2$ is isometric to the quotient of the standard (nonsingular) sphere by $e_s$. The last quotient obviously has curvature 4. The singularities of the cone correspond to the conical points on $S^2$.
$\square$
\[lm:hopf\] Let $\Omega$ be a contractible domain on the standard sphere $S^2$ of curvature 4 (without conical points). Then, for any positive $l$, there is a unique metric $g$ of curvature 1 on $\Omega\times S^1$ with the following properties: All the fibers of the product are geodesics of length $l$; there is an action of $S^1$ on $\Omega\times S^1$ by isometries; the quotient metric on $\Omega$ coincides with the original one.
[**Proof.**]{} Let $\phi:S^3\to S^2$ be the standard Hopf fibration. The universal cover of $\phi^{-1}(\Omega)$ is diffeomorphic to $\Omega \times \mathbb{R}$, and $\mathbb{R}$ acts on it by parallel translations. The quotient of $\Omega\times \mathbb{R}$ by the subgroup $l\mathbb{Z}$ of $\mathbb{R}$ induces on $\Omega\times S^1$ the metric we are looking for.
$\square$
There is a natural connection $\nabla$ on the fibration $\Omega\times
\mathbb{R} \to \Omega$. Its horizontal distribution is given by the planes orthogonal to the fibers. The following lemma is standard and we omit the proof.
\[holgamma\] The holonomy of the connection $\nabla$ along a closed curve $\gamma\subset \Omega$ is equal to the parallel translation by $2{\rm area}(\gamma)$, where ${\rm
area}(\gamma)$ is the algebraic area bounded by $\gamma$.
Now, let $S^2$ be a sphere with a metric of curvature $4$ with conical points. We will associate to it a $PK$ cone of type $(1,1)$.
First, we reconstruct the sphere $S^3$ of curvature $1$ (with singularities) that fibers over $S^2$. Cut $S^2$ by geodesic segments with vertices at all the conical points, in order to obtain a contractible polygon $P$. This polygon can be immersed into the standard sphere of curvature 4 by the enveloping map. Consider the fibration over $P$ from Lemma \[lm:hopf\] with length $l=2{\rm area}(P)$. The holonomy of the fibration along the border of $P$ is trivial (by Lemma \[holgamma\] the circle $S^1$ makes one full rotation). This means that the original gluing of $P$, which gives $S^2$ with conical points, can be lifted to a gluing of $P\times
S^1$. To construct such a gluing, we choose a horizontal section $s$ of $P\times S^1$ over the boundary of $P$ and identify $(x,s(x))$ with $(y,s(y))$ whenever $x$ and $y$ are identified by the gluing of $P$. Since the border circle turns once, we obtain the sphere $S^3$.
Now, consider the space $\mathbb{R}_+\times S^3$ with the metric $(dr)^2+r(ds)^2$, where $r\in \mathbb{R}_+$ and $(ds)^2$ is the metric constructed on $S^3$. This space is a $PK$-cone of type $(1,1)$.
$\square$
[**The general case.**]{} The $2$-sphere with conical and marked points associated to the $PK$ cone is given by the metric quotient of the unit sphere in the $PK$ cone by the action of the field $e_s$. The marked points correspond to the multiple orbits.
Let $S^2$ be a sphere of curvature 4 with conical points two of which, $x$ and $y$, are marked. Let us construct for every $1<p<q$ the corresponding $(p,q)$-cone. Take first the $(1,1)$-cone $C$ associated to the sphere $S^2$ constructed above. Denote by $l_x$ and $l_y$ the preimages of $x,y\subset C$ under the projection to $S^2$. Consider the ramified covering of degree $pq$ over $C$ with the branchings of orders $p$ over $l_x$ and of $q$ over $l_y$. This is the $(p,q)$-cone we are looking for.
$\square$
[**Proof of Theorem \[Thm:alpha=\].**]{}
Consider the case of $PK$ cones of type $(1,1,\alpha)$. Let $S^2$ be the quotient sphere associated to the cone. It has $n$ conical points of angles $2\pi\beta_1,...,2\pi\beta_n$ and its area is given by the Gauss-Bonnet formula: $$\mathrm{area}(S^2)=\frac{1}{4}(4\pi+\sum_i 2\pi(\beta-1))$$
From Lemma \[holgamma\] $2\pi\alpha=2\mathrm{area}(S^2)$. This proves the theorem for $(1,1,\alpha)$ singularities. Singularities of other types are treated in a same way using Corollary \[coverpq\].
$\square$
$PK$ metrics on singular piecewise linear spaces
------------------------------------------------
Definition \[gooddefinition\] can be naturally extended to the following class of $PL$ manifolds with singularities. We call a $4$-dimensional topological space with a simplicial decomposition a [*$PL$-manifold up to codimension $2$*]{} if every $3$-simplex is a border of exactly two $4$-simplices. A compatible choice of flat metric on the $4$-simplices of such a space defines a polyhedral metric on it. Obtained metric has singularities only in codimension $2$ and we can repeat Definition \[gooddefinition\] saying that this metric is a $PK$-metric if its holonomy is contained in $U(2)$ and all singular $2$-faces of conical angles $2\pi k$ ($k\ge 2$) have holomorphic directions. A space with such a structure is called a [*singular $PK$ manifold.*]{}
Most of the theorems of this section about (nonsingular) $4_{\mathbb R}$ dimensional $PK$ manifolds can be restated for singular $4_{\mathbb R}$ dimensional $PK$ manifolds. In fact, these singular manifolds are complex surfaces with isolated singularities. We will formulate the result but will skip the proof.
\[singsurf\] For a singular $PK$ manifold of dimension $4_{\mathbb R}$ its complex structure defined outside singularities can be extended to the whole singular manifold. Obtained complex space is a complex surface with isolated singularities. In the neighborhood of every isolated singularity there is a natural holomorphic field $e=e_r+ie_s$ such that the (real) field $e_r$ acts by dilatation of the metric and the (real) field $e_s$ generates an action of $S^1$ by isometries.
Polyhedral K[ä]{}hler metrics via logarithmic connections
=========================================================
For every $PK$ surface $S$ the $PK$ metric induces on $T(S\setminus sing)$ a holomorphic, flat, unitary, torsion free connection. This connection extends to a meromorphic connection on $TS$ with first order poles at the singular locus. In this section we will write explicit formulas of $PK$ connections in [*linear coordinates*]{} $z,w$ on $2$-dimensional $PK $cones. We also give a condition for a unitary connection on the tangent bundle of a complex surface that implies that the corresponding metric on $S$ is $PK$.
Definitions and first results
-----------------------------
Let $M$ be a complex manifold and $D$ be a normal crossing divisor. A meromorphic $1$-form $\omega$ on $M$ is called [*logarithmic*]{} with respect to $D$ if it is holomorphic on $M\setminus D$, and in a neighborhood of any point of $D$ it can be represented as $$\omega=\sum_{i=1}^k f_i\frac{dz_i}{z_i}+\sum_{i=k+1}^n f_i dz_i,$$ where $f_i$ are holomorphic functions, $z_i$ are local coordinates, and $D$ is given locally by the equation
$$D=\cup_{i=1}^k\{z_i=0\}$$ The sheaf of logarithmic 1-forms is denoted by $\Omega^1(\mathrm{log}D)$.
Let $E$ be a holomorphic vector bundle over $M$. A meromorphic connection $\nabla$ on $E$ is called [*logarithmic*]{} (with respect to $D$) if it can be written in local coordinates as
$$\nabla=d+A,$$ where $A$ is a $\Omega^1(\mathrm{log}D)$-valued section of $\mathrm{Aut}(E)$.
For any irreducible component $D_i$ of $D$ we denote by $\mathrm{Res}_{D_i}(\nabla)$ the [*residue*]{} of $\nabla$ with respect to $D_i$, it is a holomorphic section of $\mathrm{Aut}(E)|_{D_i}$.
The following proposition is standard, the proof can be found in Section $4$ of the article of Malgrange in \[Bo\].
\[malgrange\] Let $\nabla$ be a flat logarithmic connection on $(M,E^k)$ with poles at a normal crossing divisor $D$. Suppose that all eigenvalues of $Res_{D}(\nabla)$ are contained in $]-1,0]$.
For a point $x\in D$ chose local coordinates $z_i$ such that $D_i$ is given by $\cup_i\{z_i=0\}$. Then there exists a neighborhood $U$ of $x$ and holomorphic sections $s_1,...,s_k$ of $E^k$ giving a trivialisation of $E^k$ over $U$ and such that in this trivialisation $\nabla$ is given by:
$$\nabla=d+\sum_i B_i\frac{dz_i}{z_i}$$
where $B_i$ are constant matrix-valued functions.
For a complex manifold $M$ and a meromorphic connection $\nabla$ on $TM$ its [*torsion*]{} is a meromorphic section of $\Omega^2(M)\otimes TM$. It is given by the following formula: $$T(u,v)=\nabla_u(v)-\nabla_v(u),$$ $u,v\in TM$. A connection with zero torsion is called [*torsion-free*]{}.
Now, we will restrict our attention to connections on the tangent bundles of surfaces. Let $S$ be a surface with a weighted arrangement of curves $(\Gamma_{j},\beta_{j})$ and let $x_1,...,x_k$ be the points of the arrangement of multiplicity at least $3$.
We say that a meromorphic connection $\nabla$ on $TS$ is [*partially adapted*]{} to $(\Gamma_j, \beta_j)$ if $\nabla$ is logarithmic on $S\setminus\{x_1,...,x_k\}$, $\mathrm{Res}_{\Gamma_{j}}\nabla$ has eigenvalues $(\beta_{j}-1,0)$ at $\Gamma_{j}$, and $T\Gamma_{j}\cong
\mathrm{ker}(\mathrm {Res}_{\Gamma_{j}}\nabla)$.
\[half1\] On every $PK$ surface $S$ the $PK$ connection is partially adapted to the weighted arrangement of $S$.
[**Proof.**]{} The statement of the lemma clearly holds at smooth points of the singular locus of $S$, because they can be embedded isometrically in the product of $\mathbb C$ with a $2$-cone. At the same time the connection on the $2$-cone is logarithmic and has residue $\beta-1$ where $2\pi \beta$ is the cone angle.
From the description of double points of the singular locus (Lemma \[2linecone\]) it follows that the connection is also logarithmic at these points. Indeed, the connection on the direct product of two $2$-cones is logarithmic, and for the second type of cones that are branched covers of $\mathbb C^2$ one can change the metric without changing the connection to make these cones also direct products.
$\square$
\[holtorsion\] Let $S$ be a complex surface with a weighted arrangement $(\Gamma_j,\beta_j)$, $\beta_j\ne 1$. Suppose that $\nabla$ is partially adapted, then its torsion is holomorphic.
[**Proof**]{}. By Hartogs theorem it is sufficient to show that the torsion of $\nabla$ is holomorphic outside of the multiple points of the arrangement $\Gamma_{j}$. So it is sufficient to consider the case of a connection on $\mathbb{C}^2$ with a pole at the line $z=0$. Chose locally the second coordinate $w$ in such a way that the residue of $\nabla$ is given by the formula
$$Res_{z=0}\nabla=
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\beta-1&0\\
0&0\\
\end {array}\right)$$ In this case the connection $\nabla$ can be written as
$$\label{lineconnection}
\nabla=d+\frac{dz}{z}Res_{z=0}\nabla+A,$$
where $A$ is holomorphic. This proves the lemma.
$\square$
\[torsionfree\] Suppose that $\Gamma(\Omega_S^1)=0$, i.e., there is no nontrivial holomorphic 1-forms on $S$; then the torsion of $\nabla$ is identically zero.
[**Proof.**]{} The torsion of a meromorphic connection on the tangent bundle to a complex manifold $X$ is a section of $\Omega_X^2\otimes TX$. In the case when $X$ is a two-dimensional complex surface $S$ the bundle $\Omega_S^2\otimes TS$ is two-dimensional and isomorphic to the bundle of holomorphic $1$-forms $\Omega_S^1$. Thus on $S$ any holomorphic section of $\Omega_S^2\otimes TS$ is identically zero.
$\square$
Formulas for connections on $(1,1)$ cones
-----------------------------------------
In the following proposition we describe the connection of a $PK$ metric in a neighborhood of a singular point of type $(1,1)$.
\[conformulas\] Consider a $PK$-cone of type $(1,1,\alpha)$ with linear coordinates $z,w$. For $i=1,...,n$ let $l_1=0,...,l_n=0$ be the equations of the singular lines of the cone. Let $2\pi\beta_i$ be the conical angle at $l_i=0$. Then the following holds:
1\) The residue $\mathrm{Res}_{l_i}\nabla$ of $\nabla$ at $l_i$ is given by a constant matrix-valued function $A_i$ and the connection $\nabla$ is given by the following formula:
$$\label{constantres}
\nabla=d+A=d+\sum_{i=1}^n A_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}$$
2\) The residues $A_i$ satisfy the following equations:
$$\label{3equations}
a)\; \sum_{i=1}^n A_i=(\alpha-1)\mathrm{Id};\quad b)\;
\mathrm{tr}(A_i)=\beta_i-1;\quad
c)\; \{l_i=0\}=\mathrm{ker}(A_i)$$
[**Proof of \[conformulas\].1)** ]{}
We prove first that the residue of $\nabla$ is constant at any $l_i$. Indeed, the action of $\mathbb C^*$ on the cone changes the $PK$ metric by a scalar factor, thus this action preserves the connection $\nabla$. For any $c\in \mathbb C^*$ we have: $$A(cz,cw)=A(z,w),$$ i.e., the residue ${\rm Res}_{l_i}(\nabla)$ is constant on $l_i$.
Consider now the following connection $\nabla'$ on $\mathbb
{C}^2$: $$\nabla'=d+\sum_i{\rm Res}_{l_i}(\nabla)\cdot \frac{dl_i}{l_i}$$
We claim that $\nabla'=\nabla$. Indeed, the matrix-valued $1$-form $\nabla'-\nabla$ has no poles at the lines $l_i$ thus it is holomorphic on $\mathbb{C}^2$. Moreover this 1-form is preserved by the $\mathbb {C}^*$ action, i.e., it is identically zero.
$\square$
Next lemma is essential for the proof of \[conformulas\].2).
For the Euler field $e$ of the $PK$-cone we have: $$\nabla_e e=e$$
[**Proof.**]{} It is sufficient to check this identity for the flat $\mathbb{C}^2$.
$\square$
[**Proof of \[conformulas\].2).**]{}
Let us prove (\[3equations\]a). The Euler field $e$ on the $PK$-cone is given by
$$e=\frac{1}{\alpha}\left(z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}
+w\frac{\partial}{\partial w}\right)$$ We have
$$\nabla_e e=de(e)+\sum_{i=1}^n A_i(e)\frac{dl_i}{l_i}(e)=
\frac{1}{\alpha}e+\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{\alpha}A_i(e)=e$$
This means that $\sum_{i=1}^n A_i(e)=(\alpha-1)e$, i.e., $A=(\alpha-1)\mathrm{Id}$.
Statements (\[3equations\]b,c) are proven in Lemma \[half1\].
$\square$
For $i=1,...,n$ let $l_i$ be lines in $\mathbb C^2$ containing the origin and let $\beta_i$ be complex numbers. Then the space of matrixes $A_i$ satisfying (\[3equations\]) has dimension $(n-3)$. Next formula gives the unique connection for $n=3$ with poles at the lines $z=0$, $w=0$, $z+w=0$
$$\nabla=d+\left(\begin{array}{cc}
(\beta_1-1)\frac{dz}{z}+\frac{\beta_2+\beta_3-\beta_1-1}{2}\frac{dz+dw}{z+w}
&\frac{\beta_2+\beta_3-\beta_1-1}{2}(\frac{dz+dw}{z+w}-\frac{dw}{w})\\
\frac{\beta_1+\beta_3-\beta_2-1}{2}(-\frac{dz}{z}+\frac{dz+dw}{z+w})&
\frac{\beta_1+\beta_3-\beta_2-1}{2}\frac{dz+dw}{z+w}+(\beta_2-1)\frac{dw}{w}\\
\end {array}\right)$$
\[complexaffine\] Any connection $\nabla$ on $\mathbb C^2$ given by formula (\[constantres\]) with the matrices $A_i$ satisfying (\[3equations\]) is flat, torsion-free and thus it defines a singular affine structure on $\mathbb C^2$.
[**Proof.**]{} Since $dA=0$ the curvature of $\nabla$ is given by $$dA+A\wedge A=A\wedge A$$ We need to prove that $A\wedge A=0$. Let us write $$A_i=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
a_i&b_i\\
c_i&d_i\\
\end {array}\right),$$ then the equation $A\wedge A=0$ is equivalent to the following system
$$\sum_i c_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\wedge \sum_i b_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}=0$$
$$\sum_i b_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\wedge \sum_i (a_i- d_i)\frac{dl_i}{l_i}=0$$
$$\sum_i c_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\wedge \sum_i (a_i- d_i)\frac{dl_i}{l_i}=0$$
For the first equation we have $$\sum_i c_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\wedge \sum_i b_i\frac{dl_i}{l_i}=
d\mathrm{log} (\prod_i l_i^{c_i})\wedge d\mathrm{log}(\prod_i l_i^{b_i})$$
Function $f_1=\mathrm{log}(\prod_i l_i^{c_i})$ and $f_2=\mathrm{log}(\prod_i l_i^{b_i})$ are homogeneous of degree $0$ on $\mathbb{C}^2$ (since $\sum c_i=\sum b_i=0$ by (\[3equations\]a)). It follows that $df_1\wedge df_2=0$. The next two equations are completely analogous.
Now we show that $A$ is torsion free. We have
$$T\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial z},\frac{\partial}{\partial w}\right)=
\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial
z}\right) A_i\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial w}\right)-
\frac{dl_i}{l_i}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial w}\right)
A_i\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\right)=$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{l_i}A_i\left(\frac{\partial l_i}{\partial z}
\frac{\partial }{\partial w}-\frac{\partial l_i}{\partial w}
\frac{\partial }{\partial z}\right)=0$$
The last equality holds by (\[3equations\]c).
$\square$
[**Connection on the blow-up.**]{}
\[conblow\] Let $\nabla$ be a connection on $\mathbb C^2$ given by formula (\[constantres\]) with the matrices $A_i$ satisfying (\[3equations\]). Consider the blow-up of $\mathbb C^2$ at $(0,0)$, take the pull-back of the tangent bundle of $\mathbb C^2$ to the blow-up, and consider on it the pull-back of $\nabla$. The obtained connection is logarithmic and its residue at the exceptional curve is $(\alpha-1)Id$.
[**Proof.**]{} Let us introduce coordinates $u,v$ on the blow-up $u=\frac{z}{w}, v=w$. The exceptional line is given by $v=0$. Let $l_i=s_iz+t_iw=s_iuv+t_iv$. Then the pull-back connection is given by $$\nabla=d+\sum_{i=1}^n A_i d{\rm (log} l_i)=
d+\sum_{i=1}^n A_i (d{\rm (log} v)+d{\rm (log}(s_iu+t_i))=$$ $$d+(\alpha-1){\rm Id}\cdot d({\rm log}v)
+\sum_{i=1}^n A_i\cdot d{\rm log}(s_iu+t_i))$$ Here we use Equation (\[3equations\]a). This proves the lemma.
$\square$
Unitary flat logarithmic torsion free connection $\mapsto$ $PK$ metric
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In this subsection we consider only arrangements $(S,\Gamma_j)$ that satisfy the property that $\Gamma_j$ are smooth and transversal. We give a sufficient criterion for such an arrangement to be the singular locus of a $PK$ metric in terms of an [*adapted*]{} connection. Singularities of such an arrangement are normal crossings or singularities of type $(1,1)$.
\[parabconditions\] Let $\nabla$ be a connection partially adapted to $(S,\Gamma_j,\beta_j)$. Suppose that $\Gamma_j$ are smooth and intersect transversally. Consider the blow up $\pi:\widetilde S\to S$ at all points $x_i$ of multiplicity at least $3$. $\nabla$ is [*adapted*]{} to $(\Gamma_j,\beta_j)$ if the pull-back connection $\pi^*\nabla$ on $\pi^*TS$ is logarithmic on $\widetilde S$ and its residue at the exceptional curve over $x_i$ equals $\sum_{j}d_{ij}(\beta_i-1)Id$.
\[connectionPK\] Let $(S,\Gamma_j, \beta_j, x_i)$ be a weighted arrangements of curves and $\nabla$ be an adapted flat, unitary, torsion free connection on $TS$. Suppose that $0<\beta_j<1$ and for every $x_i$, $\sum_i d_{ij}(\beta_i-1)>-2$. Then the unitary metric on $TS$ corresponding to $\nabla$ is a $PK$ metric.
[**Proof.**]{} Note first that since $\nabla$ is unitary, flat, and torsion-free, the metric $g$ corresponding to $\nabla$ is flat on the complement to the curves $\Gamma_j$. So to prove that $g$ extends to a $PK$ metric on $S$ it will be sufficient to show the following $3$ properties of $g$.
a\) For any smooth point of $\Gamma$ there is a neighborhood $U$ with $U\setminus \Gamma$ isometric to the direct product of a flat punctured $2$-cone and a flat disc.
b\) For any double point of $\Gamma$ there is a neighborhood $U$ with $U\setminus \Gamma$ isometric to the direct product of two flat punctured $2$-cones.
c\) For any point of $\Gamma$ of multiplicity greater than $2$ a neighborhood of the point is isometric to a $2_{\mathbb C}$-dimensional $PK$ cone.
The proofs of a) and b) are similar so we will prove only b) and c).
[**Proof of b).**]{} Introduce coordinates $z,w$ in a neighborhood of the double point such that $\Gamma$ is locally given by $zw=0$. According to Proposition \[malgrange\] there exist two sections $s_1$ and $s_2$ such that the connection $\nabla$ is given by $$\nabla =d+B_1\frac{dz}{z}+B_2\frac{dw}{w}$$ where $B_1$ and $B_2$ are constant and commuting. Making an additional linear change in $s_1,s_2$ we can suppose that $B_1(s_1)=0$ and $B_2(s_2)=0$. It is clear then that the sub-bundles of the tangent bundle generated by $s_1$ and $s_2$ are invariant under $\nabla$ and moreover the vector field $s_1$ is tangent to the line $w=0$ and $s_2$ is tangent to the line $z=0$. Since $\nabla$ is torsion free the integral curves of $s_1$ and $s_2$ are flat cones. So we can deduce that locally the neighborhood of $(0,0)$ is the direct product of two $2$-cones.
$\square$
[**Proof of c).**]{} Let $0$ be a point of $\Gamma$ of multiplicity greater than $2$. From a) it follows that the metric $g$ extends continuously to any punctured curve $\Gamma_j\setminus 0$, thus we obtain a polyhedral Kähler metric on $U\setminus0$. It is necessary to show further that $g$ extends to $0$ and the resulting metric on $U$ is a polyhedral Kähler metric. To show this it is sufficient to construct the action of $\mathbb C^*$ on $U\setminus 0$ by dilatations, i.e., $\mathbb R^*$ must act by dilatations of the metric and $S^1$ must act by isometries.
[**Construction of the $\mathbb C^*$ action on $U\setminus 0$.**]{}
Consider the holonomy representation of the group $\pi_1(U\setminus \Gamma, x)$ in the group $U(2,\mathbb C)\ltimes \mathbb C^2$ of unitary affine transformations of $\mathbb C^2$. $$\mathrm{Hol}_{\nabla}:\pi_1(U\setminus \Gamma, x)
\to U(2,\mathbb C)\ltimes \mathbb C^2$$ The linear part of this representation is denoted by $\mathrm {hol}_{\nabla}$. Denote by $c$ the generator of the center of $\pi_1(U\setminus \Gamma, x)$ corresponding to an anti-clockwise path around $0$ in a complex line through $0$. From condition 2) of Definition \[parabconditions\] it follows that $$\mathrm {hol}_\nabla(c)=\mathrm {exp}(2\pi i\sum_j(\beta_j-1))\mathrm {Id}$$
We see that the affine transformation ${\mathrm Hol}_\nabla(c)$ is a complex rotation of $\mathbb C^2$ around some point $y$ on angle $2\pi\sum_j(\beta_j-1)$.
Since any element $h$ of $\pi_1(U\setminus \Gamma, x)$ commutes with $c$, the affine transformation $\mathrm {Hol}_\nabla(h)$ fixes the point $y$. It follows that the representation $\mathrm
{Hol}_\nabla(c)\pi_1(U\setminus \Gamma, x)$ commutes with the affine action of $\mathbb C^*$ on $\mathbb C^2$, given by complex dilatations that fixe $y$. We deduce that the action of $\mathbb C^*$ can be pulled back to the action of $\mathbb C^*$ on $U\setminus 0$.
$\square$
The condition $\beta_j<1$ in this theorem can be replaced by the condition $\beta_j\notin \mathbb Z_+$ but we don’t prove this here.
Topological relations on the singular locus.
============================================
In this section we prove Theorem \[Thm:chernclasses\]. We use a formula of Ohtsuki \[Oh\].
[**Theorem \[Oh\].**]{} Let $S$ be a surface and $E$ be a holomorphic vector bundle on it. Let $D=\bigcup_j D_j$ be a normal crossings divisor on $S$ and $\nabla$ a logarithmic connection on $E$ with poles at $D$. Denote by $y_k$ the double points of $D$ and by $D_{k_1}$ and $D_{k_2}$ the irreducible components of $D$ containing $y_k$. We also use the notation ${\rm R}_j={\rm Res}_{D_j}(\nabla)$. The following identities hold:
$$c_1(E)=-\sum_j {\rm Tr}({\rm R}_j)D_j$$ $$c_2(E)=\sum_k ({\rm Det}({\rm R}_{k1}+{\rm R}_{k2})
-{\rm Det}({\rm R}_{k1})-{\rm Det}({\rm R}_{k2}))(y_k)
+
\sum_j {\rm Det}({\rm R}_j) D_j\cdot D_j$$
Note that the value of the first summand is defined only at $y_k$ but the function ${\rm Det(R}_j)$ is defined on the whole divisor $D_j$ and is constant on it.
Proof of \[Thm:chernclasses\](2) and \[Thm:chernclasses\](3) in the case of $(1,1)$ singularities
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider a $PK$ surface $S$ with the weighted arrangement $(\Gamma_j,\beta_j; x_i,\alpha_i)$ such that all multiple points of the arrangement are either normal crossings or singularities of type $(1,1)$. Let $S_b$ be the blow-up of $S$ at the points $x_i$ and let $\pi: S_b\to S$ be the blow-down. Denote by $P_i$ the exceptional curve over $x_i$ and denote by $\widetilde
\Gamma_j$ the proper transform of $\Gamma_j$. Consider the pull-back $\widetilde\nabla$ of the $PK$ connection $\nabla$ to $\pi^*(TS)$. By Lemma \[conblow\] $\widetilde\nabla$ is logarithmic with poles at the divisor $\bigcup_i P_i\bigcup_j\widetilde\Gamma_j$ (further we call this divisor by $D$), and the residue of $\widetilde\nabla$ at $P_i$ is equal to $(\alpha_i-1)Id$.
\[pulback\] $$\pi^*\sum_j (\beta_j-1) \Gamma_j=
\sum_i 2(\alpha_i-1)P_i+\sum_j(\beta_j-1)\widetilde\Gamma_j$$
[**Proof.**]{} $$\pi^*(\sum_j (\beta_j-1)\Gamma_j)=
\sum_j(\beta_j-1)(\widetilde\Gamma_j +\sum_i d_{ij}P_i)=$$ $$=\sum_j(\beta_j-1)\widetilde\Gamma_j+\sum_i 2(\alpha_i-1)P_i$$ the second equality follows from \[Thm:alpha=\].
$\square$
[**Proof of \[Thm:chernclasses\](2)**]{}
Using first Theorem \[Oh\] and then Lemma \[pulback\] we obtain:
$$c_1(\pi^*K_S)=-c_1(\pi^*TS)=\sum_i {\rm Tr(Res}_{P_i}\widetilde\nabla)
\cdot P_i
+\sum_j {\rm Tr(Res}_{\widetilde\Gamma_j}\widetilde\nabla)
\cdot \widetilde\Gamma_j=$$
$$=\sum_i 2(\alpha_i-1)P_i+\sum_j(\beta_j-1)\widetilde\Gamma_j=
\pi^*\sum_j(\beta_j-1) \Gamma_j$$
It follows that $K_S=\sum_j(\beta_j-1) \Gamma_j$.
$\square$
[**Proof of \[Thm:chernclasses\](3)**]{}
According to Theorem \[Oh\] the number $c_2(\pi^*TS)$ can be expressed as the sum of the contributions of the irreducible components of $D$ and the sum over their pairwise intersections. The first sum is the following: $$\sum_i \mathrm{Det}(\mathrm{Res}_{P_i}\widetilde\nabla)P_i\cdot P_i+
\sum_j \mathrm{Det}(\mathrm{Res}_{\widetilde \Gamma_j}\widetilde\nabla)
\widetilde\Gamma_j\cdot\widetilde\Gamma_j=-\sum_i(\alpha_i-1)^2$$ Here we use $\mathrm{Det}(\mathrm{Res}_{\widetilde \Gamma_j}\widetilde\nabla)=0$.
The sum of the contributions of the double points on $P_i$ is the following: $$(\alpha_i-1)\sum_j d_{ij}(\beta_j-1)
=2(\alpha_i-1)^2$$
Any intersection of $\widetilde \Gamma_j$ with $\widetilde
\Gamma_k$ contributes $(\beta_j-1)(\beta_k-1)$ thus the sum over all intersections of curves $\widetilde \Gamma_j$ is given by $$\sum_{j>k}B_{jk}(\beta_j-1)(\beta_k-1)$$ Finally, taking the sum of all contribution we obtain
$$c_2(TS)=c_2(\pi^*(TS))=\sum_i(\alpha_i-1)^2+\sum_{j>k}
B_{jk}(\beta_j-1)(\beta_k-1)$$ $\square$
Proof of \[Thm:chernclasses\](1)
--------------------------------
\[lemma:\[Gj:Gk\]\] For any $j\ne k$ we have
$$\label{GjGk}
\Gamma_j\cdot \Gamma_k=
B_{jk}+\sum_i (p_iq_i)(d_{ij}d_{ik})$$
[**Proof.**]{} This formula expresses the intersection index of $\Gamma_j$ and $\Gamma_k$ as a sum of local multiplicities of their intersections. By definition $B_{jk}$ is the number of transversal intersections of $\Gamma_j$ and $\Gamma_k$. The local multiplicity of the intersection of $\Gamma_j$ and $\Gamma_k$ at $x_i$ equals $(p_iq_i)(d_{ij}d_{ik})$. Indeed, the local multiplicity of the intersection of the curves $cz^q=w^p$ and $z^q=w^p$ at $0$ equals $pq$ if $1\ne c\ne 0$; the local multiplicities of intersection of $z^q=w^p$ with lines $z=0$ and $w=0$ are equal to $p$ and $q$ correspondingly. Now everything follows from the definition of $d_j$ and $d_k$.
$\square$
[**Proof of \[Thm:chernclasses\](1)**]{}
The Gauss-Bonnet theorem for flat surfaces with conical singularities implies
$$2g(\Gamma_j)-2=\sum_{k\ne j}B_{jk}(\beta_k-1)+
\sum_i(d_{ij}\alpha_i-\tilde d_{ij})$$
This formula expresses the Euler characteristics of $\Gamma_j$ as the sum of the defects of the conical points of $\Gamma_j$. The first sum contains the contribution of the normal crossings of $\Gamma_j$ and the second sum contains the contribution of the singularities $x_i$.
Now, using Theorem \[Thm:alpha=\], we obtain the following expression for the right term of the previous equation:
$$\sum_{k\ne j}B_{jk}(\beta_k-1)+
\sum_i\left(d_{ij}\frac{p_i q_i}{2}\sum_k d_{ik}(\beta_k-1)
+d_{ij}\frac{p_i+q_i}{2}-\tilde d_{ij}\right)=$$
using Lemma \[lemma:\[Gj:Gk\]\] $$=\sum_{k\ne j}B_{jk}\frac{\beta_k-1}{2}+
\sum_k\Gamma_j\cdot \Gamma_k\frac{\beta_k-1}{2}-
\Gamma_j\cdot\Gamma_j\frac{\beta_j-1}{2}+$$
$$+\sum_i\frac{p_i q_i}{2}(d_{ij})^2(\beta_j-1)+
\sum_i\left(d_{ij}\frac{p_i+q_i}{2}-\tilde d_{ij}\right)=$$
using relation \[Thm:chernclasses\](2) $$=\sum_k B_{jk}\frac{\beta_k-1}{2}+\frac{K_S\cdot\Gamma_j}{2}+
\sum_i\left(d_{ij}\frac{p_i+q_i}{2}-\tilde d_{ij}\right)$$
This proves \[Thm:chernclasses\](1).
$\square$
Line arrangements in $\mathbb{C}P^2$
------------------------------------
In this subsection we consider weighted arrangements of lines on $\mathbb{C}P^2$ that satisfy Equations \[Thm:chernclasses\](1)-(3). Let $(L_1,\beta_1;...;L_n,\beta_n)$ be such an arrangement. Any singularity of this arrangement is either a normal crossing or a $(1,1)$-type singularity. So Equations \[Thm:chernclasses\](1) and \[Thm:chernclasses\](2) simplify and take the form:
$$\sum_k B_{jk}(\beta_k-1)=-1,\;\;\;\;\sum_k(\beta_k-1)=-3$$
Here by definition the number $B_{ij}$ $(i\ne j)$ is equal to $1$ if the point of the intersection of $L_i$ and $L_j$ is a double point (i.e., other lines of the arrangement don’t contain it) and $B_{ij}=0$ otherwise. The number $(B_{jj}+1)$ is equal to the number of points of multiplicity at least $3$ on the line $L_j$.
[**Symmetric case.**]{} Consider the most symmetric case when all angles $\beta_j$ are equal. Then we have
$$\beta_j-1=-\frac{3}{n},\;\; \sum_k B_{jk}=\frac{n}{3}$$
The number $\sum_k B_{jk}+1$ is equal to the number of all intersections of $L_j$ with other lines. Thus we obtain the following condition:
[*The arrangement contains $3m$ lines and any line intersects the other lines exactly at $m+1$ points.*]{}
One can show that such arrangements satisfy as well Equation \[Thm:chernclasses\](3). These arrangements were considered first by Hirzebruch in \[Hir\] and we recall several examples.
[*1) 3 lines.*]{} A generic configuration of $3$ lines on $\mathbb{C}P^2$.
[*2) 6 lines.*]{} The configuration of $6$ lines $x-y=0$, $x\pm z=0$, $y\pm z=0$ $z=0$.
[*3) $3(m+1)$ lines, $m>1$.*]{} Consider the ramified covering of $\mathbb{C}P^2$ by itself given by $(x:y:z)\to(x^m:y^m:z^m)$. The preimage of the configuration of $6$ lines is an arrangement of $3(m+1)$ lines and any line has $m+2$ intersections with the other lines.
[*4) Hesse arrangement.*]{} Consider a nonsingular cubic in $\mathbb{C}P^2$. It has $9$ points of inflections. There exist $12$ lines in $\mathbb{C}P^2$ that intersect the cubic exactly at the points of inflections.
[**Criterium.**]{} There exists one geometric condition that often permits to decide quickly that a given line arrangement is not $PK$.
\[doublecrit\] Every $PK$ arrangement $(L_j,\beta_j)$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ satisfy the following criterium. For every $L_j$ the exist a point in $\mathbb CP^2$ that belongs to all lines $L_k$ such that $L_k\cap L_j$ is a double point of the arrangement.
[**Proof.**]{} Consider the sub-bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2|_{L_j}$ of directions orthogonal to $L_j$ with respect to $PK$ metric (these directions are eigenvectors of the residue map $\rm{Res}_{L_j}\nabla$). This sub-bundle is holomorphic outside of the multiple points of the arrangement and it extends holomorphically on the whole line $L_j$. Indeed, at double points the $PK$ metric is a direct product of two $1$-cones, and at every point of multiplicity more than $2$ the eigenvectors of $\rm{Res}_{L_j}\nabla$ are constant in the local linear coordinates (Proposition \[conformulas\]). The defined sub-bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2|_{L_j}$ is transversal to $L_j$ and so it has degree $1$. It follows that there exists a point $y_j$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ such that this sub-bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2|_{L_j}$ is given by directions tangent to the lines through $y_j$. This proves the proposition.
$\square$
Limit $PK$ arrangements with a cusp
-----------------------------------
An arrangement of lines on $\mathbb RP^2$ is called [*simplicial*]{} if it subdivides $\mathbb RP^2$ in triangles.
Simplicial arrangements often occur as solutions to some extreme (combinatorial) problems \[G2\] and so it is not very surprising that some of simplicial arrangements are $PK$ ($PK$ arrangement give extremum for the Bogomolov-Gieseker Inequality (\[cp2gieseker\]) Theorem \[th:existence\]). For the moment $3$ infinite family of simplicial arrangements and $91$ sporadic examples are know; $90$ sporadic examples are listed in \[G1\] and one additional in \[G2\]. It will be interesting to find out what sporadic arrangements are $PK$, the criterium from Proposition \[doublecrit\] rules out some of them.
For three infinite series of arrangements from \[G1\] there exists a system of weights such that all [*equalities*]{} of Theorems \[Thm:chernclasses\] and \[th:existence\] are satisfied. The first series is a union of a pencil of $n$ lines and a line that does not belong to the pencil. For this series the weight of the line should be $0$ and the weights of the lines from the pencil can be arbitrary (but we impose of course $\sum_j(\beta_j-1)=-3$). Second series is called $R_{2k}$ and consists of the lines formed by extending the sides of a regular $k$-gon together with an additional $k$ lines formed be the axes of symmetry of the $k$-gon. We associate to the axes weight $\frac{k-1}{k}$ and to the sides weight $\frac{2k-1}{2k}$ (the choice of wights is unique for $k>3$). The third series $R_{4k+1}$ is the union of $R_{4k}$ with the line at infinity of weight $1$. We see that for the point of the highest multiplicity of these arrangements the inequality $\sum_{ij}d_{ij}(\beta_j-1)>-2$ does not hold strictly but instead of this the equality holds. So these arrangements are not $PK$. We conjecture instead that there is a different geometric structure related to these arrangements.
A weighted arrangement $(L_j,\beta_j)$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ is called a [*limit $PK$ arrangement with a cusp*]{} if it satisfies all conditions of Theorem \[th:existence\] apart from one inequality. We impose that there is a multiple point $x$ of the arrangement called the [*cusp*]{} such that $\sum_{j|x\in L_j} (\beta_j-1)=-2$.
Arrangements $R_{2k}$ satisfy this definition, $R_{4k+1}$ and a pencil of lines plus a line formally don’t satisfy (because the first arrangement has a line of weight $1$ and the second has a line of weight $0$). But the following should hold for all $3$ series.
\[pencil\] For every limit $PK$ arrangement with a cusp there exists a flat torsion-free connection on $\mathbb CP^2$ with holonomy in the upper triangular subgroup of $SL(2,\mathbb C)$ and with the poles of residues $(0,\beta_j-1)$ at the lines $L_j$. This connection should preserve the sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$ tangent to the pencil of lines through the cusp of the arrangement.
For a pencil of lines plus a line the connection on $\mathbb CP^2$ should be given by a formula from Proposition \[complexaffine\]. Here $\mathbb CP^2$ is the completion of $\mathbb C^2$, the line at infinity belongs to the arrangement and has weight $\beta=0$.
If Conjecture \[pencil\] holds it should be possible to deduce that limit $PK$ arrangements with a cusp satisfy the following restrictive properties.
[**Conjectural properties.**]{} For every multiple point $y$ of the arrangement the line $[x,y]$ belongs to the arrangement (here $x$ is the cusp). If $mult(y)\ge3$ then sum of the defects of the lines $L_j$ that contain $y$ but don’t contain $x$ equals the defect of the line $[x,y]$.
It will be very interesting to classify all weighted arrangements that satisfy the two conjectural properties (they hold for $R_{2k}$ and $R_{4k+1}$). This will help to classify [*non-rigid*]{} $PK$ arrangements for which the admissible collection of weights $\beta_j$ have moduli. Of course the weights $\beta_j$ belong to a certain open polyhedron and the weights corresponding to limit $PK$ arrangements can appear on the boundary of the polyhedron.
Parabolic bundles and Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence
======================================================
The goal of this section is to recall the notion of parabolic bundles and to formulate in a handy way several results from \[M2\] that we use in the proof of Theorem \[th:existence\]. In particular we formulate the parabolic version of Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence from \[M2\]. A systematic and thorough treatment of parabolic bundles can be found in \[IS\]. Parabolic Chern character is also defined in \[IS\] (but we will not use it here). We adopt partially the notations of these articles.
We will discuss only parabolic bundles on complex surfaces. A good reference for usual two-dimensional bundles on surfaces is \[F\].
Let $X$ be a complex surface and $D$ be a simple normal crossing divisor with the irreducible decomposition $D=\bigcup_{i\in S} D_i$. A [*parabolic bundle*]{} $E_*$ on $X$ is given by a bundle $E$ with a collection of increasing filtrations by sub-sheaves $F_a^i$, indexed by $i\in S$, $a\in ]0,1]$ and satisfying the following properties:
1\) Every sub-sheaf $F_a^i$ is locally free.
2\) $ E(-D_i)\subset F^i_a(S)$ for any $a\in ]0,1]$.
3\) The sets $\{a| F_a^i(E)/F^i_{<a}(E)\ne 0\}$ are finite for any $i$ in $S$.
A parabolic bundle $E_*$ on a complex surface $X$ with a simple normal crossing divisor $D$ induces natural filtrations on the restrictions $E|_{D_i}$ by their vector sub-bundles. These filtrations are indexed by $a\in ]0,1]$ and defined by the formula: $$F_a^i/E(-D)\subset E|_{D_i}$$ Parabolic structure can be reconstructed from these filtrations (see \[IS\]).
\[parch1\]
The [*parabolic first Chern class*]{} of a parabolic bundle $E_*$ is given by the following formula:
$${\rm par\textrm{-}ch_1}(E_*)={\rm ch_1}(E)-
\sum_i\sum_{a_i}a_i\cdot {\rm rank}_{D_i}(F^i_{a_i}/ F^i_{<a_i})\cdot [D_i]$$
Let $L$ be an ample line bundle on $S$. Then the [*parabolic degree*]{} of $E_*$ with respect to $L$ is given by $$pardeg_L(E_*)=\int_S {\rm par\textrm{-}ch_1}(E_*) \cdot c_1(L)$$
[**The parabolic second Chern characteristic number**]{}.
Let $(S,D)$ be a complex surface with a normal crossing divisor $D=\cup_{i=1}^n D_i$. Let $E_{*}$ be a parabolic vector bundle. We will recall now the formula for the parabolic second character of $E_{*}$ given by Mochizuki in \[M2\]. His formula works in much larger generality but we need only the case of surfaces.
The parabolic second Chern character of $E_*$ is given as a sum of $c_2(E)$, the contributions of the divisors $D_i$, and the points of their intersections $D_i\cap D_j$.
To define the contributions of the points in $D_i\cap D_j$, for every $a_i,a_j\in ]0,1]$, consider the skyscraper sheaf $Gr^F_{(a_i,a_j)}$
$$F^i_{a_i}\cap F^j_{a_j}/
((F^i_{a_i}\cap F^j_{<a_j})\cup (F^i_{<a_i}\cap F^j_{a_j}))$$
This sheaf is supported at the points in $D_i\cap D_j$, and it is non-trivial only for finite set of $(a_i,a_j)$. Consider the following sum
$$\nu(i,j)=\sum_{p\in D_i\cap D_j; a_i, a_j}a_i\cdot a_j
\cdot {\rm rank_p} (Gr^F_{(a_i,a_j)})$$
\[parch2def\] The second parabolic Chern character of the parabolic bundle $E_*$ is given by the formula $$par\textrm{-}ch_2(E_*)=ch_2(E)-
\sum_{i;a_i}a_i\cdot c_1(F^i_{a_i}/F^i_{<a_i})+$$ $$+\sum_{i;a_i}\frac{1}{2}a_i^2{\rm rank}_{D_i}(F^i_{a_i}/F^i_{<a_i})
\cdot [D_i\cdot D_i]+\sum_{i,j}\nu(i,j)$$
[**Stable bundles and Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality.**]{}
Here again we consider a surface $S$ with a parabolic bundle $E_*$. For any sub-sheaf $V$ of $E$ the filtration on $E$ induces a structure of a parabolic sheaf on $V$. Recall that a sub-sheaf $V$ of $E$ is called [*saturated*]{} is the quotient $E/V$ is torsion-free.
Let $L$ be an ample bundle on $S$. The bundle $E_*$ is called [*$\mu_L$-stable*]{} (or [*slope stable*]{}) if for every saturated sub-sheaf $V$ of $E$ it holds
$$pardeg_L V_* <pardeg_L E_*$$
When $E$ is a rank $2$ bundle in order to check its stability it is sufficient to consider only [*saturated locally free rank one sub-sheaves*]{} of $E$. Following \[F\] we call such sub-sheaves of $E$ [*sub-line bundles*]{}.
The following inequality (called [*Bogomolov-Gieseker*]{} inequality) is proven in \[M2\] and was also proven in different terms in \[Li\].
\[bginequality\] Let $E_*$ be a $\mu_L$-stable parabolic bundle on the surface $S$. Then following inequality holds: $${\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_{2}(E_*)-
\frac{1}{2}{\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_1^2(E_*)\le 0$$
Let $(X,D,E_*)$ be a complex surface with a simple normal crossing divisor $D$ with a parabolic bundle $E_*$, and let $\nabla$ be a unitary flat logarithmic connection on $E$ with poles at $D$. We say that $\nabla$ is [*compatible*]{} with $E_*$ if the following conditions hold.
1\) For every $i$ and $a\in ]0,1]$ the sub-bundle $F_a^i/E(-D_i)$ of $E|_{D_i}$ is preserved by the residue map $Res_{D_i}(\nabla)$.
2\) The eigenvalue of $Res_{D_i}(\nabla)$ on the bundle $F_a^i/F_{<a}^i$ equals $-a$ (recall that this bundle is non-trivial only for finite number of values of $a$).
3\) The connection induced by $\nabla$ on $F_a^i(X\setminus D_i)$ extends to a logarithmic connection on $F_a^i(X)$.
Finally we can formulate the version of parabolic Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence that we use later.
\[takuro\] Let $(X,D,E_*)$ be a complex surface with a simple normal crossing divisor $D$ and a parabolic bundle $E_*$. Suppose that $E_*$ is $\mu_L$-stable, has zero parabolic degree, and has zero second parabolic Chern number. Then there exists a flat unitary logarithmic connection on $E$ compatible with $E_*$.
This statement can be deduced from \[M2\] (see also \[Li\]) and \[M1\]. We explain this very briefly skipping all details. In \[M2\] Mochizuki works with parabolic Higgs bundles and proves Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence for stable Higgs bundles with vanishing first and second Chern characters. The case that we are interested in is the particular case when the Higgs field is zero. So by \[M2\] there exists a unitary flat metric on $E(X\setminus D)$ adapted to the parabolic structure. It follows further from \[M1\] that the flat unitary connection corresponding to the flat metric constructed on $E(X\setminus D)$ extends to a logarithmic connection on $E$ and moreover this connection is compatible with the parabolic structure $E_*$.
Theorem of existence
====================
In this section we prove Theorem \[th:existence\].
A description of the proof
--------------------------
Let $(L_j,\beta_j)$ be a weighted arrangement of lines in $\mathbb{C}P^2$. Recall that by $x_i$ we denote the multiple points of the arrangement of multiplicity at least $3$; $d_{ij}=1$ if $x_i$ belongs to $L_j$ and $d_{ij}=0$ otherwise. Suppose that $(L_j,\beta_j)$ satisfies the three conditions of Theorem \[th:existence\].
To prove Theorem \[th:existence\] we make the blow up $\pi :S \to \mathbb CP^2$ of $\mathbb CP^2$ at the points $x_i$ and consider on $S$ the pull back $E$ of the tangent bundle $E=\pi^*T\mathbb {C}P^2$. Using the weights $\beta_j$ we define a parabolic structure on $E$. We get a parabolic bundle $E_*$ with zero parabolic first Chern class and prove that $E_*$ is stable for a certain polarisation. Inequality (\[cp2gieseker\]) is just the Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality (Theorem \[bginequality\]).
In the case when the second parabolic Chern class of $E_*$ equals $0$ using Theorem \[takuro\] we prove that there exists a logarithmic flat unitary connection on $T\mathbb CP^2$ and combining this with results of Section 4 we conclude the proof of Theorem \[th:existence\].
The parabolic bundle on the blown up $\mathbb CP^2$
---------------------------------------------------
Let $(L_j,\beta_j)$ be an arrangement of lines in $\mathbb{C}P^2$, satisfying the inequalities (\[stabin\]). In this subsection we construct the parabolic structure on a $2$-bundle on the blowup of $\mathbb CP^2$ and we calculate its parabolic Chern character. Let us fix some notations.
[**Notations**]{}.
Denote by $S$ the blow up of $\mathbb CP^2$ at the points $x_1,...,x_k$ of multiplicity at least $3$ and let $\pi: S\to \mathbb{C}P^2$ be the corresponding projection map;
Denote by $E$ the pullback bundle $\pi^*T\mathbb{C}P^2$;
For $j\in \{1,...,n\}$ denote by $D_j$ the proper transform of $L_j$;
For $j\in \{n+1,...,n+k\}$ denote by $D_j$ the exceptional line $P_{j-n}$;
$$D_j=P_{j-n},\;\; \pi(P_{j-n})=x_{j-n}$$
[**The parabolic structure on the bundle $(S,E)$.**]{}
For any $j\in\{1,...,n\}$ the restriction of $E$ to $D_j$ contains a distinguished rank $1$ sub-bundle – the pullback $\pi^*TL_j$ of the tangent bundle of $L_j$. Denote by $E_j$ the subsheaf of $E$, generated by the sections that are contained in $\pi^*TL_j$, being restricted to $D_j$. This subsheaf fits into the following exact sequence:
$$0\to E_j\to E\to E|_{D_j}/\pi^*TL_j\to 0$$
Now for $1\le j \le n$ we put $$F^j_a=E^j, \;\;{\rm for}\;\; 0<a<1-\beta_j, \;\;\;
F^j_a=E \;\;{\rm for}\;\; 1-\beta_j\le a\le 1$$ And for $0<i\le k$ $$F^{n+i}_a=E(-D_{n+i}), \;\;{\rm for}\;\; 0<a<1-\alpha_i, \;\;\;
F^{n+i}_a=E \;\;{\rm for}\;\; 1-\alpha_i\le a\le 1$$
\[parchcalc\] The first and second parabolic Chern characters of $(E_*)$ are given by the following formulas: $${\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_1(E_*)=ch_1(E)-\sum_{j=1}^n(1-\beta_j)D_j-
2\sum_{i=1}^k (1-\alpha_i)D_{n+i}$$
$$\label{parch2cp2}
{\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_2(E_*)=\frac{3}{2}
-\sum_{j=1}^n (1-\beta_j)-\sum_{j=1}^n\frac{1}{2}(1-\beta_j)^2B_{jj}
+\sum_{i=1}^k (1-\alpha_i)^2$$
[**Proof.**]{} The calculation of $\rm par\textrm{-}ch_1(E_*)$ is a straight-forward application of Definition \[parch1\]. For $j\in \{1,...,n\}$ the quotient sheaf $F^j_a/F^j_{<a}$ has rank $1$ for $a=1-\beta_j$ and is trivial otherwise. For $j\in \{n+1,...,n+k\}$ the sheaf $F^j_a/F^j_{<a}$ has rank $2$ for $a=1-\alpha_j$ and is trivial otherwise.
In order to calculate $\rm par\textrm{-}ch_2(E_*)$ we need the following lemma.
1\) For $1\le j_1<j_2\le n$ we have $\nu(j_1,j_2)=0$.
2\) For $1<i_1<i_2\le k$ we have $\nu(n+i_1,n+i_2)=0$.
3\) For $1\le j\le n$, $1\le i\le k$ we have $\nu(j,n+i)=d_{ij}(1-\beta_j)(1-\alpha_j)$.
[**Proof.**]{}
1\) The sheaf $Gr^F_{(a_{j_1},a_{j_2})}$ can be nontrivial only when $a_{j_1}=1-\beta_{j_1}$ and $a_{j_2}=1-\beta_{j_2}$. But in this case by construction the sheaf is equal to $E/(E_{j_1}\cup E_{j_2})$. At the same time $E_{j_1}\cup E_{j_2}=E$.
2\) $Gr^F_{(a_{n+i_1},a_{n+i_2})}$ is trivial because $D_{n+i_1}\cap D_{n+i_2}=\varnothing$.
3\) The sheaf $Gr^F_{(a_{j},a_{n+i})}$ is nontrivial only when $a_{j}=1-\beta_j$, $a_{n+i}=1-\alpha_i$. In this case it is equal to $E/(E(-D_{n+i})\cup E_j)$. It is supported at the points $D_{j}\cap D_{n+i}$ and has rank $1$ at each point.
$\square$
[**Calculation of $\rm par\textrm{-}ch_2(E_*)$.**]{} According to Definition (\[parch2def\]) we have:
$$par\textrm{-}ch_2(E_*)=\frac{3}{2}-
\sum_{j=1}^n (1-\beta_j)$$ $$-\sum_{j=1}^n\frac{1}{2}(1-\beta_j)^2B_{jj}-
\sum_{i=1}^k (1-\alpha_i)^2
+\sum_{i=1,j=1}^{k,n}d_{ij}(1-\beta_j)(1-\alpha_i)$$
Here we use the following facts:
1\) For $j\in (1,...,n)$ we have $c_1(E/E_j)=1$, $[D_j\cdot D_j]=-B_{jj}$.
2\) For $i\in (1,...,k)$ we have $E|D_{n+i}$ is trivial, $[D_{n+i}\cdot D_{n+i}]=-1$.
Finally, by Theorem \[Thm:alpha=\] (use $p=q=1$) the last term is equal to $2\sum_{i=1}^k (1-\alpha_i)^2$. This concludes the proof.
$\square$
Theorem on stability and additional lemmas
------------------------------------------
In this subsection we prove that the parabolic bundle $E_*$ constructed above is stable with respect to an appropriate polarisation on $S$. Take $N\in \mathbb Z_+$, $$N>max\{\frac{k}{min_i \alpha_i},\;
\frac{2k}{min_{j,k}(\beta_j+\beta_k)},\;
\frac{3k}{1-max_j \beta_j}\}$$ and define the following line bundle:
$$L_N=O_S(-\sum_{i=1}^k P_i)\otimes p^*O(N)$$ Note, that $L_N$ is ample since $N>k$.
\[stabth\] The parabolic bundle $(E_*,S)$ is $\mu_{L_N}$-stable.
Let us first give a plan of the proof. The parabolic degree of $E_*$ is zero, so we need to show that the parabolic degree of any saturated sub-line bundle $V$ of $E$ is negative. Every line bundle on $S$ is of the form $O_S(\sum_i d_iP_i)\otimes \pi^*O(d)$. For sub-line bundles of $E$ we have $d\le 1$ and the constant $N$ is chosen in such a way that the degree of $V\subset E$ can be positive only for $d\ge 0$. Since the parabolic weights are in $[0,1]$, $pardeg V_*\le deg V$, so we only need to consider line sub-bundles of $E$ with $d=1,\;0$. In the case $d=1$ the pushdown $\pi_*V$ is contained in a sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$ generated by sections tangent to a pencil of lines. We prove that $pardeg (V_*)$ is negative comparing the degree of $V$ with the parabolic contribution, coming from the behavior of the pencil of lines with respect to the line arrangement on $\mathbb CP^2$.
Let us introduce some notations. For a point $x$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ denote by $L_x$ the sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$ generated by the sections tangent to the pencil of lines containing $x$. For a section $v$ of $T\mathbb CP^2$ with isolated zeros denote by $L_v$ the sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$ generated by $v$. The following lemma is standard, we omit the proof.
Sub-line bundles of $T\mathbb CP^2$ have degree at most $1$. Every saturated sub-line bundle of $
T\mathbb CP^2$ of degree $1$ equals $L_x$ for some $x$. Every saturated sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$ of degree $0$ equals $L_v$ for some $v$.
\[deg10\] Let $L=O_S(\sum_{i=1}^k d_iP_i)\otimes\pi^*(O(d))$ be a saturated sub-line bundle of $E$. Then $d\le 1$. Suppose $d=1$ or $d=0$.
1\) If $d=1$ then $\pi_*(V)\subset L_x$ for some $x\in \mathbb CP^2$.
2\) If $d=0$ then $\pi_*(V)\subset L_v$ for some vector filed $v$ with isolated zeros.
3\) $\pi_*(V)$ coincides with $L_x$ or $L_v$ outside of the set $\{x_1,...,x_k\}$.
[**Proof.**]{} Consider $(\pi_*V)^{\vee\vee}$, this is saturated sub-line bundle of $T\mathbb CP^2$. Its degree equals to $d$, so $d\le 1$. In the case $d=1$ by the previous lemma $(\pi_*V)^{\vee\vee}$ is $L_x$ of some $x$, if $d=0$ it is $L_v$ for some $v$. The sheaf $\pi_*V$ is a subsheaf of $(\pi_*V)^{\vee\vee}$ and it differs from it only at points $x_i$ for which $d_i<0$.
$\square$
\[subbundles\]
Let $V=O_S(\sum_{i=1}^k d_iP_i)\otimes\pi^*(O(d))$ be a sub-line bundle of $E$. Then for any $i$ we have $d_i\le 2-d$. In particular we have an upper bound on degree of $V$:
$$\label{degin}
{\rm deg}_{L_N}(V)=c_1(V)\cdot c_1(L_N)\le (2-d)k+Nd$$
[**Proof.**]{} Let us prove that for any $i$ it holds $d_i\le 2-d$. For any line $P$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ we have $T\mathbb CP^2_{|P}\simeq O(1)\oplus O(2)$. Take a line $P$ that contains a point $x_i$ and doesn’t contain any point $x_j$ for $j\ne i$. Let $P'$ be the proper transform of $P$. Then again $E_{| P'}\simeq O(1)\oplus O(2)$. Since $\mathrm{Hom_{O_S}}(V,E)\ne 0$, there is a line $P$ through $x_i$ for which $\mathrm{Hom_{O_{P'}}}(V_{|P'},E_{|P'})\ne 0$. At the same time, by definition of $V$ $$V_{|P'}=O(d\pi^*H+d_iP_i)_{|P'}=O(d+d_i)$$ it follows $$(d+d_i)\le 2$$ Now we conclude the proof $${\rm deg_{L_N}}(O_S(\sum_i d_iP_i+d\pi^*H))=
\sum_id_i+Nd\le (2-d)k+Nd$$ $\square$
\[sumpencil\] Let $(L_j,\beta_j)$ be a weighted line arrangement satisfying the conditions (\[stabin\]) of Theorem \[th:existence\].
1\) For any point $x$ in $\mathbb CP^2$ the following inequality holds:
$$\label{stab}
\sum_{j|x\notin L_j}(1-\beta_j) > 1+\frac{2k}{N}$$
2\) A holomorphic vector field $v$ with isolated zeros can be tangent to at most $3$ lines of the arrangement.
[**Proof.**]{} 1) It is clear that the sum attains its maximum for a point that is a multiple point of the arrangement. Since $\sum_j(1-\beta_j)=3$, for a double point of the arrangement the sum in (\[stab\]) is at least $1+min_{j,k}(\beta_j+\beta_k)$. For a point $x_i$ of multiplicity more than $2$ we have: $$\sum_{j|x\notin L_j}(1-\beta_j)=3-\sum_j d_{ij}(1-\beta_j)=
3-2(1-\alpha_i) \ge 1+2\mathrm{min}_i(\alpha_i)$$
2\) This is standard, the field $v$ must have $3$ zeros and it must be tangent to the lines that join these zeros.
$\square$
Proof of stability
------------------
[**Proof of Theorem \[stabth\].**]{}
By \[deg10\] and \[subbundles\] any sub-line bundle $V$ of $E$ is of the form $O_S(\sum_{i=1}^k d_iP_i)\otimes\pi^*(O(d))$ with $d\le 1$, and $deg_{L_N}(V)<0$ if $d<0$. Since in our situation the parabolic weights are contained in $]0,1]$, we have an inequality $pardeg_{L_N}(V_*)\le deg_{L_N} (V)$. So it is necessary only to consider the cases when $d=1$ and $d=0$.
To calculate the parabolic first Chern class $parch_1(V_*)$ we need to find for every $j\in \{1,...,n+k\}$ and $a\in ]0,1]$ the rank of the following quotient sheaf supported on $D_j$: $$(V\cap F^j_{a_j})/(V\cap F^j_{<a_j})$$
Consider the case $d=1$. Then according to Lemma \[deg10\] there exists $x\in \mathbb CP^2$ such that $\pi_*(V)\subset L_x$.
In the case $j\in\{1,...,n\}$ there are two possibilities.
If $x\in L_j$ then $V\subset F^j_{a_j}$ for all $0<a_j\le 1$ so the corresponding quotient sheaf is always trivial. If $x\notin L_j$ then the quotient sheaf is non-trivial for $a_i=1-\beta_j$ and has rank one (this follows from \[deg10\]).
In the case $j\in\{n+1,...,n+k\}$ the quotient sheaf is nontrivial for $a_j=1-\alpha_{j-n}$ and has rank $1$. This gives us the formula:
$$parch_1(V_*)=ch_1(V)-\sum_{j|x\notin L_j}(1-\beta_j)D_j-
\sum_{i=1}^n(1-\alpha_i)D_{n+i}$$
We have the following sequence of inequalities $$pardeg_{L_N}(V_*)=deg_{L_N}(V)-
c_1(L_N)\cdot (\sum_{j|x\notin L_j}(1-\beta_j)D_j+
\sum_{i=1}^n(1-\alpha_i)D_{n+i})\le$$ using Inequality (\[degin\]) and the equality $2(1-\alpha_i)= D_{n+i}\cdot \sum_j(1-\beta_j)D_j $ $$\le N+k-N\sum_{j|x\notin L_j}(1-\beta_j)+\sum_i 2(1-\alpha_i)-\sum_i(1-\alpha_i)<$$ using $0<\alpha_i<1$ and Inequality (\[stab\]) $$< N+2k-N(1+\frac{2k}{N})=0$$
The case $d=0$ is analogous. By Lemma \[deg10\] there exists a vector-field $v$ with isolated zeros such that $\pi_*(V)\subset L_v$. The arrangement contains more than $3$ lines so there is at least one line that is not tangent to $v$. Making the same calculation in the case $d=1$ and using $N>\frac{3k}{1-max_j \beta_j}$ we get
$$pardeg_{L_N}(V_*)\le 2k-N(1-max_j(\beta_j))+\sum_i(1-\alpha_j)<0$$
$\square$
[**Example.**]{} Consider the arrangement of $6$ lines that pass through $4$ generic points $x_1,...,x_4$. For every $\beta\in]0,1[$ we can associate the weight $\beta$ to the lines $x_1x_i$ and $1-\beta$ to the lines $x_ix_j$, $i,j>1$. We get a stable parabolic bundle on $\mathbb CP^2$ blown up at $x_1,...,x_4$. When $\beta$ tends to $0$ the parabolic degree of the sheaf corresponding to $L_{x_1}$ tends to zero and as a result for $\beta=0$ we don’t get a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb CP^2$.
Proof of Theorem \[th:existence\] and an application of the Bogomolov Gieseker inequality
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[**Proof of Theorem \[th:existence\].**]{} Let us sum up what we have done. We started with a weighted arrangement $(L_j,\beta_j)$ that satisfies the conditions of Theorem \[th:existence\]. We introduced a structure of parabolic bundle $E_*$ on the pullback $E$ of the tangent bundle $T\mathbb CP^2$ to the blow up of $\mathbb CP^2$ at the multiple points of the arrangement. We proved that $E_*$ is stable (Theorem \[stabth\]) and has zero first parabolic Chern class (Proposition \[parchcalc\]). So inequality (\[cp2gieseker\]) follows from the calculation of second parabolic Chern number (Proposition \[parchcalc\]) and Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality (Theorem \[bginequality\]). This proves the first part of the theorem.
If the equality is attained in (\[cp2gieseker\]) then the second parabolic Chern number of $E_*$ vanishes, so we can use parabolic Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence (Theorem \[takuro\]). Namely, there exists a unitary flat logarithmic connection on $E$ compatible with the parabolic structure of $E_*$. By Corollary \[torsionfree\] the constructed connection is torsion-free. Finally, using Theorem \[connectionPK\] we conclude that the corresponding flat connection on $T\mathbb CP^2$ defines a $PK$ metric.
$\square$
Let us give one corollary of Theorem \[th:existence\]. For a multiple point $x_i$ of a line arrangement $L_1,...,L_N$ denote by $\mu_i$ the number of lines through $x_i$.
Suppose that the multiplicity of every point of the arrangement $(L_1,...,L_N)$ is less than $\frac{2N}{3}$. Then the following inequality holds: $$\sum_i\mu_i\ge \frac{N^2}{3}+N$$ In the case of equality $N$ is divisible by $3$, every line intersects over lines in $\frac{N}{3}+1$ points and there exists a $PK$ metric on $\mathbb CP^2$ with conical angles $2\pi\frac{N-3}{N}$ at the lines $L_j$.
Note that for a generic arrangement the total multiplicity is $N(N-1)$ while for the most degenerate arrangement it is $N$.
[**Proof.**]{} We have the following equality:
$$N^2=(\sum_j L_j)^2=N+\sum_{j\ne k}L_j\cdot L_k=N+\sum_i \mu_i(\mu_i-1)$$
$$\label{sumofmu}
\sum_i\mu_i^2=N^2-N+\sum_i\mu_i$$
Associate to each $L_j$ weight $\beta_j=\frac{N-3}{N}$, then the arrangement satisfies the conditions of Theorem \[stabth\]. Since all weights are equal we can treat double points of the arrangements as points of type $(1,1)$ and we get the following equalities:
$$1-\alpha_i=\frac{3\mu_i}{2N},\;\;\, 1-\beta_j=\frac{3}{N},\;\;\;
\sum_jB_{jj}=\sum_i\mu_i-N$$
Applying the Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality to the corresponding stable parabolic bundle $E_*$ and using (\[sumofmu\]) we get:
$$0\ge{\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_2(E_*)=\frac{\sum_i 9\mu_i^2}{4N^2}-
\frac{9\sum_i \mu_i-9N}{2N^2}-\frac{3}{2}=$$
$$\frac{9\sum_i \mu_i^2-18\sum_i \mu_i+18N-6N^2}{4N^2}=
\frac{3N^2+9N-9\sum_i\mu_i}{4N^2}$$
$\square$
This inequality was proven previously in \[La\] using different methods. We finish with the following remark.
For line arrangements that satisfy condition of Theorem \[th:existence\] the system of equations (\[bgderive\]) from Theorem \[Thm:chernclasses\] is a corollary of the Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality.
[**Proof.**]{} Let $(L_j,\beta_j)$ be an arrangement satisfying conditions of \[th:existence\]. For a small deformation $\beta_j'$ of $\beta_j$ the deformed parabolic bundle $E_*'$ (defined in the same way as $E_*$ but using the weights $\beta_j'$ instead $\beta_j$) is stable and satisfies the Bogomolov-Gieseker inequality. The inequality is quadratic in $\beta_j$ and it attains its maxima (zero) for the initial data. So its derivatives in all directions vanish. This produces a system of linear equations on $\beta_j$. We will show that this system is equivalent to the system of equations (\[bgderive\]) from Theorem \[Thm:chernclasses\]. Consider the following derivative: $$\frac{\partial}{\partial \beta_j}{\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_{2}(E_*)-
\frac{\partial}{\partial \beta_j}\frac{1}{2}{\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_1^2(E_*)$$ If we restrict this expression to the plane $\sum_j(\beta_j-1)=-3$, the second term vanishes. The first term is given by Equation (\[parch2cp2\]) $$\frac{\partial}{\partial \beta_j}({\rm par\textrm{-}ch}_2(E_*))=
1+(1-\beta_j)B_{jj}-\sum_id_{ij}(1-\alpha_i)=$$
using $\sum_j(\beta_j-1)=-3$ and $1-\alpha_i=\frac{1}{2}\sum_j{d_{ij}(1-\beta_j)}$ $$1+(1-\beta_j)B_{jj}-\frac{1}{2}(3-\sum_{k\ne j}B_{jk}(1-\beta_j)+(B_{jj}+1)(1-\beta_j)))=$$ $$\frac{1}{2}(1-\sum_kB_{jk}(1-\beta_j))$$ $\square$
Further results, questions, and directions
==========================================
In a subsequent paper we will use Theorem \[th:existence\] to construct several infinite families of aspherical complex surfaces. Some of these families of surfaces admit a metric of type $CAT(0)$. In particular some smooth compact quotients of the complex ball admit a $PK$ metric of type $CAT(0)$, this answers a question of Gromov and Davis.
For every $PK$ surface its $PK$ metric induces a positive $(1,1)$ current on it, so it should not be difficult to prove that every $PK$ surface is a Kähler surface (in principle, one should be able to smoothen a bit the $PK$ metric to get a smooth Kähler metric on the surface). It should be possible to show that non-algebraic $K3$ surfaces don’t admit a $PK$ metric, but we don’t know any obstruction for the existence of $PK$ metrics on algebraic surfaces. At the same time the set of examples of $PK$ surfaces that we have is rather limited.
We hope that Theorem \[pkcomplex\] extends to higher dimensions. Namely, that for a polyhedral Kähler manifold of any dimension the complex structure on the complement of the metric singularities extends to a complex analytic structure on the whole manifold. In particular the metric singularities should not have odd (real) codimension and all singularities of even codimension should have holomorphic directions. Note that in higher dimensions we can obtain complex manifolds with singularities even if we start with a topological polyhedral Kähler manifold (i.e. the link of every point is a topological sphere). Indeed, by Brieskorn the link of the hypersurfaces $z_1^2+z_2^2+z_3^2+z_4^3+z_5^{6k-1}=0$, $1 \le k\le 28$ in $\mathbb C^5$ is $S^7$ with one of $28$ smooth structures. At the same time these hypersurfaces have a $PK$ metric, induced by an obvious degree $24(6k-1)$ ramified cover of the hyperplane $\sum_i z_i=0$.
The notion of polyhedral Kähler manifolds can be generalised in several directions. A [*polyhedral affine structure*]{} on a manifold is a choice of a simplicial decomposition and an affine structure on the complement of codimension $2$ faces that restricts to the standard affine structure on the interior of every face of the top dimension. We say that a manifold $M^{2n}$ is [*polyhedral complex affine*]{} if the holonomy is contained in $GL(n,\mathbb C)$ and singular faces of codimension $2$ at which the holonomy is trivial have holomorphic directions ([*cf*]{} Definition \[gooddefinition\]). For complex dimension $2$ we expect to get a theory similar to the one developed in this article. It should be possible to classify the singularities of complex codimension $2$ but the list will be longer.
If the holonomy of a polyhedral affine manifold is contained in the symplectic group $SP(2n)$ we call the manifold [*polyhedral nearly symplectic*]{}. It is not hard to see that every symplectic manifold admits a polyhedral nearly symplectic structure. But the converse should be wrong already for $4$-manifolds, so we adjust the definition.
Let $M^4$ be a polyhedral nearly symplectic manifold and let $M_1^4(\varepsilon)$ be a neighborhood of the union of all edges. The $PL$ symplectic structure on $M^4\setminus M_1^4(\varepsilon)$ can be smoothen along the faces of codimension $2$ to a genuine symplectic form $w$. Let $c_1$ be the first Chern class of an almost complex structure tamed by $w$ on $M_1^4(\varepsilon)$. We call $M^4$ [*polyhedral symplectic*]{} if for every surface $S$ contained in $M_1^4(2\varepsilon)\setminus M_1^4(\varepsilon)$ we have $c_1\cdot S=0$.
It is not hard to prove that every symplectic $4$-manifold admits a polyhedral symplectic structure. More importantly, we conjecture that every polyhedral symplectic $4$-manifold admits a symplectic smoothing.
Another interesting direction to generalise $PK$ manifolds is to consider complex manifolds with Kähler metric of constant holomorphic curvature and conical singularities at holomorphic geodesic divisors. In the case of negative curvature these manifolds will be generalisations of complex hyperbolic orbifolds, i.e. quotients of the complex ball $B^n$ by a lattice of $SU(n,1)$. These manifolds are presumably are the same as Thurston $(\mathbb CH^n, SU(n,1))$ - cone manifolds \[Th\]. In the case of surfaces it is sufficient to ask that singularities of the metric form a complex curve, at points that are not multiple there is a local isometric action of the group $SU(1,1)\times S^1$, and at the multiple points there is an holomorphic isometric action of $\mathbb R^1$. It should be possible to generalise Theorem \[th:existence\] to this setting using parabolic Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence for parabolic Higgs bundles \[M2\] using an idea from \[S\]. It would be interesting to reprove (or even generalise) results of \[CHL\] using this approach.
Finally we hope to prove the following conjecture.
For every arrangement satisfying conditions of Theorem \[th:existence\] its complement is of the type $K(\pi,1)$.
The converse to this conjecture is wrong because Proposition \[doublecrit\] permits us to check that some simplicial arrangements are not $PK$. At the same time by a theorem of Deligne all (complexified) simplicial arrangement have a complement of the type $K(\pi,1)$.
[99999999999999]{}
Borel et al. Algebraic $D$-modules. Perspectives in Mathematics, 2. (1987) 151–172.
T. F. Banchoff, W. K[ü]{}hnel. The $9$-vertex complex projective plane. [*Math. Intelligencer.*]{} [**5**]{}(1983), 11–22.
J. Cheeger. A vanishing theorem for piecewise constant curvature spaces. [*Curvature and topology of Riemannian manifolds (Katata, 1985), 33–40, Lecture Notes in Math., 1201, Springer, Berlin.*]{} (1986).
W. Couwenberg, G. Heckman, E. Looijenga. Geometric structures on the complement of a projective arrangement. [*Publ. Math. IHES.*]{} [**101**]{} (2005), 69–161.
R. Friedman. Algebraic surfaces and holomorphic vector bundles. Springer (1998).
B. Grünbaum. Arrangements of hyperplanes. Proceedings of the second Louisisana conference on combinatorics graph theory and computings. 41–106 (1971).
B. Grünbaum. Arrangements and spreads. Regional Conf. Series in Mathematics [**10**]{}. Amer. Math Soc., (1972).
F. Hirzebruch. Algebraic surfaces with extreme Chern numbers. [*Russian Math. Surveys*]{} [**40**]{} (1985), 135–145.
Jaya NN Iyer, C. Simpson. The Chern character of a parabolic bundle, and a parabolic Reznikov theorem in the case of finite order at infinity. arXiv: math.AG/06121444
J. Kaneko, S. Tokungaga, M. Yoshida. Complex crystallographic groups 2. [*J. Math. Soc. Japan.*]{} [**34**]{}(1982), 595–605.
A. Langer. Logarithmic orbifold Euler numbers of surfaces with applications. [*Proc. London Math. Soc.*]{} (3) 86 (2003), no. 2, 358–396.
Li Jiayu. Hermitian-Einstein metrics and Chern number inequalities on parabolic stable bundles over Kähler manifolds. [*Communications in analysis and geometry.*]{} [8]{}(2000), 445–475
T. Mochizuki. Asymptotic behaviour of tame harmonic bundles and an application to pure twistor $D$-modules, part 1. [*Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} 185 (2007), no. 869, xii+324 pp
T. Mochizuki. Kobayashi-Hitchin correspondence for tame harmonic bundles and an application. [*Astérisque*]{} No. 309 (2006)
M. Ohtsuki. A residue formula for Chern classes associated with logarithmic connections.[*Tokyo J. Math.*]{} [**5**]{}(1982) 13–21.
S. Orshanskiy. A PL-manifold of nonnegative curvature homeomorphic to $S^2 \times S^2$ is a direct metric product. arXiv:0807.1922 (2008).
C. Simpson. Constructing variations of Hodge structure using Yang-Mills theory and application to uniformization. [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} 1 (1988), 867–918.
W. P. Thurston. Shapes of polyhedra and triangulations of the sphere. [*Geometry and Topology Monographs*]{} [**1**]{}, (1998) 511–549.
M. Troyanov. Les surfaces euclidiennes [à]{} singularit[é]{}s coniques. [*L’Enseign. Math.*]{} [**32**]{}(1986), 79–94.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'General semiclassical expression for quantum fidelity (Loschmidt echo) of arbitrary pure and mixed states is derived. It expresses fidelity as an interference sum of dephasing trajectories weighed by the Wigner function of the initial state, and does not require that the initial state be localized in position or momentum. This general *dephasing representation* is special in that, counterintuitively, all of fidelity decay is due to dephasing and none due to the decay of classical overlaps. Surprising accuracy of the approximation is justified by invoking the shadowing theorem: *twice*–both for physical perturbations and for numerical errors. It is shown how the general expression reduces to the special forms for position and momentum states and for wave packets localized in position or momentum. The superiority of the general over the specialized forms is explained and supported by numerical tests for wave packets, non-local pure states, and for simple and random mixed states. The tests are done in non-universal regimes in mixed phase space where detailed features of fidelity are important. Although semiclassically motivated, present approach is valid for abstract systems with a finite Hilbert basis provided that the discrete Wigner transform is used. This makes the method applicable, via a phase space approach, e. g., to problems of quantum computation.'
author:
- Jiří Vaníček
title: Dephasing representation of quantum fidelity for general pure and mixed states
---
\[sec:intro\]Introduction
=========================
Time evolution in classical mechanics is very sensitive to perturbations of both initial conditions of a trajectory and the Hamiltonian. Because of the unitarity of quantum evolution, on the other hand, the overlap of two different quantum states remains constant in time. However, we can still define sensitivity of quantum evolution to perturbations of the Hamiltonian. This is usually done using the notion of *quantum fidelity* (sometimes called *Loschmidt echo*), defined for pure states as [@peres:1984]$$M\left( t\right) =\left\vert \left\langle \psi\left\vert e^{+iH^{\epsilon
}t/\hbar}e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar}\right\vert \psi\right\rangle \right\vert ^{2}.
\label{fidelity}$$ Here $|\psi\rangle$ is the initial state, $H^{0}$ and $H^{\epsilon}=H^{0}+%
\epsilon V$ are the unperturbed and perturbed Hamiltonians, respectively. In words, fidelity is the overlap at time $t$ of two identical initial states evolved with two slightly different Hamiltonians. Because of its relevance in theories of decoherence and in experimental realizations of quantum computation [@nielsen:2000], quantum [@jalabert:2001; @jacquod:2001; @cerruti:2002; @prosen:2002; @prosen:2002a; @jacquod:2003; @silvestrov:2003; @prosen:2003; @prosen:2005; @bevilaqua:2004; @vanicek:2003a; @vanicek:2004a; @vanicek:2004b; @cucchietti:2002; @cucchietti:2002a; @wisniacki:2002a; @wisniacki:2002; @wang:2002; @prosen:2002b; @jacquod:2002; @emerson:2002; @wisniacki:2003; @cerruti:2003; @cucchietti:2003; @adamov:2003; @kottos:2003; @znidaric:2003; @hiller:2004; @gorin:2004; @jacquod:2004; @iomin:2004; @wang:2004; @wang:2005; @combescure:2005; @weinstein:2005] as well as classical [@benenti:2003; @eckhardt:2003; @benenti:2003a; @garcia:2003; @veble:2004] fidelity has been extensively studied in the last few years. Many universal regimes of fidelity decay have been found in different limiting cases [jalabert:2001,jacquod:2001,cerruti:2002,prosen:2002,prosen:2002a,jacquod:2003, silvestrov:2003,prosen:2003,prosen:2005,bevilaqua:2004]{}. Many of these works used a semiclassical approach, but before Ref. [vanicek:2003a]{} only as a starting point for various approximations, because of difficulties in treating an exponentially growing number of terms in the general semiclassical expression for fidelity, especially in chaotic systems. This problem was solved in Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] by a uniform expression for fidelity which implicitly summed over all these contributions using an integral over initial conditions, similar in spirit to Miller’s initial value representation [@miller:1970; @miller:2001]. This surprisingly simple and accurate expression, although limited to wave packets localized in position, has been successfully applied as a starting point to derive fidelity decay in the deep Lyapunov regime [@wang:2005] and the plateau of fidelity in neutron scattering [@bevilaqua:2004]. Five other known regimes of fidelity can also be simply described by this method [@vanicek:2004b].
In a recent Rapid Communication [@vanicek:2004a], the uniform expression for fidelity was justified by the shadowing theorem of classical mechanics [@hammel:1987; @grebogi:1990] and a more general and, in fact, *always* more accurate expression, valid for arbitrary pure states, was stated. One purpose of the present article is to provide (in Sec. \[sec:derivation\]) a detailed derivation of this general semiclassical expression ([DR\_final]{}) for fidelity of arbitrary pure, i. e., also nonlocal states. Fidelity is expressed as an interference sum of dephasing trajectories weighed by the Wigner function of the initial state. The general derivation provides an alternative and more explicit justification of the validity of this *dephasing representation* (DR). Interestingly, in Sec. \[sec:mixed\] it is shown that the same dephasing representation is valid also for general mixed states. Section \[sec:special\] shows how the general expression reduces to the original form [@vanicek:2003a] and other specialized forms for position and momentum states or Gaussian wave packets localized in position or momentum. In Sec. \[sec:examples\], the general dephasing representation is tested on a non-local state–a coherent superposition of two separated wave packets–and on two two types of mixed state–an incoherent superposition of two wave packets and a completely random state. It is also shown that the general expression is superior to the original form [@vanicek:2003a] even for a single Gaussian wave packet. All numerical calculations are done for a system with a finite Hilbert basis. In such systems, quantum phase space can be rigorously defined if the original Wigner function [@wigner:1932] is replaced by the discrete Wigner transform [@wooters:1987; @leonhardt:1995; @hannay:1980; @rivas:1999; @bouzouina:1996]. Since this discrete transform can be defined in a general abstract Hilbert space with finite basis, the present approach should be applicable to problems of quantum computation if phase space approach is used [@miquel:2002]. In Sec. \[sec:comparison\], DR is compared to other “Wigner” methods. The main conclusions of the paper are summarized in Sec. \[sec:conclusion\].
\[sec:derivation\]Dephasing representation for a general pure state
===================================================================
Fidelity amplitude for a general pure state $|\psi \rangle $ can be written as$$O\left( t\right) =\left\langle \psi \left\vert e^{+iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar
}e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar }\right\vert \psi \right\rangle .
\label{fidelity_amplitude}$$In order to derive the general dephasing representation of fidelity, we could start by replacing the two quantum propagators in Eq. ([fidelity\_amplitude]{}) by the corresponding semiclassical Van Vleck propagators [@vanvleck:1928], as in Refs. [vanicek:2003a,vanicek:2004a]{}. However, we will save some effort if we start directly from the semiclassical initial value representation (IVR) [miller:1970,miller:2001]{} for the two Van Vleck propagators,$$\begin{aligned}
e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar }& \approx \left( 2\pi i\hbar \right) ^{-d/2}\int d\mathbf{%
r}_{0}^{\prime }\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime }\left\vert \partial \mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime }\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime
}\right) /\partial \mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime }\right\vert ^{1/2} \nonumber \\
& \times e^{iS^{0}\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime };t\right) /\hbar }|\mathbf{r%
}_{t}^{\prime }\rangle \langle \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime }|,
\label{ivr_propagator} \\
e^{+iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar }& \approx \left( -2\pi i\hbar \right) ^{-d/2}\int
d\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime \prime }\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime
}\left\vert \partial \mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime \prime }\left( \mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime }\right) /\partial
\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime }\right\vert ^{1/2}
\nonumber \\
& \times e^{-iS^{\epsilon }\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime };t\right)
/\hbar }|\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime \prime }\rangle \langle \mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime \prime }|. \notag\end{aligned}$$Here $\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime }$ and $\mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime }$ are the initial conditions of trajectories of $H^{0}$ and of $H^{\epsilon }$, respectively, and $\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}_{t}^{\prime }$ and $\mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}_{t}^{\prime \prime }$ are the corresponding coordinates and momenta at time $t$. Action $S^{0\prime }$ of a trajectory of the unperturbed Hamiltonian $H^{0}$, is given by$$S^{0\prime }\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime
};t\right) =\int_{0}^{t}d\tau \left[ \mathbf{p}_{\tau }^{\prime }\mathbf{%
\cdot \dot{r}}_{\tau }^{\prime }-H^{0}\left( \mathbf{r}_{\tau }^{\prime },%
\mathbf{p}_{\tau }^{\prime };\tau \right) \right] . \label{action}$$Similar expression holds for the action $S^{\epsilon \prime \prime }\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime };t\right) $ of a trajectory of the perturbed Hamiltonian $H^{\epsilon }$. In the simplified notation above, the square roots of the determinants in Eq. ([ivr\_propagator]{}) also include the appropriate Maslov indices [@gutzwiller:1990]. Using the IVR expressions (\[ivr\_propagator\]), fidelity amplitude ([fidelity\_amplitude]{}) becomes$$\begin{aligned}
O_{\text{IVR}}\left( t\right) &=& \left( 2\pi \hbar \right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r%
}_{0}^{\prime }\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime }\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime
\prime }\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime }\left\vert \frac{\partial
\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime }}{\partial \mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime }}\right\vert
^{1/2} \nonumber \\
& \times & \left\vert \frac{\partial \mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime \prime }}{\partial
\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime \prime }}\right\vert ^{1/2}\langle \psi |\mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime \prime }\rangle \langle \mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime \prime }|\mathbf{%
r}_{t}^{\prime }\rangle \langle \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime }|\psi \rangle
\,e^{i\left( S^{0\prime }-S^{\epsilon \prime \prime }\right) /\hbar }.
\label{ivr_amplitude}\end{aligned}$$
Uniform semiclassical expression for fidelity
---------------------------------------------
If we further expand the $\delta$ function in integral (\[ivr\_amplitude\]) as an integral over a dummy momentum $\mathbf{q}$,$$\langle\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime\prime}|\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}\rangle
=\delta\left( \Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}\right) =\left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int
d\mathbf{q\,}e^{i\mathbf{q\cdot\Delta r}_{t}/\hbar},$$ we obtain a “full” uniform semiclassical expression for fidelity,$$\begin{aligned}
O_{\text{unif}}\left( t\right) & = & \left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-2d}\int d\mathbf{r%
}_{0}^{\prime}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime}\int d\mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime\prime}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\int d\mathbf{q} \nonumber \\
& \times &
\left\vert \frac{\partial\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}}{\partial\mathbf{p}%
_{0}^{\prime}}\right\vert ^{1/2}\left\vert \frac{\partial\mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime\prime}}{\partial\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}}\right\vert
^{1/2}\psi^{\ast}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\right) \psi\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}\right) \notag \\
& \times & \exp\left\{ \frac{i}{\hbar}\left[ S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime%
\prime}+\mathbf{q\cdot\Delta r}_{t}\right] \right\} . \label{uniform}\end{aligned}$$ This integral is, formally, semiclassically exact. In particular, it is free of caustics, unlike, e. g., the Van Vleck propagator. Because it is expressed only in terms of initial conditions (and dummy momentum $\mathbf{q}$), it appears to be ready for numerical evaluations. Unfortunately, this integral is highly oscillatory, and very difficult to compute, especially in many-dimensional or chaotic systems. Therefore we will take an alternative route, using a further approximation, but obtain an integral much easier to tackle numerically.
Dephasing representation
------------------------
First, let us make a change of variables $\left\{ \mathbf{r}^{\prime },%
\mathbf{r}^{\prime \prime },\mathbf{p}^{\prime },\mathbf{p}^{\prime \prime
}\right\} \rightarrow \left\{ \mathbf{r},\Delta \mathbf{r},\mathbf{p},\Delta
\mathbf{p}\right\} $ in integral (\[ivr\_amplitude\]). It should be emphasized that we do not assume $\Delta \mathbf{r}$ or $\Delta \mathbf{p}$ to be small. New variables (averages and differences) are defined for all times from $0$ to $t$ as$$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{r}& =\frac{1}{2}\left( \mathbf{r}^{\prime }+\mathbf{r}^{\prime
\prime }\right) , \label{avg_and_diff} \\
\Delta \mathbf{r}& =\mathbf{r}^{\prime \prime }-\mathbf{r}^{\prime }, \notag
\\
\mathbf{p}& =\frac{1}{2}\left( \mathbf{p}^{\prime }+\mathbf{p}^{\prime
\prime }\right) , \notag \\
\Delta \mathbf{p}& =\mathbf{p}^{\prime \prime }-\mathbf{p}^{\prime }, \notag\end{aligned}$$The Jacobian of this transformation is unity. If we intend to perform integrals over $\Delta \mathbf{r}$ and $\Delta \mathbf{p}$ first, we can consider $\mathbf{r}_{0}$ and $\mathbf{p}_{0}$ as fixed for the moment, and write $$\left\vert \frac{\partial\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}}{\partial\mathbf{p}%
_{0}^{\prime}}\right\vert ^{1/2}\left\vert \frac{\partial\mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime\prime}}{\partial\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}}\right\vert
^{1/2}=\left\vert \frac{\partial\left( -\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}\right) }{%
\partial\left( -\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) }\right\vert ^{1/2}\left\vert
\frac{\partial\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}}{\partial\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}}\right\vert
^{1/2}=\left\vert \frac{\partial\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}}{\partial\Delta \mathbf{%
p}_{0}}\right\vert , \label{det_transf}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
O\left( t\right) &=& \left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d%
\mathbf{p}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}\left\vert
\frac{\partial\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}}{\partial\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}}\right\vert \nonumber \\
& \times &
\psi^{\ast}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\right) \delta\left( \Delta%
\mathbf{r}_{t}\right) \psi\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}\right) \,\exp\left[
\frac{i}{\hbar}\left( S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime\prime }\right) \right] .
\label{ivr_amplitude1}\end{aligned}$$ Next we change variables from $\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}$ to $\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}
$ and eliminate the $\delta$ function,$$\begin{aligned}
O\left( t\right) &=&\left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d%
\mathbf{p}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\psi^{\ast}\left( \mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime\prime}\right) \psi\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}\right)
\, \nonumber \\
& \times & \left. \exp\left[ \frac{i}{\hbar}\left( S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon
\prime\prime}\right) \right] \right\vert _{\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}=0}.
\label{ivr_amplitude2}\end{aligned}$$ The present form is equivalent to Eq. (\[uniform\]). On one hand, the present form appears much simpler (a $3d$- vs. $5d$-dimensional integral), on the other hand it is not an integral over independent variables because it contains a constraint on the final positions ($\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}=0$).
While we do not intend to evaluate this integral by the stationary phase (SP) approximation, it is instructive to check where the action difference $%
S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime\prime}$ is stationary because those regions give the main contributions to the integral. Variation of action $S^{0\prime}
$ gives$$\delta S^{0\prime}=-\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime}\cdot\delta\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime
}+\mathbf{p}_{t}^{\prime}\cdot\delta\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}$$ and a similar expression holds for $\delta S^{\epsilon\prime\prime}$. Due to the $\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}=0$ constraint, we have a constraint $\delta\mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime}=\delta\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime\prime}$ on the variation of endpoints, and therefore $$\delta\left( S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime\prime}\right) =-\mathbf{p}%
_{0}^{\prime}\cdot\delta\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}+\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime
}\cdot\delta\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}-\Delta\mathbf{p}_{t}\cdot \delta%
\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}.$$
Expanding variation $\delta\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}$ in terms of variations $\delta
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}$ and $\delta\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime}$, we find$$\begin{aligned}
\delta\left( S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime\prime}\right) &=&\left( \Delta%
\mathbf{p}_{0}-\Delta\mathbf{p}_{t}\cdot\frac{\partial\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}%
}{\partial\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}}\right) \cdot\delta \mathbf{r}%
_{0}^{\prime} \notag \\
&-& \Delta\mathbf{p}_{t}\cdot\frac{\partial\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}%
}{\partial\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}}\cdot\delta\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime}
+ \mathbf{%
p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\cdot\delta\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}.
\label{variation_action_diff}\end{aligned}$$ Note again that so far we have not assumed anything about closeness of the two trajectories. Since we can easily shift integration variables $\mathbf{r}_{0}
$ and $\mathbf{p}_{0}$ to $\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}$ and $\mathbf{p}%
_{0}^{\prime }$ in Eq. (\[ivr\_amplitude2\]), variation ([variation\_action\_diff]{}) indeed tells us where the action difference would be stationary. There are three stationary phase conditions,$$\begin{aligned}
\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}-\Delta\mathbf{p}_{t}\cdot\frac{\partial\mathbf{r}%
_{t}^{\prime}}{\partial\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}} & =0, \label{sp_conds}\\
\Delta\mathbf{p}_{t}\cdot\frac{\partial\mathbf{r}_{t}^{\prime}}{\partial
\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}} & =0, \\
\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\cdot\delta\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0} & =0.\end{aligned}$$ The third SP condition was intentionally written in the full form. In general, all three conditions would be satisfied only for a discrete set of trajectories ($3d$ equations for $3d$ unknowns). However, if the perturbation were $\epsilon=0$, one could immediately guess that there is one continuous set of solutions satisfying $\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}=\Delta%
\mathbf{p}_{t}=\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}$. The first two conditions are satisfied exactly, the third one approximately for small variations $\delta\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}$. Even though the third condition is satisfied only approximately, we obtain the correct result–identical trajectories $\Delta\mathbf{r}_{\tau}=0$ for all times $\tau$, $0<\tau<t$–and as we shall see below, also the final result for fidelity will become exact in this limit ($\epsilon = 0$). If we add the perturbation, these precise solutions break down, due to the exponential sensitivity of classical dynamics. However, as was shown in Ref. [@vanicek:2004a], if the shadowing theorem [hammel:1987,grebogi:1990]{} is applicable in the given system (for a given perturbation $\epsilon$ and up to time $t$), there will be a very near solution with $\Delta\mathbf{r}_{\tau}\approx0$ for all times $\tau$, $%
0<\tau<t$. Putting off a discussion of the shadowing theorem until later, suffice it to say that this theorem, completely counterintuitively, guarantees that we can compensate one exponential sensitivity (to perturbations of $H^{0}$) by another exponential sensitivity (to initial conditions) and get a trajectory which remains very close to the unperturbed trajectory up to time $t$. In fact, these approximate (diagonal) solutions with $\Delta \mathbf{r}_{\tau}\approx0$ will be by far the most dominant ones because for short times no other solutions exist and for long times the diagonal solutions dephase much slower than the remaining (off-diagonal) solutions with different trajectories. Again this will be justified later in this section. Assuming the validity of shadowing, the diagonal solutions dephase as $$\begin{aligned}
S^{0\prime}-S^{\epsilon\prime\prime} & \approx\epsilon\int_{0}^{t}d\tau
V\left( \mathbf{r}_{\tau},\tau\right) -\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}\cdot \mathbf{p}%
_{t}+\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\cdot\mathbf{p}_{0} \label{action_diff} \\
& =-\Delta S_{t}-\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}\cdot\mathbf{p}_{t}+\Delta\mathbf{r}%
_{0}\cdot\mathbf{p}_{0}.\end{aligned}$$ The first term is due to the perturbing potential $\epsilon V$ along the unperturbed trajectory, the other two terms are due to the small difference of trajectories at time $t$ and at time $0$. Substituting this action difference into integral (\[ivr\_amplitude2\]), we obtain the dephasing representation$$\begin{aligned}
O_{\text{DR}}\left( t\right) &=& \left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r}%
_{0}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0} \notag \\ &\times& \psi^{\ast }\left( \mathbf{%
r}_{0}+\frac{1}{2}\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\right) \psi\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}-%
\frac{1}{2}\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\right) \notag \\ &\times&
\exp\left[ \frac {i}{\hbar}\left( -\Delta S_{t}+\Delta\mathbf{r}%
_{0}\cdot\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) \right] . \label{DR_2}\end{aligned}$$ The final result is more succinctly written as$$O_{\text{DR}}\left( t\right) =\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\mathbf{p}%
_{0}\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) \,\exp\left(
-i\Delta S_{t}/\hbar\right) , \label{DR_final}$$ using the Wigner function of the initial state $|\psi\rangle,$ $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r},\mathbf{p}\right) &=& \left( 2\pi\hbar\right)
^{-d}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r\,}\psi^{\ast}\left( \mathbf{r}+\frac{1}{2}\Delta%
\mathbf{r}\right) \notag \\
&\times& \psi\left( \mathbf{r}-\frac{1}{2}\Delta \mathbf{r}\right)
\,\exp\left( i\Delta\mathbf{r}\cdot\mathbf{p}/\hbar\right) .
\label{wigner_f}\end{aligned}$$
The general expression (\[DR\_final\]) expresses fidelity as an interference integral over initial positions $\mathbf{r}_{0}$ and momenta $%
\mathbf{p}_{0}$. Because of this property it was called dephasing representation in Ref.[@vanicek:2004a]. The amplitude of each term is given by the Wigner function $\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}%
_{0}\right) $ and the phase by the integral of the perturbing potential along the unperturbed trajectory, $\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{%
p}_{0}\right) $. This is a very intuitive and simple picture that differs from the simplest semiclassical picture only in using the Wigner function instead of the classical phase space distribution $\rho_{\text{class}}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right)
$.
For zero perturbations, $\epsilon=0$, expression (\[DR\_final\]) correctly reduces to the obvious exact result,$$O_{\text{DR}}^{\epsilon=0}\left( t\right) =\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\mathbf{%
p}_{0}\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) =1 \label{no_pert}$$ for all times $t$, where the basic property of the Wigner function was used.
Although we started our derivation for a pure state, we ended up with a dephasing representation in terms of the Wigner function. Since this function can also be defined for mixed states, it appears that expression (\[DR\_final\]) should remain valid for mixed states, with appropriate generalization of the notion of fidelity. In Section \[sec:mixed\], it will be shown that this is indeed the case.
Shadowing theorem and its double use
------------------------------------
### Trajectories of $H^0$ and $H^{\epsilon}$
Shadowing theorems in general state that (under certain detailed conditions) for small enough $\epsilon$ there is a time $t$ such that for a trajectory of $H^{0}$ with initial condition $\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}$, $\mathbf{p}%
_{0}^{\prime}$ there exists a trajectory of $H^{\epsilon}$ with initial condition $\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}$, $\mathbf{p}_{0}^{\prime\prime}$ remaining within a certain small distance from the first trajectory up to time $t$. In uniformly hyperbolic systems this shadowing time $t$ is infinite [@anosov:1967; @bowen:1975], in more general systems at least finite [@grebogi:1990]. Since it is very difficult to find the maximum shadowing time $t$ and the corresponding bound on the closeness of trajectories for a specific system, the derivation of dephasing representation of fidelity assumed that shadowing was applicable for a given perturbation and time: the numerical results will provide the final verification.
### Numerical evaluation
In order to use DR in numerical applications, one only needs to generate initial conditions $\mathbf{r}_{0}$, $\mathbf{p}_{0}$ from a distribution given by the Wigner function $\rho_{W}$, run trajectories with the unperturbed Hamiltonian $H^{0}$ and compute the action difference $\Delta
S_{t}=-\epsilon\int_{0}^{t}d\tau V\left( \mathbf{r}_{\tau},\tau\right) $ along this trajectory. There is no need to compute Van Vleck determinants or Maslov indices as in many other semiclassical applications. Because the Wigner function, unlike classical probability, can be negative, some care must be taken to sample from its distribution. The simplest possible recipe would be to sample according to the probability $\left\vert
\rho_{W}\right\vert $ and attach a sign afterward together with the dephasing factor. As we will see from the analysis of special cases in Sec. \[sec:special\], Wigner function is particularly simple for position and momentum eigenstates (just a delta function), for Gaussian wave packets (a Gaussian in both position and momentum), or for a random mixed state (a constant over the whole phase space). These distributions can be easily sampled using standard methods. For general pure or mixed states one can resort to a Monte-Carlo procedure, e. g., using the Metropolis algorithm, which is frequently done for the IVR approximation [@miller:2001].
One might object that numerical computation of trajectories, due to the exponential sensitivity of classical evolution, will destroy the validity of the DR (\[DR\_final\]). However, here the shadowing theorem helps again–in fact in its original form [@hammel:1987; @grebogi:1990] where the perturbation was indeed due to errors of numerical propagation. The shadowing idea, as stated in Refs. [@hammel:1987; @grebogi:1990] guarantees that for each numerical (noisy) trajectory there will be a nearby exact trajectory of $H^{0}$.
Comparison of diagonal and off-diagonal terms
---------------------------------------------
Let us attempt to quantify the validity of the DR by comparing the importance of diagonal and off-diagonal terms in fidelity amplitude. These should be distinguished from the “diagonal” and “off-diagonal” terms in the fidelity itself (i.e., the amplitude squared), which have been frequently discussed in the literature, see, e. g. Refs. [@jalabert:2001; @jacquod:2003] where the off-diagonal terms in the fidelity amplitude are already neglected.
For short enough times $t$, it is clear why DR is accurate–there will be no off-diagonal contributions because there will be no off-diagonal SP solutions of Eqs. (\[sp\_conds\]). For long times, the number of off-diagonal solutions increases, but in the semiclassical limit (small $\hbar$) and for small perturbations $\epsilon$, their contribution is again negligible, due to their much faster dephasing. Let us see in detail how this happens.
If the unperturbed potential is denoted $W$, then the off-diagonal solutions dephase as$$\Delta S_{\text{off-diag}}=S^{0\prime}-S^{0\prime\prime}=\int_{0}^{t}d\tau%
\left[ W\left( \mathbf{r}_{\tau}^{\prime}\right) -W\left( \mathbf{r}%
_{\tau}^{\prime\prime}\right) \right] \label{action_diff_offdiagonal}$$ because for small enough $\epsilon$, the perturbation $V$ is really unimportant in dephasing of off-diagonal terms. Assuming for simplicity that the off-diagonal terms have the same weight and that their action differences are Gaussian distributed, their average will be$$\left\langle e^{i\Delta S_{\text{off-diag}}/\hbar}\right\rangle \approx \exp%
\left[ -\left\langle \left( \Delta S_{\text{off-diag}}\right)
^{2}\right\rangle /2\hbar^{2}\right] . \label{average_offdiagonal}$$ In chaotic systems, $\left\langle \left( \Delta S_{\text{off-diag}}\right)
^{2}\right\rangle =2K_{W}t$, where the diffusion coefficient is $%
K_{W}=\int_{0}^{\infty}dt\,C_{W}\left( t\right) $ and $C_{W}$ is the potential correlator, $C_{W}\left( t\right) =\left\langle W\left[ \mathbf{r}%
\left( t\right) \right] W\left[ \mathbf{r}\left( 0\right) \right]
\right\rangle $.
Similar analysis can be done for the diagonal terms [jalabert:2001,cerruti:2002,vanicek:2003a]{}. Their average is then given by a formula analogous to Eq. (\[average\_offdiagonal\]), except with $\Delta S_{%
\text{diag}}$ given by expression (\[action\_diff\]). The variance is now given by $\left\langle \left( \Delta S_{\text{diag}}\right)
^{2}\right\rangle =2K_{V}\epsilon^{2}t$. Because the diagonal contributions are weighed by the Wigner function, their total contribution is roughly equal to the average. The number of discrete off-diagonal semiclassical contributions should for long times grow as $e^{\gamma t}$ where $\gamma$ is the topological entropy. Then in the worst possible scenario, where each off-diagonal term contributes by its full weight (as if the Wigner function–in the case of diagonal terms–were unity everywhere), the ratio of the sum of the off-diagonal contributions to the total contribution of the diagonal terms should be$$\frac{\text{off-diag.}}{\text{diag.}}\sim\exp\left\{ \left[ -\left(
K_{W}-K_{V}\epsilon^{2}\right) /\hbar^{2}+\gamma\right] t\right\} .$$ For small enough $\epsilon$ and small enough $\hbar$, the off-diagonal terms will become negligible. Namely, the diagonal terms will give a smaller contribution if both $\hbar^{2}<K_{W}/\gamma$ and $\epsilon^{2}<\left(
K_{W}-\hbar^{2}\gamma\right) /K_{V}$.
Similar analysis is possible for integrable systems [prosen:2002a,vanicek:2004b]{}. There the number of off-diagonal contributions grows only algebraically, $\sim t^{\alpha}$ and variance of their action difference $\left\langle \left( \Delta S_{\text{off-diag}}\right)
^{2}\right\rangle =C_{W}^{\infty}t^{2}$ where $C_{W}^{\infty}=\lim_{t%
\rightarrow\infty}t^{-1}\int_{0}^{t}d\tau\,C_{W}\left( \tau\right) $. Similarly, for diagonal terms, $\left\langle \left( \Delta S_{\text{diag}%
}\right) ^{2}\right\rangle =C_{V}^{\infty}t^{2}\epsilon^{2}$ [@prosen:2002a]. In this case, the ratio of the two types of contributions is$$\frac{\text{off-diag.}}{\text{diag.}}\sim t^{\alpha}\exp\left[ -\left(
C_{W}^{\infty}-C_{V}^{\infty}\epsilon^{2}\right) t/\left( 2\hbar^{2}\right) %
\right]$$ and the condition for negligibility of the off-diagonal terms in the limit $%
t\rightarrow\infty$ is $\epsilon^{2}<C_{W}^{\infty}/C_{V}^{\infty}$.
\[sec:mixed\]Dephasing representation for a general mixed state
===============================================================
There are several ways to generalize the pure-state definition ([fidelity\_amplitude]{}) of fidelity to mixed states. The simplest generalization is$$O\left( t\right) =\operatorname*{tr}\left( e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar}\rho
e^{+iH^{\epsilon}t/\hbar}\right) \label{fid_ampl_mixed}$$ where $\rho$ is the density matrix of the mixed state, normalized such that $%
\operatorname*{tr}\rho=1$ [@prosen:2002a]. For pure states $\rho
=|\psi\rangle\langle\psi|$, this general definition reduces to the pure-state definition (\[fidelity\_amplitude\]). One interpretation of the general expression (\[fid\_ampl\_mixed\]) is that the ket vectors evolve with the unperturbed Hamiltonian $H^{0}$ and the bra vectors with the perturbed Hamiltonian $H^{\epsilon}$. Another interpretation is that expression (\[fid\_ampl\_mixed\]) is simply an average of fidelity amplitudes of pure-state components of the given mixed state. This should be distinguished from the often studied averaged fidelity.
The second possible generalization of the notion of fidelity to mixed states replaces the expression for fidelity (\[fidelity\]), rather than fidelity amplitude (\[fidelity\_amplitude\]) by an expression$$M\left( t\right) =\operatorname*{tr}\left[ \rho ^{0}\left( t\right) \rho
^{\epsilon }\left( t\right) \right] =\operatorname*{tr}\left[ \rho (0)\rho (t)%
\right] , \label{fid_mixed2}$$where $\rho ^{0}\left( t\right) $, $\rho ^{\epsilon }\left( t\right) $ are the evolved density operators,$$\rho ^{\epsilon }\left( t\right) =e^{-iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar }\rho
e^{+iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar },$$or, alternatively, $\rho (t)$ is the evolved operator $$\rho \left( t\right) =e^{+iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar
}e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar }\rho e^{+iH^{0}t/\hbar }e^{-iH^{\epsilon }t/\hbar }.$$Again for pure states $\rho =|\psi \rangle \langle \psi |$, definition (\[fid\_mixed2\]) reduces to the pure-state definition (\[fidelity\]).
Finally there is another, more intuitive but also more complicated generalization, which uses the notion of purity fidelity–the trace of the squared reduced density matrix [@prosen:2002b],$$P_{F}\left( t\right) =\operatorname*{tr}_{S}\left[ \operatorname*{tr}_{E}\rho\left(
t\right) \right] ^{2}, \label{purity_fidelity}$$ where subscripts $E$ or $S$ denote that the trace operation is performed on the environment or system degrees of freedom, respectively. For details see Ref. [@prosen:2002b]. Purity fidelity (\[purity\_fidelity\]) does not, of course, reduce to the definition of fidelity for pure states (\[fidelity\]).
While dephasing representation expressions are possible for the last two generalizations, in what follows the simplest generalization ([fid\_ampl\_mixed]{}) is assumed. With the mixed-state definition ([fid\_ampl\_mixed]{}), the semiclassical derivation in Eqs. (\[ivr\_propagator\])-(\[DR\_final\]), can be followed closely for mixed states, if we replace the product $\langle\psi|\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime }\rangle\langle\mathbf{%
r}_{0}^{\prime}|\psi\rangle=\psi^{\ast}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}%
\right) \psi\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime }\right) $ in Eqs. ([ivr\_amplitude]{}), (\[ivr\_amplitude1\]), and (\[DR\_2\]) by the matrix element $\langle\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime}|\rho|\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}%
\rangle$ of the density operator. For instance, Eq. (\[ivr\_amplitude1\]) will become$$\begin{aligned}
O\left( t\right) &=& \left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d%
\mathbf{p}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}\left\vert
\frac{\partial\Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}}{\partial\Delta\mathbf{p}_{0}}\right\vert
\, \\ & & \times\,\delta\left( \Delta\mathbf{r}_{t}\right) \,\langle\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime
}|\rho|\mathbf{r}_{0}^{\prime\prime}\rangle\,\exp\left[ \frac{i}{\hbar }%
\left( S^{0}-S^{\epsilon}\right) \right] . \end{aligned}$$ At the end, we obtain the same final result (\[DR\_final\]), only the Wigner function of a pure state (\[wigner\_f\]) must be replaced by the Wigner-Weyl transform of the density operator,$$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r},\mathbf{p}\right) &=&\left( 2\pi\hbar\right)
^{-d}\int d\Delta\mathbf{r\,}\left\langle \mathbf{r}+\frac{1}{2}\Delta%
\mathbf{r}\left\vert \rho\right\vert \mathbf{r}-\frac{1}{2}\Delta\mathbf{r}%
\right\rangle \notag \\
& & \times \exp\left( i\Delta\mathbf{r}\cdot \mathbf{p}/\hbar\right) .
\label{wigner_f_rho}\end{aligned}$$
\[sec:special\]Special cases
============================
For a *position state* $|\mathbf{R}\rangle$, $\psi\left( \mathbf{r}%
\right) =\delta\left( \mathbf{r}-\mathbf{R}\right) $, the Wigner function (\[wigner\_f\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{W}^{\text{pos.st.}}\left( \mathbf{r},\mathbf{p}\right) & =\left(
2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\int d\mathbf{x\,}\delta\left( \mathbf{r}+\frac{1}{2}%
\mathbf{x-R}\right) \notag \\
&\ \times \delta\left( \mathbf{r}-\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{x-R}\right)
\,\exp\left( i\mathbf{x}\cdot\mathbf{p}/\hbar\right) \notag
\\
& =\left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\mathbf{\,}\delta\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right) .
\label{wig_pos_state}\end{aligned}$$ Substituting Eq. (\[wigner\_f\]) into the general dephasing representation (\[DR\_final\]), we find$$O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{pos.st.}}\left( t\right) =\left( 2\pi\hbar\right)
^{-d}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}\,\exp\left[ -i\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{R},%
\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) /\hbar\right] ,$$ in agreement with Eq. (1) from Ref. [@vanicek:2004a] and with [vanicek:2003a,wang:2004]{}.
For a *momentum state* $|\mathbf{P\rangle}$, $\psi\left( \mathbf{r}%
\right) =\left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d/2}\exp\left( i\mathbf{P}\cdot\mathbf{%
r/\hbar}\right) $, the Wigner function (\[wigner\_f\]) becomes$$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{W}^{\text{mom.st.}}\left( \mathbf{r},\mathbf{p}\right) &=& \left(
2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-2d}\int d\mathbf{x}\exp\left[ i\left( \mathbf{p-P}%
\right) \cdot\mathbf{x/\hbar}\right] \notag \\ &=& \left( 2\pi\hbar\right)
^{-d}\delta\left( \mathbf{p-P}\right) \text{,} \label{wig_mom_state}\end{aligned}$$ and the general DR of fidelity (\[DR\_final\]) reduces to$$O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{mom.st.}}\left( t\right) =\left( 2\pi\hbar\right)
^{-d}\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\,\exp\left[ -i\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},%
\mathbf{P}\right) /\hbar\right] .$$
A *general Gaussian wave packet* with average position $\mathbf{R}$, average momentum $\mathbf{P}$, and position spread $\sigma$,$$\psi\left( \mathbf{r}\right) =\left( \pi\sigma^{2}\right) ^{-d/4}\exp\left[ i%
\mathbf{P\cdot}\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right) /\hbar-\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right)
^{2}/2\sigma^{2}\right]$$ has Wigner function$$\begin{aligned}
&\rho_{W}^{\text{gen.G.w.p.}}\left( \mathbf{r,p}\right) =\left(
\pi\sigma^{2}\right) ^{-d/2}\left( 2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-2d}\int d\mathbf{x} \notag \\
& \ \times \exp\left\{ \frac{i}{\hbar}\left( \mathbf{p-P}\right) \cdot\mathbf{x-}\left[
\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right) ^{2}+\left( \mathbf{x}/2\right) ^{2}\right]
/\sigma^{2}\right\} \notag \\
& =\left( \pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\exp\left[ -\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right)
^{2}/\sigma^{2}-\left( \mathbf{p-P}\right) ^{2}\sigma^{2}/\hbar^{2}\right] .
\label{wig_wavepacket}\end{aligned}$$ In general the dephasing representation of a Gaussian wave packet is ([DR\_final]{}) with the Wigner function (\[wig\_wavepacket\]) where we must include dephasing trajectories with varying *both* positions *and* momenta. Only in special cases, such as when the wave packet is strongly *localized in position* (i. e., when $\sigma\ll\hbar^{1/2}$), can we make a further simplification by replacement of $\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{r%
}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) $ by $\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{R,p}_{0}\right)
$ in Eq. (\[DR\_final\]). Then we can compute the $\mathbf{r}_{0}$ integral in Eq. (\[DR\_final\]) analytically and obtain$$\begin{aligned}
&& O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{pos.G.w.p.}}\left( t\right) =\left(
\sigma^{2}/\pi\hbar^{2}\right) ^{d/2}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0} \notag \\ &&\ \times \exp\left[ -i\Delta
S_{t}\left( \mathbf{R,p}_{0}\right) /\hbar-\left( \mathbf{p-P}\right)
^{2}\sigma^{2}/\hbar^{2}\right],\ \label{fid_pos_loc} \end{aligned}$$ in agreement with Eq. (8) in Ref.[@vanicek:2003a]. There the same result was obtained by linearizing the Van Vleck semiclassical propagator about the central trajectory. In Section \[sec:examples\] it will be shown that the symmetric expression (\[wig\_wavepacket\]) based on the general DR ([DR\_final]{}) is superior to the specialized form (\[fid\_pos\_loc\]). Similarly, if the initial Gaussian wave packet is *localized in momentum* (i. e., when $\sigma\gg\hbar^{1/2}$), we can replace $\Delta S_{t}\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) $ by $\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}%
\mathbf{,P}\right) $ and obtain$$\begin{aligned}
&& O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{mom.G.w.p.}}\left( t\right) =\left( \pi\sigma
^{2}\right) ^{-d/2}\int d\mathbf{r}_{0} \notag \\ && \ \times \exp\left[ -i\Delta S_{t}\left(
\mathbf{r}_{0}\mathbf{,P}\right) /\hbar-\left( \mathbf{r-R}\right)
^{2}/\sigma^{2}\right].\ \label{fid_mom_loc} \end{aligned}$$ For general (non-Gaussian) wave packets, which are nevertheless localized either in position (about $\mathbf{R}$) or momentum (about $\mathbf{P}$), we can use the general property of the Wigner function$$\begin{aligned}
\int d\mathbf{r\,}\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r,p}\right) & =\left\vert
\psi\left( \mathbf{p}\right) \right\vert ^{2}, \\
\int d\mathbf{p\,}\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r,p}\right) & =\left\vert
\psi\left( \mathbf{r}\right) \right\vert ^{2},\end{aligned}$$ and obtain, upon substitution into the general DR (\[DR\_final\]),$$\begin{aligned}
O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{pos.w.p.}}\left( t\right) & =\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}\exp%
\left[ -i\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{R,p}_{0}\right) /\hbar\right] \left\vert
\psi\left( \mathbf{p}_{0}\right) \right\vert ^{2}, \\
O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{mom.w.p.}}\left( t\right) & =\int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\exp%
\left[ -i\Delta S_{t}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}\mathbf{,P}\right) /\hbar\right]
\left\vert \psi\left( \mathbf{r}_{0}\right) \right\vert ^{2}.\end{aligned}$$
Finally, for a completely *random state*, i. e., an incoherent superposition of all pure basis states, the density operator as well as its Wigner function (\[wigner\_f\_rho\]) is just a constant (independent of position or momenta), and for a system with a finite phase space volume $%
\Omega$, the DR becomes$$O_{\text{DR}}^{\text{random st.}}\left( t\right) =\frac{1}{\Omega}\int d%
\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\mathbf{p}_{0}\exp\left( -i\Delta S_{t}/\hbar\right) .
\label{fid_random}$$
It should be pointed out that while names like position or momentumstates have been used to describe the special cases, they do not necessarily need to be eigenstates of the usual position or momentum operator. In the case of abstract Hilbert space with a finite basis, position states are simply the basis states (called *computational* states in the setting of quantum information, could be, e. g. spin eigenstates), and momentum states are simply the states defined by the discrete Fourier transform of the original basis states [@miquel:2002]. In Ref. [@miquel:2002], this generalized phase-space representation is used to show that for quite a few interesting operations on computational states, the Wigner function evolves classically. In all these cases, the dephasing representation described in Secs. \[sec:derivation\]-\[sec:examples\] should be applicable if discrete Wigner function [@miquel:2002] is used and simple other modifications are made to account for the finite-size of phase space. In fact, this is done in the numerical examples in the following section.
\[sec:examples\]Numerical tests
===============================
Now let us apply the theoretical analysis from previous sections to a specific system, the Chirikov standard map. Its advantage is that it is discrete, coordinate space is only one-dimensional, but at the same time standard map already contains generic complexities of classical dynamics. Specifically, the phase space is mixed and so various simplifications applicable in quasi-integrable or strongly chaotic systems are in general not applicable. Standard map is a symplectic map defined on a compact two-dimensional phase space–torus, as follows, $$\begin{aligned}
q_{j+1} & =q_{j}+p_{j}\text{ \ \ (mod }2\pi\text{)} \\
p_{j+1} & =p_{j}-W^{\prime}\left( q_{j+1}\right) -\epsilon V^{\prime }\left(
q_{j+1}\right) \text{ \ \ (mod }2\pi\text{)}\mathrm{,}\end{aligned}$$ where $q$ and $p$ are position and momentum on the torus, potential $W\left(
q\right) =-k\cos q$, and the perturbation is $V\left( q\right) =-\cos2q$. Using an $n$-dimensional Hilbert space for the quantized map fixes the effective Planck constant to be $\hbar=\left( 2\pi n\right) ^{-1}$. (We are using letter $q$ for the coordinate to distinguish this special system from the general considerations. Similarly, we will use letter $Q$ to denote the position of a position state or center of a wave packet.) Parameter $\epsilon
$ controls the strength of perturbation. For $\epsilon\ll1$, the map is close to being integrable, for $\epsilon\gg1$, the map is strongly chaotic. The goal of this section is not to use the dephasing representation to explore various universal regime that occur in these two limits and have been carefully studied in the literature. This was already done in Refs. [@vanicek:2003a; @vanicek:2004b]. The goal of this section is rather to explore the detailed features of fidelity in non-universal regimes. The optimal region of parameter space is in the vicinity of $\epsilon=1$, since there phase space has a significant amount of chaotic as well as integrable regions. Mixed phase space is in general the hardest to treat and therefore this setting is chosen here because it provides the most challenging test for any approximation.
Gaussian wave packets
---------------------
One might think that the general dephasing representation (\[DR\_final\]) is only useful for highly non-local states and that the original expression (\[wig\_pos\_state\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] is good enough at least for Gaussian wave packets. This subsection demonstrates that even for Gaussian wave packets, the general dephasing representation (\[DR\_final\]) is superior to the original expression (\[wig\_pos\_state\]) from Ref. [vanicek:2003a]{}.
Figure 1 compares three approximations to compute fidelity of Gaussian wave packets with the exact result: the expression (\[wig\_pos\_state\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] for wave packets localized in position (red dashed line), corresponding expression (\[fid\_mom\_loc\]) for wave packets localized in momentum (blue dotted line), and the general DR (\[DR\_final\]), with the Wigner function (\[wig\_wavepacket\]), symmetrically treating position and momentum (black solid line).
The exact fidelity, computed by exact quantum evolution using the Fast Fourier Transform algorithm, is represented by solid dots. The parameters are $n=1000$, $k=0.95$, $\epsilon=0.015$, and the wave packet is localized at $Q=0.7\pi$ and $P=0.4\pi$. The number of classical trajectories used in the calculations is $1000$. Wave packets used in parts a), b), and c) of Fig. 1 have position spread $\sigma$ equal to 0.004$\pi$, 0.16$\pi$, and 0.04$\pi$, respectively. For a wave packet localized in position in Fig. 1a), the original expression (\[wig\_pos\_state\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] works very well and is almost indistinguishable from the general DR ([DR\_final]{}), as expected, whereas Eq. (\[fid\_mom\_loc\]) for momentum wave packets fails. For a wave packet localized in momentum in Fig. 1b), the momentum-wave-packet expression (\[fid\_mom\_loc\]) works well and it is almost indistinguishable from the general DR (\[DR\_final\]), but the original position-wave-packet expression (\[wig\_pos\_state\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] fails completely. The general DR works very well in both cases. It might seem that either the momentum or position versions could cover the whole range of Gaussian wave packets, because one might think that the intermediate case, i. e., a fairly symmetric wave packet, is localized enough in both position and momentum. That this is not so is provided by the final test in Fig. 1c): both specialized expressions ([fid\_pos\_loc]{}) and (\[fid\_mom\_loc\]) give a significant error in comparison with exact fidelity, but the general DR (\[DR\_final\]) gives very accurate results, as expected because of its fair treatment of position and momentum. To conclude, expression (\[DR\_final\]), is accurate for the whole range of Gaussian wave packets, from position-like to symmetric to momentum-like, even in the presence of mixed dynamics.
Nonlocal states
---------------
For nonlocal states, there is even less hope that the position-wave-packet expression for fidelity (\[fid\_pos\_loc\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] would work. One might think that for a superposition of localized wave packets it is enough to simply add the terms (\[fid\_pos\_loc\]) for the fidelity amplitude. This is not the case which can be seen by considering a wave packet $\psi$ that is a superposition of two Gaussian wave packets $%
\psi_{1}$ and $\psi_{2}$, centered at phase space points $\left( \mathbf{R}%
_{1}\mathbf{,P}_{1}\right) $ and $\left( \mathbf{R}_{2}\mathbf{,P}%
_{2}\right) $. The resulting wave packet has a Wigner function that is not just a simple sum of the Wigner functions of the two Gaussian wave packets. The correct Wigner function has in addition an *interference term* localized in the vicinity of the phase-space point $\left( \mathbf{(R}_{1}+%
\mathbf{R}_{2})/2\mathbf{,(P}_{1}+\mathbf{P}_{2})/2\right) $. We will demonstrate now the importance of this interference term and show that if it is taken into account, the general DR (\[DR\_final\]) will still give excellent results, even for nonlocal states.
Being motivated by the quantum computation applications, let us consider a superposition of computational states (i. e., position states in the abstract phase space), instead of Gaussian wave packets. Our initial state is a *coherent* superposition$$|\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( |\mathbf{R}_{1}\rangle+|\mathbf{R}%
_{2}\rangle\right) , \label{coh_superpos}$$ with a Wigner distribution,$$\begin{aligned}
&\rho_{W}^{\text{coh}}\left( \mathbf{r,p}\right) =\frac{1}{2}\left(
2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d} \{ \delta ( \mathbf{r-R}_{1})
+\delta ( \mathbf{r-R}_{2} ) \notag \\
&+ 2\delta\left[ \mathbf{r}-\left(
\mathbf{R}_{1}+\mathbf{R}_{2}\right) /2\right] \cos\left[ \left( \mathbf{R}%
_{1}-\mathbf{R}_{2}\right) \cdot\mathbf{p/\hbar}\right] \} .
\label{wig_coher}\end{aligned}$$ If the interference term is neglected, we obtain a Wigner function of the *incoherent* superposition (\[mixed\_state\]),$$\rho_{W}^{\text{incoh}}\left( \mathbf{r,p}\right) =\frac{1}{2}\left(
2\pi\hbar\right) ^{-d}\left[ \delta\left( \mathbf{r-R}_{1}\right)
+\delta\left( \mathbf{r-R}_{2}\right) \right] \label{wig_incoh}$$
Figure 2 compares two approximate ways to compute fidelity with the exact quantum result: both approximations use the general DR (\[DR\_final\]), but whereas one uses the correct full Wigner function (\[wig\_coher\]) (black solid line), the other uses the incorrect Wigner function (\[wig\_incoh\]), neglecting the interference term (purple dashed-dotted line). Again, the exact result is represented by solid dots. The parameters used in Fig. 2 are $n=200$, $k=0.7$, $\epsilon=0.02$, $Q_{1}=0.4\pi$, and $400$ classical trajectories were used. The position of the other component state varies in the two parts.
If the positions $\mathbf{R}_{1}$ and $\mathbf{R}_{2}$ are largely separated, the oscillations in the interference term have a high frequency. Because nearby initial conditions follow similar trajectories and have similar actions, the phase factor in the DR (\[DR\_final\]) varies slowly. Therefore the fast oscillations in the weight factor given by the interference term in the Wigner function can completely cancel out the contribution of the interference part to the DR integral. (Incidentally, this situation is in a way opposite to the usual semiclassical considerations where the weight is a slowly varying function and the phase factor is the fast oscillating factor.) Figure 1a) shows an example of situation where this cancellation occurs: $Q_{1}=0.4\pi$ and $Q_{2}=1.2\pi$. Because the interference term is negligible, both approximations give the same and very accurate result.
If the initial states are closer, as in Fig. 2b), where $Q_{1}=0.4\pi$ and $%
Q_{2}=0.42\pi$, the interference term is important, and only the correct Wigner function (\[wig\_coher\]) agrees well with the exact result. This shows that for coherent nonlocal states, the general DR (\[DR\_final\]) must be used instead of some approximate versions which neglect quantum coherence of the initial state.
Mixed states
------------
Wigner function (\[wig\_incoh\]) was wrong for the coherent state ([coh\_superpos]{}), but it does correctly describe a certain mixed state, namely the incoherent superposition of computational states $|\mathbf{R}%
_{1}\rangle$ and $|\mathbf{R}_{2}\rangle$,$$\rho^{\text{incoh}}=\frac{1}{2}\left( |\mathbf{R}_{1}\rangle\langle \mathbf{R%
}_{1}|+|\mathbf{R}_{2}\rangle\langle\mathbf{R}_{2}|\right) .
\label{mixed_state}$$ In Sec. \[sec:mixed\] it was shown that if the generalized definition ([fid\_ampl\_mixed]{}) of fidelity for mixed states is used, dephasing representation (\[DR\_final\]) remains valid, as long as the Wigner transform of the density operator (\[wigner\_f\_rho\]) is used. For the incoherent mixture with density operator (\[mixed\_state\]), Wigner distribution is precisely that given by Eq. (\[wig\_incoh\]). Figure 3 compares DR (\[DR\_final\]) with the Wigner function (\[wig\_incoh\]) with the exact fidelity for the state (\[mixed\_state\]). Fidelity computed by the DR is drawn with a black solid line, exact fidelity with solid dots. The parameters are the same as in Fig. 2b), in particular $Q_{1}=0.4\pi$ and $%
Q_{2}=0.42\pi$. Although now only $200$ classical trajectories were used, the agreement is again excellent.
Last but not least we consider the completely random mixed state. It is an incoherent superposition of all computational states and in a finite-dimensional Hilbert space, its density operator is$$\rho^{\text{random}}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|Q_{i}\rangle\langle Q_{i}|=%
\frac{1}{n}\hat{1}.$$ Figure 4 compares the random-state version (\[fid\_random\]) of DR (black solid line) with the exact result (solid dots). Parameters in this calculation are $n=100$, $k=2$, $\epsilon=0.03$ and $1000$ classical trajectories were used. Again, it is reassuring that even in the case that the whole phase space is important, with just $1000$ trajectories, dephasing representation still works so well–despite the fact that it was derived solely from semiclassical arguments and requires only classical information.
\[sec:comparison\]Relation to other “Wigner” methods
====================================================
It should be noted that the Wigner distribution has been used in various other approximate methods, especially in chemical physics. For instance, it was used to compute photodissociation cross-sections [@heller:1976; @brown:1981], to treat inelastic scattering [@lee:1980], or to compute thermal correlation functions using the linearized semiclassical IVR method [@miller:1974a; @wang:1998; @miller:2001]. In all these applications, there was just one Hamiltonian, but the two states (or more generally, density or other operators) were different. The quantity of interest was a general correlation function of the type $$C_{AB}\left( t\right) =\operatorname*{tr}\left( AU^{\dag }BU\right) \label{corr_f}$$where $A$ and $B$ are general operators and $U=\mathcal{T}e^{-i \int H d \tau}$ is the time evolution operator. Using various approximations, all authors [@heller:1976; @brown:1981; @lee:1980; @miller:1974a; @wang:1998; @miller:2001] obtain the same final result, expressed as an overlap of two Wigner distributions, one at time 0, the other evolved classically to time $t$, $$C_{AB}^{\text{Wigner}}\left( t\right) = (2\pi \hbar)^d \int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\mathbf{p}%
_{0}A_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) B_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}%
_{t},\mathbf{p}_{t}\right) \,$$ Here $A_W$ and $A_W$ are the Wigner transforms (\[wigner\_f\_rho\]) of operators $A$ and $B$.
Because there is only one Hamiltonian, there is no dephasing factor $%
e^{i\Delta S/\hbar }$, as in the DR. In fact we could apply one of these older approaches to the second generalized definition (\[fid\_mixed2\]) of fidelity for mixed states because that definition is in the form of Eq. (\[corr\_f\]) with $A=B=\rho$ and the time evolution operator $U = e^{+iH^{\epsilon}t/\hbar}e^{-iH^{0}t/\hbar}$. Then we would obtain a very different result from the DR, $$M^{\text{Wigner}}\left( t\right) = (2\pi \hbar)^d \int d\mathbf{r}_{0}\int d\mathbf{p}%
_{0}\rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}\right) \rho_{W}\left( \mathbf{r}%
_{t},\mathbf{p}_{t}\right). \label{fid_wig}$$ Although appearing as elegant as the dephasing representation, there is a problem with this expression. First, it will be much more sensitive to numerical errors. We can see that already by considering zero perturbation. Correctly, for each initial condition $\mathbf{r}_{0},\mathbf{p}_{0}$, we should have $\mathbf{r}_{0}=
\mathbf{r}_{t}$ and $\mathbf{p}_{t}=\mathbf{p}_{0}$. In systems with nonlinear dynamics, particularly chaotic systems, numerical errors in forward and backward propagation will yield exponentially growing errors. If the initial state is a localized wave packet, expression (\[fid\_wig\]) would give a numerically decaying overlap even for zero perturbations when exact fidelity is constant $M(t) = 1$. Indeed, numerical test not presented here showed that instead of staying at unity, $M^{\text{Wigner}}$ quickly decays to a plateau and remains there for some time, and finally decays exponentially again. (This is the same behavior as observed in literature for physical perturbations [@prosen:2005; @bevilaqua:2004].
Even if numerical errors did not exist, equation (\[fid\_wig\]) would have problems. It can describe some decay due to dephasing, but only that in the fast oscillating parts of the initial state. For simple Gaussian wave packets, the fidelity decay in Eq. (\[fid\_wig\]) is completely due to the decay of classical overlaps, i. e., classical fidelity. To conclude, the “Wigner” form (\[fid\_wig\]) is apparently not as good as the dephasing representation, but it does deserve further study, especially because it might shed further light on the question of importance of various contributions to fidelity. Preliminary studies show that $M^{\text{Wigner}}$ correctly describes exact fidelity in both chaotic and quasi-integrable systems for large perturbations (i. e., in Lyapunov and algebraic regimes, respectively), when dephasing is not important [@vanicek:2004b]. It gives wrong results in both chaotic and quasi-integrable systems for small perturbations (in the FGR and Gaussian regimes), when dephasing is important [@vanicek:2004b].
\[sec:conclusion\]Conclusion
============================
This paper has presented a derivation of a general semiclassical expression for fidelity of pure and mixed states. This dephasing representation expresses fidelity as an interference integral, with weight of each term given by the Wigner function and the phase by the integrated perturbation along an unperturbed trajectory. In particular, no analog of the Van Vleck determinant is needed. As the original specialized expression (\[fid\_pos\_loc\]) from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a], dephasing representation avoids searching for the exponentially growing number of terms in the standard semiclassical expressions [@jalabert:2001]. It also avoids the ubiquitous divergences in Van Vleck determinants present in the usual semiclassical expressions.
The advantage of dephasing representation lies in that it does not require the original state to be localized. Its form suggests that it should be applicable to general pure and mixed states. This claim was supported by the following numerical evidence: First, it was shown, on the example of Gaussian wave packets, that position and momentum must be treated symmetrically. This was the flaw of the expression from Ref. [@vanicek:2003a] and is apparently corrected in the DR. Second, on the example of coherent superpositions of states, it was shown that oscillatory patterns in the Wigner function are important: therefore classical phase space distribution, resulting from incoherent superposition of component Wigner distributions (for states for which these are the same as classical distributions). This may shed some further light on the controversial issue of importance of sub-Plank structures on decoherence [@zurek:2001; @jacquod:2002]. Finally, it was shown that DR is also accurate for mixed states: incoherent superpositions and completely random states. All tests were performed on a system with mixed phase space: with both integrable and chaotic regions.
While the numerical tests were quite successful, a further study is needed to determine precisely all situations where the dephasing representation breaks down. The analysis provided in Sec. \[sec:derivation\] of this paper should simplify that task. Also, a more rigorous formulation of the precise conditions of validity of the dephasing representation is needed.
The author wishes to thank the Department of Chemistry at the University of California, Berkeley for support.
[63]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, ****, ().
, ** (, , ).
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
(), .
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
(), .
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ** (, , ).
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A variant of Siu’s analyticity theorem is proved for relative types of plurisubharmonic functions. Some results on propagation of plurisubharmonic singularities and maximality of pluricomplex Green functions with analytic singularities are derived.'
---
[**Analyticity and propagation of plurisubharmonic singularities**]{}
[**Alexander Rashkovskii**]{}
Introduction
============
Given a complex manifold $X$, let ${{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ denote the class of all plurisubharmonic functions on $X$ and ${{\operatorname{PSH}}}^-(X)$ its subclass of all non-positive functions.
We will say that $u\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ has singularity at a point $\zeta\in
X$ if $u(\zeta)=-\infty$. A basic characteristic of the singularity is its [*Lelong number*]{} $$\nu(u,\zeta)=
\liminf_{x\to \zeta}\frac{u(x)}{\log|\varsigma(x)|}=dd^cu\wedge
(dd^c\log|\varsigma(x)|)^{n-1}(\{\zeta\});$$ here $d=\partial +
\bar\partial$, $d^c= (\partial -\bar\partial)/2\pi i$, $n=\dim X$, and $\varsigma$ are local coordinates on a neighbourhood of $\zeta$ with $\varsigma(\zeta)=0$.
A classical result due to Siu states that the the function $x\mapsto
\nu(u,x)$ is upper semicontinuous in the analytic Zariski topology; this means that the set $$S_c(u,X)=\{\zeta\in X:\nu(u,\zeta)\ge c\}$$ is an analytic variety of $X$ for any $u\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ and $c>0$. As a consequence, for an arbitrary analytic variety $Z$, the value $\nu(u,\zeta)$ is generically constant on $Z$, equal to $\inf\{\nu(u,\zeta):\zeta\in Z\}$; it can be greater only on a proper analytic subset of $Z$.
Siu’s theorem was extended to directional Lelong numbers $\nu(u,\zeta,a)$, $a\in{{ {\mathbb}R}^n}_+$, by Kiselman [@Kis2], and to generalized (weighted) Lelong numbers $\nu(u,{\varphi})$ with respect to exponentially Hölder continuous plurisubharmonic weights ${\varphi}$ by Demailly [@D1]. The analyticity theorems with respect to the standard and directional Lelong numbers give important information on asymptotic behaviour of plurisubharmonic functions near the singularity points: for example, $u(x)\le c\log|\varsigma(x)|+O(1)$ as $x\to\zeta\in S_c(u,X)$. Relations between the weighted Lelong numbers $\nu(u,{\varphi})$ and the asymptotic behaviour of $u$ are not that direct.
In [@R7], a notion of [*relative type*]{} $\sigma(u,{\varphi})$ of $u$ with respect to a maximal plurisubharmonic weight ${\varphi}$ was introduced (see Section 2) and an analyticity theorem for the sets $\{\zeta:\:\sigma(u,{\varphi}_\zeta)\ge c\}=\{\zeta:\: u(x)\le
c\,{\varphi}(x,\zeta) +O(1),\ x\to\zeta\}$ was proved, where ${\varphi}_\zeta(x)={\varphi}(x,\zeta)\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X\times X)$ is such that ${\varphi}_\zeta^{-1}(-\infty)=\zeta$, $(dd^c{\varphi})^n=0$ on $\{x\neq
\zeta\}$, and $e^{\varphi}$ is Hölder continuous with respect to $\zeta$. The extra condition (comparing to Demailly’s result) on $(dd^c{\varphi})^n$ is quite essential. Take, for example, the function ${\varphi}(x,\zeta)=\max\{\log|x_1-\zeta_1|+\log(|x_1-\zeta_1|+|x_2|),
\log|x_2-\zeta_2|\}$ in ${{{\mathbb}C}}^2\times{{{\mathbb}C}}^2$; one has $\log|x_1|\le
{\varphi}(x,\zeta)+O(1)$ precisely when $\zeta\in\{(0,\zeta_2):\zeta_2\neq 0\}$ that is not an analytic variety. The reason here is that the values of the weighted Lelong numbers $\nu(u,{\varphi}_\zeta)$ and relative types $\sigma(u,{\varphi}_\zeta)$ depend on the singularity of ${\varphi}$ in opposite ways: while any jump of the singularity of ${\varphi}$ at a particular point $\zeta$ just [*increases*]{} the value of $\nu(u,{\varphi}_\zeta)$, it [*diminishes*]{} the type $\sigma(u,{\varphi}_\zeta)$.
Here we present a more general analyticity result (Theorem \[theo:typean\]) for the relative types. Its main feature is that we allow the singularity sets ${\varphi}_\zeta^{-1}(-\infty)$ consisting of several points, which makes it possible to apply the result to weights generated by finite holomorphic mappings. Another benefit is that the analyticity concerns a parameter space (as in [@D1 Théorème 4.14]), which can thus give additional information on the asymptotic behaviour even at a fixed point (see, for example, Corollary \[cor:var\]). We derive some results on propagation of plurisubharmonic singularities (Corollary \[cor:finite\] and Theorem \[theo:integr\]), which in turn imply certain global maximality properties of pluricomplex Green functions with non-isolated analytic singularities (Corollary \[cor:gr\]).
Preliminaries
=============
Throughout the note, the following notions will be used.
A function $u\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ is said to be [*maximal*]{} on an open set $U\Subset X$ if for any $v\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ the condition $v\le u$ on $X\setminus U$ implies $v\le u$ on the whole $X$. A locally bounded $u$ is maximal on $U$ if and only if $(dd^cu)^n=0$ there, $n=\dim
X$.
Given a Stein manifold $X$, let us have a finite set ${\mathcal
Z}=\{\zeta_1,\ldots,\zeta_k\}\subset X$ and functions $\varphi_1,\ldots,\varphi_k$ such that $\varphi_j$ is plurisubharmonic near $\zeta_j$, locally bounded and maximal on a punctured neighbourhood of $\zeta_j$, and $\varphi_j(\zeta_j)=-\infty$. The function $$G_{A,\{\varphi_j\}}(z)=\sup\,\{u(z):\: u\in PSH^-(X),\ u\le \varphi_j\
{\rm near\ }\zeta_j,\ 1\le j\le k\}$$ is the [*Green–Zahariuta function*]{} of $X$ with the singularity $\varphi=\{\varphi_j\}$. The notion was introduced, for the continuous weights $\varphi_j$, in [@Za0], see also [@Za]; the general case was treated in [@R7]. The function $G_{A,\varphi}$ is plurisubharmonic in $X$, maximal on $X\setminus{\mathcal Z}$ and satisfies $G_{A,\varphi}(x)=\varphi_j(x)+O(1)$ as $x\to\zeta_j$.
Let ${\varphi}\in PSH(X)$ be locally bounded on $X\setminus{\mathcal Z}$ and such that its restriction to a neighbourhood of each point $\zeta_j$ is a maximal weight equivalent to $\varphi_j$ in the sense $\lim{\varphi}_j(x)/{\varphi}(x)=1$; for example, one can take ${\varphi}=G_{A,\{\varphi_j\}}$. The [*relative type*]{} $\sigma(u,{\varphi})$ of $u$ with respect to ${\varphi}$ was introduced in [@R7] as $$\sigma(u,{\varphi})=\liminf_{{\varphi}(x)\to-\infty}\frac{u(x)}{{\varphi}(x)}.$$ In other words, $$\sigma(u,{\varphi}_y)=
\lim_{r\to-\infty}r^{-1}\Lambda(u,{\varphi},r),$$ where $\Lambda(u,{\varphi},r):=\sup\{u(x):\: {\varphi}(x)<r\}$.
Analyticity theorem
===================
Let now $X$ be a Stein manifold of dimension $n$ and $Y$ be a complex manifold of dimension $m$. Let $R:Y\to (-\infty,\infty]$ be a lower semicontinuous function on $Y$. We consider a continuous plurisubharmonic function ${\varphi}:X\times Y\to [-\infty,\infty)$ such that:
1. ${\varphi}(x,y)<R(y)$ on $X\times Y$;
2. the set ${\mathcal Z}(y)=\{x:{\varphi}(x,y)=-\infty\}$ is finite for every $y\in Y$;
3. for any $y_0\in Y$ and $r<R(y_0)$ there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $y_0$ such that the set $\{(x,y):\: {\varphi}(x,y)<r,\: y\in U\}\Subset X\times Y$;
4. $(dd^c{\varphi})^n=0$ on $\{ {\varphi}(x,y)>-\infty\}$;
5. $e^{{\varphi}(x,y)}$ is locally Hölder continuous in $y$: every point $(x_0,y_0)\in X\times Y$ has a neighbourhood $\omega$ such that $$\label{eq:holder}
|e^{{\varphi}(x,y_1)}-e^{{\varphi}(x,y_2)}|\le
M|\varsigma(y_1)-\varsigma(y_2)|^\beta, \quad (x,y_j)\in\omega,$$ for some $M,\,\beta>0$ and suitable coordinates $\varsigma$ on $Y$.
The function ${\varphi}_y(x)={\varphi}(x,y)$ is a maximal plurisubharmonic weight with poles at ${\mathcal Z}(y)$; we will write this as ${\varphi}_y(x)\in MW_{{\mathcal Z}(y)}$. In particular, given $u\in
PSH(X)$, the function $$r\mapsto \Lambda(u,{\varphi}_y,r):=\sup\{u(x):\: {\varphi}_y(x)<r\}$$ is convex and there exists the limit $$\sigma(u,{\varphi}_y)=
\lim_{r\to-\infty}r^{-1}\Lambda(u,{\varphi}_y,r) =\liminf_{x\to{\mathcal
Z}(y)}\frac{u(x)}{{\varphi}(x,y)},$$ the relative type of $u$ with respect to the weight ${\varphi}_y$. We have thus $$\label{eq:mainb} u(x)\le
\sigma(u,{\varphi}_y){\varphi}(x,y)+O(1),\quad x\to {\mathcal
Z}(y).$$
Denote $$S_c(u,{\varphi},Y)=\{y\in Y:\: u(x)\le c{\varphi}(x,y) +O(1)\ {\rm
as\ }x\to{\mathcal Z}(y)\}.$$ Equivalently, $S_c(u,{\varphi},Y)=\{y\in
Y:\: \sigma(u,{\varphi_y})\ge c\}$.
\[theo:typean\] Let a continuous function ${\varphi}\in PSH(X\times Y)$ satisfy the above conditions (i)–(v). Then for every $u\in PSH(X)$ and $c>0$, the set $S_c(u,{\varphi},Y)$ is an analytic variety.
We will follow the lines of the proof of [@R7 Theorem 7.1], which in turn is an adaptation of Kiselman’s and Demailly’s proofs of the corresponding variants of Siu’s theorem. Note that although the proof is quite short, it is based on such deep results as Demailly’s theorem on plurisubharmonicity of the function $\Lambda(u,{\varphi}_y,r)$ and the Bombieri–Hörmander theorem.
By [@D3 Theorem 6.11], the function $\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},{\rm
Re}\,\xi)$ is plurisubharmonic on the set $\{(y,\xi)\in Y\times{{{\mathbb}C}}:\:
{\rm Re}\,\xi<R(y)\}$. Fix a pseudoconvex domain $D\Subset Y$ and denote $R_0=\inf\,\{R(y):\: y\in D\}>-\infty$. Given $a>0$, the function $$(u,\xi)\mapsto\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},{\rm Re}\,\xi)-a\,{\rm
Re}\,\xi$$ is thus plurisubharmonic in $D\times\{{\rm
Re}\,\xi<R_0\}$ and independent of ${\rm Im}\,\xi$, so by Kiselman’s minimum principle [@Kis8], the function $$U_a(y)=\inf\{\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},r)-a(r-R_0):\:r<R_0\}$$ is plurisubharmonic in $D$.
Let $y\in D$. If $a>\sigma(u,{\varphi_y})$, then $\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},r)>
a(r-R_0)$ for all $r\le r_0<R_0$. If $r_0<r<R_0$, then $\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},r)- a(r-R_0)> \Lambda(u,{\varphi}_y,r_0)$. Therefore $U_a(y)>-\infty$.
Now let $a<\sigma(u,{\varphi_y})$. In view of property (iii) and estimate (\[eq:mainb\]), the exponential Hölder continuity (\[eq:holder\]) implies the bound $$\Lambda(u,{\varphi}_z,r)\le
\Lambda(u,{\varphi_y},\log(e^r+M|\varsigma(z)|^\beta))\le
\sigma(u,{\varphi_y})\log(e^r+M|\varsigma(z)|^\beta)+C$$ in a neighbourhood $U_y$ of $y$ with the coordinates $\varsigma$ chosen so that $\varsigma(y)=0$. Denote $r_z=\beta\log|\varsigma(z)|$, then $$\label{eq:holb1} U_a(z)\le \Lambda(u,{\varphi}_z,r_z)- ar_z
\le (\sigma(u,{\varphi_y})-a)\beta\log|\varsigma(z)|+C_1, \quad z\in
U_y.$$
Given $a,b>0$, let $Z_{a,b}$ be the set of points $y\in D$ such that the function $\exp(-b^{-1}U_a)$ is not integrable near $y$. As follows from the Hörmander–Bombieri–Skoda theorem [@Ho Theorem 4.4.4], all the sets $Z_{a,b}$ are analytic.
If $y\not\in S_c(u,{\varphi},D)$ and $\sigma(u,{\varphi_y})<a<c$, then $U_a(y)>-\infty$ and so, by Skoda’s theorem [@Ho Theorem 4.4.5], $y\not\in Z_{a,b}$ for all $b>0$.
If $y\in S_c(u,{\varphi},D)$, $a<c$, and $b< (c-a)\beta (2m)^{-1}$, then (\[eq:holb1\]) implies $y\in Z_{a,b}$. Thus, $S_c(u,{\varphi},D)$ coincides with the intersection of all the sets $Z_{a,b}$ with $a<c$ and $b<(c-a)\beta (2m)^{-1}$, and is therefore analytic.
Dependence on coordinates
=========================
By a classical result (again due to Siu), standard Lelong numbers are independent of the choice of coordinates. The following statement can be viewed as a bridge between Siu’s analyticity and invariance theorems.
\[cor:var\] Let ${\varphi}\in MW_0$ satisfy $|e^{{\varphi}(a)}
-e^{{\varphi}(b)}|\le M|a-b|^\beta$, $\beta>0$, on a pseudoconvex neighbourhood $X$ of $0\in {{{\mathbb}C\sp n}}$, and let $Y$ be a complex manifold in $GL_n({{{\mathbb}C}})$. Then for every $u\in PSH(X)$, the sets $$\{(\zeta,A)\in X\times Y: u(x)\le {\varphi}(Ax-\zeta)+O(1)\ {\rm as\
}x\to A^{-1}\zeta\}$$ and $$\{(\zeta,A)\in X\times Y: u(x)\le {\varphi}(A(x-\zeta))+O(1)\ {\rm as\
}x\to \zeta\}$$ are analytic varieties in $X\times Y$. In particular, the set $$S(u,{\varphi},Y)=\{A\in Y: u(x)\le {\varphi}(Ax)+O(1)\
{\rm as\ } x\to 0\}$$ is analytic in $Y$. The functional $u\mapsto\sigma(u,{\varphi}_A)$, where ${\varphi}_A(x)={\varphi}(Ax)$, is independent of $A\in GL_n({{{\mathbb}C}})$ if and only if ${\varphi}(x)=c\log|x|+O(1)$ for some constant $c>0$.
The analyticity follows directly from Theorem \[theo:typean\]. To prove the last assertion, consider the Green–Zahariuta function $G_{\varphi}$ for the singularity ${\varphi}$ in the unit ball $\mathbb B$. Since ${\varphi}(x)={\varphi}(Ax)+O(1)$ for any unitary $A$, we have $G_{\varphi}(x)=\chi(\log|x|)$, where $\chi$ is a convex increasing function on $(-\infty,0)$. The equation $(dd^cG_{\varphi})^n=0$ outside $0$ implies $\chi''=0$, and the condition $G_{\varphi}=0$ on $\partial \mathbb B$ gives then $\chi(t)=c\,t$, $c>0$.
[*Remark*]{}. For the case ${\varphi}(x)=\max_k \log|x_k|^{a_k}$ and $Y=GL_n({{{\mathbb}C}})$, similar analyticity theorems were proved in [@D] and [@Kis3].
Analytic singularities
======================
Let $F:X\times Y\to {{{\mathbb}C}}^{n}$ be a holomorphic mapping such that its zero set $|Z_F|$ is of codimension $n$ and moreover, $|Z_F|\cap\{(x,y_0):x\in X\}$ is finite for any $y_0\in Y$. Then the function ${\varphi}(x,y)=\log|F(x,y)|$ satisfies conditions (i)–(v) on $X'\times Y$ for any domain $X'\Subset X$; condition (iv) follows from King’s formula $(dd^c\log|F|)^{n}=[Z_F]$. This observation can be used in finding analytic majorants for plurisubharmonic singularities.
\[cor:finite\] Let $f=(f',f'')$ be a finite equidimensional holomorphic mapping on a complex manifold $X$. If $u\in {{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ satisfies $u\le\log|f'|+O(1)$ on an open set $\omega\subset X$ intersecting every irreducible component of the zero set of $f'$, then $u\le\log|f'|+O(1)$ locally on $X$.
Let ${\varphi}_N(x,y)=\log(|f'(x)-f'(y)|+
|f''(x)-f''(y)|^N)$, $N\in{{{\mathbb}Z}}_+$, and let $X'\Subset X$ be such that $\omega'=X'\cap\omega$ intersects all irreducible components of the set $Z'=\{x\in X': f'(x)=0\}$. Then, by Theorem \[theo:typean\], $S(u,{\varphi},X')$ is an analytic variety. By the assumption, $S(u,{\varphi},X')\cap\omega'\supset S(\log|f'|,{\varphi},X')\cap\omega'$. Therefore, $S(u,{\varphi},X')$ contains all irreducible components of $S(\log|f'|,{\varphi},X')$ that pass through $\omega$. Observe now that $S(\log|f'|,{\varphi},X')= Z'$, which implies $u\le {\varphi}_N+C$ on $Z'$.
Given $a\in Z'$, we can assume $D=\{x:\max\{|f'(x)|,
|f''(x)-f''(a)|\}<1\}\Subset X'$. Therefore, $u\le g_N+C$, where $g_N(x)=\max\{\log|f'(x)|, N\log|f''(x)-f''(a)|\}$ is the Green–Zahariuta function for the singularity ${\varphi}_N$ in $D$. Taking $N\to\infty$, we get $u\le\log|f'|+C$ in $D$.
A more accurate analysis allows us to weaken the assumptions on the mapping $f'$ in Corollary \[cor:finite\]. To this end, it is convenient to use the notion of complex spaces.
For a closed complex subspace $A$ of $X$, let ${{{\mathcal I}}}_A=({{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x})_{x\in X}$ be the associated coherent sheaf of ideals in the sheaf ${{\mathcal O}}_X$ of germs of holomorphic functions on $X$, and let $|A|$ be the variety in $X$ locally defined as the common set of zeros of holomorphic functions with germs in ${{{\mathcal I}}}_A$, i.e., $|A|=\{x:{{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x}\neq {{\mathcal O}}_{X,x}\}$.
Recall that an ideal ${\mathcal J}\subset {{\mathcal I}}\subset {{\mathcal O}}_{X,x}$ is called a [*reduction*]{} of ${{\mathcal I}}$ if its integral closure coincides with that of ${{\mathcal I}}$; the [*analytic spread*]{} of ${{\mathcal I}}$ equals the minimal number of generators of its reductions [@NR].
We will say that a complex space $A$ is [*integrally generic at*]{} $x\in |A|$ if the analytic spread of ${{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x}$ equals ${{\operatorname{codim}}}_x|A|$. This is equivalent to saying that there exist functions $h_k\in{{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x}$, $ k=1,\ldots, {{\operatorname{codim}}}_x|A|$, such that $\log|h|=\log|f|+O(1)$, where $f=(f_1,\ldots,f_{s})$ are generators of ${{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x}$, see [@NR]. A space $A$ is [*integrally generic*]{} if it is so at each $x\in|A|$.
We will write $u\le\log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$ if a function $u$ satisfies $u\le\log|f|+O(1)$ for local generators $f$ of ${{\mathcal I}}_A$.
\[theo:integr\] Let $A$ be an integrally generic complex space on $X$ and $\omega$ be an open set intersecting every irreducible component of $|A|$. If a function $u\in{{\operatorname{PSH}}}(X)$ satisfies $u\le \log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$ on $\omega$, then it satisfies the relation everywhere in $X$.
Denote by $Z_l$, $l=1,2,\ldots$, the irreducible components of $|A|$. We will first prove near all points of the set $ Z_l^*=Z_l\setminus \cup_{k\neq l}Z_k.$
Let ${{\operatorname{codim}}}\, Z_l=p$. For an arbitrary point $z\in
Z_l^*\cap\partial\omega$, there is a neighbourhood $U$ of $z$, a holomorphic mapping $h:U\to{{{\mathbb}C}}^p$, and a linear mapping $U\to{{{\mathbb}C}}^{n-p}$, such that $|A|\cap U=Z_l^*\cap U$, $\log|h|\le
\log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$, and for every $y\in V$, the mapping $F_y:x\mapsto(h(x)-h(y),L(x)-L(y))$ is finite in $U$. By Corollary \[cor:finite\], we get then $u\le
\log|h|+O(1)\le\log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$ on $\omega\cup U$.
Now we can repeat the procedure with $\omega\cup U$ instead of $\omega$. Since the sets $Z_l^*$ are connected, it gives us the desired bounded near every point of $|A|^*=\cup_l Z_l^*$.
The rest points can be treated as in the proof of [@RSig2 Lemma 4.2]. Namely, fix a point $z\in |A|\setminus
|A|^*$, ${{\operatorname{codim}}}_z|A|=p$. By Thie’s theorem, there exist local coordinates $x=(x',x'')$, $x'=(x_1,\ldots,x_p)$, $x''=(x_{p+1},\ldots,x_n)$, centered at $z$, and balls ${{{\mathbb}B}}'\subset
{{{{\mathbb}C}}}^p$, ${{{\mathbb}B}}''\subset {{{{\mathbb}C}}}^{n-p}$ such that ${{{\mathbb}B}}'\times {{{\mathbb}B}}''\Subset
V$, $|A|\cap({{{\mathbb}B}}'\times {{{\mathbb}B}}'')$ is contained in the cone $\{|x'|\le
\gamma |x''|\}$ with some constant $\gamma>0$, and the projection of $|A|\cap({{{\mathbb}B}}'\times {{{\mathbb}B}}'')$ onto ${{{\mathbb}B}}''$ is a ramified covering with a finite number of sheets.
Let $h=(h_1,\ldots,h_p)$ satisfy $\log|h|\le\log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$ on $V$. Take $r_1=2\gamma r_2$ with a sufficiently small $r_2>0$ so that ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\subset {{{\mathbb}B}}'$ and ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''\subset {{{\mathbb}B}}''$, then for some $\delta>0$ we have $|h|\ge\delta$ on $\partial {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\times
{{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''$.
Given a point $x_0''\subset {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''$, denote by $R(x_0'')$ and $S(x_0'')$ the intersections of the set ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\times\{x_0''\}$ with the varieties $|A|$ and $|A|\setminus |A|^*$, respectively. Since the projection is a ramified covering, $R(x_0'')$ is finite for any $x_0''\in {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''$, while $S(x_0'')$ is empty for almost all $x_0''\in {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''$ because $\dim S\le n-p-1$; we denote the set of all such generic $x_0''$ by $E$.
Given $x_0''\in E$, the function $v(x')=\log(|h(x',x_0'')|/\delta)$ is nonnegative on $\partial {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'$ and maximal on ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\setminus R(x_0'')$, since the map $h(\cdot,x_0''):{{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\to{{{{\mathbb}C}}}^p$ has no zeros outside $R(x_0'')$. Since $u$ satisfies $u\le \log|h| + O(1)$ locally near points of $|A|^*$, we have then $u(x',x_0'')\le v(x')+C$ on the whole ball ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'$, where $C=\sup_V u$.
As $x_0''\in E$ is arbitrary, this gives us $u\le \log|h|-\log\delta
+C$ on ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\times E$. The continuity of the function $\log|h|$ extends this relation to the whole set ${{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_1}'\times {{{\mathbb}B}}_{r_2}''$, which completes the proof.
Green functions
===============
The result can be applied to investigation of maximality properties for Green functions with analytic singularities.
The [*Green function $G_A$ with singularities along*]{} a complex space $A$ is the upper envelope of the class of all functions $u\in
PSH^-(X)$ such that $u\leq \log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$. This function is plurisubharmonic in $X$ and satisfies $G_A\leq \log|{{\mathcal I}}_A|$, see [@RSig2].
When $|A|$ is discrete, $G_A$ is maximal on $X\setminus |A|$. In the case $\dim|A|>0$, the Green function has additional maximality properties. Namely, if ${{\mathcal I}}_A$ has $p<n$ global generators, then $G_A$ is maximal on the whole $X$, and for an arbitrary complex space $A$, the function $G_A$ is [*locally maximal*]{} outside a discrete subset $J_A$ of $|A|$ consisting of all points $x\in|A|$ such that the analytic spread of ${{{\mathcal I}}}_{A,x}$ equals $n$ [@RSig2 Theorem 4.3]; in [@R], $J_A$ was called the [*complete indeterminacy locus*]{}. (A function $v$ is said to be locally maximal on an open set $\omega$ if every point of $\omega$ has a neighbourhood where $v$ is maximal.)
We do not know if the function $G_A$ is always maximal on $X\setminus J_A$; what we can prove is the following result.
\[cor:gr\] If $A$ is an arbitrary closed complex space on $X$, then the function $G_A$ is maximal outside an analytic subset $J$ of $|A|$, nowhere dense in each positive-dimensional component of $|A|$. If $\dim X=2$, then $J$ coincides with the complete indeterminacy locus $J_A$. If $A$ is integrally generic, then $J=\emptyset$.
By [@RSig2 Proposition 3.5], the set $|A|$ can be decomposed into the disjoint union of local (not necessarily closed) analytic varieties $J^k$, $1\le k\le n$, such that ${{\operatorname{codim}}}\,J^k\ge k$ and for each $a\in J^k$, the ideal ${{\mathcal I}}_{A,a}$ has analytic spread at most $k$. In view of Theorem \[theo:integr\], this implies the claims.
[A11]{}
, *Mesures de Monge-Ampère et caractérisation géométrique des variétés algébriques affines.* Mém. Soc. Math. France (N. S.) **19** (1985), 1–124.
, *Nombres de Lelong généralisés, théorèmes d’intégralité et d’analycité.* Acta Math. **159** (1987), 153–169.
, *Monge-Ampère operators, Lelong numbers and intersection theory.* Complex Analysis and Geometry (Univ. Series in Math.), ed. by V. Ancona and A. Silva, Plenum Press, New York, 1993, pp. 115–193.
, Notions of Convexity. Progress in Mathematics, Birkhäuser 127, 1994.
, *The partial Legendre transformation for plurisubharmonic functions.* Invent. Math. **49** (1978), 137–148.
, *Un nombre de Lelong raffiné.* Séminaire d’Analyse Complexe et Géométrie 1985–87, Fac. Sci. Monastir Tunisie, 1987, 61–70.
, *Attenuating the singularities of plurisubharmonic functions.* Ann. Polon. Math. **LX.2** (1994), 173–197.
, *Reductions of ideals in local rings.* [Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.]{} **50** (1954), 145–158.
, *Maximal plurisubharmonic functions associated to holomorphic mappings.* [Indiana Univ. Math. J.]{} **47** (1998), no. 1, 297–309.
, *Relative types and extremal problems for plurisubharmonic functions.* Int. Math. Res. Not., 2006, Art. ID 76283, 26 pp.
, *Green functions with singularities along complex spaces.*, Internat. J. Math.**16** (2005), no. 4, 333–355.
, *Spaces of analytic functions and maximal plurisubharmonic functions.* D.Sci. Dissertation, Rostov-on-Don, 1984.
, *Spaces of analytic functions and Complex Potential Theory.* Linear Topological Spaces and Complex Analysis **1** (1994), 74–146.
Tek/Nat, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Norway
0.1cm
[E-mail]{}: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We demonstrate experimentally the resonant extinction of THz radiation by a single plasmonic bowtie antenna, formed by two n-doped Si monomers with a triangular shape and facing apexes. This demonstration is achieved by placing the antenna at the output aperture of a conically tapered waveguide, which enhances the intensity of the incident THz field at the antenna position by a factor 10. The waveguide also suppresses the background radiation that otherwise is transmitted without being scattered by the antenna. Bowtie antennas, supporting localized surface plasmon polaritons, are relevant due to their ability of resonantly enhancing the field intensity at the gap separating the two triangular elements. This gap has subwavelength dimensions, which allows the concentration of THz radiation beyond the diffraction limit. The combination of a bowtie plasmonic antenna and a conical waveguide may serve as a platform for far-field THz time-domain spectroscopy of single nanostructures placed in the gap.'
address:
- '$^1$ Center for Nanophotonics, FOM Institute AMOLF, c/o Philips Research Laboratories, High Tech Campus 4, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands'
- '$^2$ Optics Research Group, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Lorentzweg 1, 2628 CJ Delft, The Netherlands'
- '$^3$ COBRA Research Institute, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands'
author:
- 'M C Schaafsma$^1$, H Starmans$^{1,2}$, A Berrier$^1$ and J Gómez Rivas$^{1,3}$'
title: Enhanced THz extinction of single plasmonic antennas with conically tapered waveguides
---
Introduction
============
Terahertz time-domain spectroscopy (THz-TDS) has a great potential for the investigation of fundamental transitions in organic and inorganic molecules and nanostructures. Translational and rotational degrees of freedom in polyatomic gases and bio-molecules, lattice vibrations in crystalline structures, conduction electrons in metals and semiconductors, all have resonances at THz frequencies in the range of [@ferguson2002; @tonouchi2007; @dexheimer2008; @jepsen2010]. In typical far-field implementations of THz spectroscopy, the wavelength greatly exceeds the length scale of the individual objects under investigation, e.g., bio-molecules or nanostructures. Therefore, spectroscopy of single objects is challenging and measurements are usually performed in large ensembles at high concentrations. When working with a limited amount of material or individual objects, the response may drop below the detection threshold. In order to compensate for these constraints, local field enhancements into subwavelength volumes are needed. Resonant conducting structures, sustaining localized surface plasmon resonances (LSPRs), are key in realizing these large local field enhancements [@shi2009; @tian2010; @berrier2010; @giannini2010].
In this manuscript, we demonstrate that it is possible to detect and measure the extinction of a single bowtie antenna in a standard THz time-domain spectrometer. The antenna is formed by two triangular monomers with facing apexes and separated by a 5 micron gap. The monomers are made of doped Si with a metallic behavior at THz frequencies [@saxler2004]. The investigated antenna exhibits an LSPR at 0.4 THz when excited by a plane wave polarized along its long axis. This resonance is the result of the coherent oscillation of the free charge carriers, harmonically driven by the incident THz electric field. Plasmonic bowtie antennas can locally enhance the field at the LSPR frequency by several orders of magnitude in the gap between the individual monomers. This gap has typically a volume of $\sim 10^{-6} \lambda^3$. The large field enhancement in deep subwavelength volumes opens the possibility for THz spectroscopy of single nanostructures or at very low concentrations of material. However, the scattering and extinction cross sections of such a plasmonic antenna can be still small compared to the beam size of the THz pulse in standard THz-TDS setups. To make the detection of a single antenna possible we use a conically tapered waveguide. Tapered waveguides have been proposed to guide and enhance THz radiation into a confined region [@rusina2008; @kim2010; @zon2011]. Zhang [*e*t al.]{} have investigated the adiabatic compression of THz radiation in tapered parallel-plate waveguides [@zhang2005]. Zhan [*e*t al.]{} have shown superfocussing of THz radiation using tapered parallel-plate waveguides [@zhan2010]. Wächter [*e*t al.]{} have used tapered photoconductive THz field probes for subwavelength imaging [@wachter2009]. Enhanced THz transmission through conically tapered waveguides has been recently reported by Nguyen [et al.]{} [@nguyen2010]. We extend here the application domain of conically tapered waveguides by measuring the extinction of single resonant antennas located at the waveguide output, where the field is enhanced.
A schematic of an experiment conducted on a single antenna is shown in figure \[Fig01\](a). A linearly polarized THz beam is used to illuminate a single plasmonic antenna. Since the antenna has an extinction cross section much smaller than the size of the beam, only a small fraction of the incident field is extinct by scattering and absorption in the antenna. The majority of the field is transmitted as unperturbed by the antenna, leading to a large background in extinction measurements. In order to reduce this background, a thin metallic screen can be used to only transmit the relevant part of the THz beam that interacts with the antenna (figure \[Fig01\](b)). Although the signal-to-background ratio is improved in this configuration, only a small fraction of the pulse is used and the signal-to-noise is not increased. To enhance the signal-to-noise, it is possible to use a tapered waveguide. The conical design guides the off-center parts of the field in the direction of the antenna, resulting in an enhanced THz electromagnetic field at the output aperture. This field enhancement leads also to the enhanced response of the antenna, allowing a more sensitive spectroscopy.
The article is organized as follows: The fabrication of the bowtie antenna and the waveguides is described in section \[Fab\]. In section \[Sim\], we present simulations of the near field enhancement of a single bowtie antenna and the conical waveguide, as well as its enhanced transmission. THz extinction measurements of a THz antenna at the output of the conical waveguide are compared with the extinction of a random array of similar antennas in section \[Exp\]. These measurements demonstrate the enhanced extinction of single antennas mediated by the enhanced field at the output of the waveguide. The article is ended with the conclusions.
![Schematic representation of experiments conducted on a single antenna. (a) A plasmonic antenna with a small cross section is illuminated by a spatially extended beam. Only a small fraction of the field is scattered and absorbed by the antenna. In a transmission experiment, there is a large background of unscattered radiation. (b) A cylindrical waveguide or a metallic screen will block this background. However, the incident intensity is also reduced. (c) The enhancement of this intensity is possible by concentrating the incident field on the antenna with a conically tapered waveguide.[]{data-label="Fig01"}]({Fig01}){width="12"}
Waveguide and antenna fabrication {#Fab}
=================================
Two waveguides have been fabricated for the experiments. A conical shape waveguide is used to enhance the field at its output aperture and a cylindrical waveguide with the same output dimensions is used to reference the transmittance. The waveguides have been fabricated using electrical discharge machining: A conically tapered electrode with a half-angle of $15^o$ or a cylindrical electrode with diameter of are lowered through an aluminium plate, eroding a conical or cylindrical hole. The dimensions of the conically tapered waveguide are a thickness of , an output aperture with a diameter of and a half-angle of $15^o$. The thickness of the cylindrical waveguide is and its diameter is . A schematic representation of the conical waveguide is shown in figure \[Fig02\](a).
The semiconductor plasmonic antennas have been fabricated using conventional micro-fabrication techniques [@berrier2012]: A silicon-on-insulator (SOI) wafer with a thick undoped top layer is implanted with arsenic atoms, introducing a free carrier concentration of $(6 \pm 3)\times
\unit{10^{19}}{\centi\meter^{-3}}$. This doping level makes silicon a conductor at terahertz frequencies. The SOI wafer is bonded onto a thick quartz substrate with benzocyclobutene (BCB). The silicon substrate and oxide layer are subsequentially removed with wet chemical etching using KOH and HF. The antenna structures are defined using optical lithography and reactive ion etching.
The behavior of semiconductor antennas is determined by the doping level, and the antenna geometry. The bowtie antenna is formed by two monomers with a triangular shape with a base of $\unit{100}{\micro\meter}$, a triangle height of $\unit{300}{\micro\meter}$ and monomer height of $\unit{1.5}{\micro\meter}$. The triangles have facing apexes, separated by a gap of . As it is shown below, this structure has a LSPR around . A schematic representation of the bowtie antenna and an optical microscope image are shown in figures \[Fig02\](b) and \[Fig02\](c), respectively. The cracks observed in the image are cracks in the BCB layer. These cracks have a typical width of a micron, being much smaller than the wavelength of THz radiation, and do not influence the measurements.
![Schematic representation of (a) the conical waveguide and (b) the bowtie antenna. (c) Optical microscope image of the bowtie antenna. The antenna is formed by two triangular monomers of n-doped Si, bonded onto a quartz substrate with BCB. The cracks in the microscope image are in the supporting BCB layer.[]{data-label="Fig02"}]({Fig02}){width="12"}
Simulations {#Sim}
===========
The local field enhancement of the bowtie antenna and the transmission properties of the conical waveguide are studied using a 3D finite element method (FEM) in the frequency domain (COMSOL Multiphysics). For the simulations, we use the antenna dimensions determined from the optical image (figure \[Fig02\](c)). The dielectric constant of n-doped Si at 0.4 THz is determined with the Drude model [@ashcroft1976; @adachi2004] to be $\epsilon=-2.1 \times 10^3 + i\cdot 1.7\times 10^{-3}$. For simplicity, we consider the antenna to be in vacuum and illuminated with a monochromatic continuous plane wave at normal incidence to the plane of the antenna. The frequency of the simulations is . As it is shown in section \[Exp\], the bowtie antenna has a LSPR around this frequency.
Figures \[Fig03\](a) and \[Fig03\](b) show the intensity enhancement of the electric field in the plane at the middle height of the antenna, normalized by the incident field. Figure \[Fig03\](a) displays the intensity enhancement for a polarization of the incident wave along the long axis of the antenna, while figure \[Fig03\](b) shows the intensity enhancement for a polarization along the short axis. Cuts through the intensity enhancement images along the long axis (horizontal-dashed lines) are shown in Figure \[Fig03\](c), while cuts along short axis (vertical-dashed lines) are shown in Figure \[Fig03\](d). The blue-solid and green-dashed curves represent the intensity enhancement for the polarization along the long axis and short axis, respectively.
![Simulations of the local field intensity enhancement close to a doped silicon bowtie antenna formed by two triangular monomers. The antenna is illuminated at normal incidence with a plane wave having a frequency of , i.e., with an incident wavevector normal to the plane of the figure. (a) and (b) show the local intensity enhancement $|E|^2/|E_0|^2$, where $|E_0|^2$ is the incident field intensity, in the plane at the middle height of the antenna for the incident THz radiation polarized parallel and orthogonal to the long antenna axis (white and black dashed lines), respectively. (c) Shows the intensity enhancement along the long axis of the antenna for a polarization parallel (blue-solid) and orthogonal (green-dashed) to the long axis. (d) Shows the intensity enhancement for both polarizations along the short axis of the antenna.[]{data-label="Fig03"}]({Fig03}){width="12"}
When driven along the long axis, the free electrons in the semiconductor bowtie antenna resonate at the LSPR frequency. There is a capacitive coupling of the two monomers across the gap. This coupling, arising from the coulomb attraction of charges across the short distance separating the two monomers, gives rise to an intensity enhancement in the gap. The enhancement is further increased by the lighting-rod effect that results from the sharp tips forming the apex of the triangles. The simulations show an intensity enhancement in the gap over 4 orders of magnitude. Note that this enhancement might be different in a real sample due to rounding of the antenna tips and the presence of the substrate. Nevertheless, the simulations illustrate that resonant bowtie antennas are capable of focusing and enhancing locally electromagnetic fields in subwavelength volumes. For an incident polarization along the short axis of the antenna there is no field enhancement relative to the incident field at . For this frequency and polarization the antenna is not resonant with the incident THz wave.
![(a) Simulated transmittance spectra of a conically tapered (blue-solid curve) and cylindrical (green-dashed curve) waveguide. (b) Transmitted intensity of the conically tapered waveguide referenced by the cylindrical waveguide. The vertical lines in both figures correspond to the frequencies at which the field enhancements are shown in figure \[Fig05\].[]{data-label="Fig04"}](Fig04){width="12"}
The transmission properties of the conically tapered and cylindrical waveguides are simulated using FEM and finite-difference in time domain (FDTD, CST Microwave Studio) techniques. As sketched in figure \[Fig01\], a linearly polarized plane wave travels from left to right through the system. The dimensions of the waveguides used for the simulations are those described in section \[Sim\]. The aluminium forming the waveguides is simulated as a perfect electric conductor. For the FDTD simulations a broadband Gaussian pulse is sent through the system, and the intensity of the transmitted field is monitored behind the waveguide, at a distance of after the output exit. The transmission spectra are obtained by Fourier transforming these fields. Figure \[Fig04\](a) shows the transmittance spectrum, defined as the transmitted intensity normalized by the incident intensity, of the conically tapered waveguide with a blue-solid curve and of the cylindrical waveguide with a green-dashed curve. Both simulations have been normalized to the maximum transmittance of the conical waveguide at . At low frequencies the transmittance vanishes. These frequencies are below the cutoff frequency defined by the output aperture of the waveguides. For an infinitely long cylindrical waveguide with a diameter of the cutoff frequency is [@marcuvitz1964]. Below cutoff the wave entering the waveguide becomes evanescent. For a waveguide of finite length, the evanescent field can still be transmitted for frequencies just below cutoff.
Figure \[Fig04\](b) shows the transmittance enhancement, which is defined as the transmittance through the conically tapered waveguide normalized by the transmittance through the cylindrical waveguide. The conically tapered waveguide enhances the transmitted field with respect to the cylindrical waveguide. While the cylindrical waveguide only transmits the fraction of the field incident onto the opening and reflects the rest, the conically tapered waveguide guides the incident field at the larger input aperture towards the smaller output aperture. These fields travel a longer distance, picking up an additional phase compared to the direct transmitted fields. For the given waveguide dimensions this results in destructive interference and a minimum in transmittance around . The entrance aperture of the conically tapered waveguide has a radius of , which is ten times the radius of the exit aperture. The 100 times larger energy illuminating the conically tapered waveguide compared to the cylindrical waveguide results in a maximum transmittance enhancement of around 35.
Figure \[Fig05\] shows FEM simulations for the total field intensity enhancement in the conically tapered waveguide. A monochromatic and linearly y-polarized plane wave propagates from left to right. The total field enhancement in the plane through the center of the waveguide along the polarization direction -the yz plane- is shown for frequencies below \[Fig05\](a), around \[Fig05\](b) and above \[Fig05\](c) cutoff. Cuts through these maps along the dashed white lines are shown in figure \[Fig05\](d). For frequencies below cutoff there is an enhancement of the field inside the waveguide, but the transmission is reduced because the propagating field is fully reflected before the aperture is reached. The interference pattern in the intensity enhancement is the result of the interference of the incident field and this reflection. For waves having frequencies close to the cutoff frequency, there is a transition from the evanescent transmitted field to propagating waves. Figure \[Fig05\](b) shows that although most of the wave is reflected a small fraction is transmitted. For frequencies well above cutoff, figure \[Fig05\](c), the field propagates through the waveguide. This condition is needed for a maximum enhancement of the transmission. We note that even for this frequency, significant reflection takes place and the interference pattern is formed. This reflection can be minimized by reducing the tapering angle of the waveguide in order to allow an adiabatic focusing of the incident THz field onto the output aperture [@rusina2008].
![Simulations of the intensity enhancement of the THz electromagnetic field propagating through a conically tapered waveguide at various frequencies. A linearly y-polarized plane wave enters the waveguide from the left and travels to the right. 2D cuts through the center of the waveguide are shown for frequencies of (a) , (b) and (c) . These frequencies correspond to frequencies below, around and above the cutoff frequency of the waveguide, respectively. Line cuts of the total field intensity enhancement through the center of the waveguide along the direction of propagation of the wave are shown in (d). For clarity, the field intensities at 0.2 and 0.4 THz have been vertically displaced.[]{data-label="Fig05"}](Fig05){width="12"}
THz transmission and extinction measurements {#Exp}
============================================
The THz transmission experiments were carried out with a standard THz-TDS setup [@dexheimer2008], in which a Ti:Sapphire oscillator (Femtolasers, Fusion 20-800), providing a train of pulses around , is used to generate broadband and linearly polarized THz pulses in a GaAs photoconductive antenna. The detection is done with a ZnTe crystal using the electro-optic effect. The THz beam has a Gaussian beam profile with a full width at half maximum of . The waveguide is placed in the THz beam, and the quartz substrate with the antenna is clamped in front of the waveguide.
The experimental characterisation of the conically tapered and cylindrical waveguides is shown in figure \[Fig06\]. Both waveguides are measured in transmission and compared against each other and a reference measurement taken without waveguide, i.e., the response function of the setup. The time domain signals (figure \[Fig06\](a)) show that the presence of the cylindrical waveguide severely reduces the transmitted signal, since most of the incident amplitude is blocked by the waveguide. The enhanced transmission of the conically tapered waveguide, relative to the cylindrical waveguide, is visible as an increase in the THz pulse dispersion. This is the contribution of the field that illuminated the entrance of the waveguide at a larger radius, and has picked up an additional phase before reaching the output aperture.
The transmittance spectra for the conically tapered (red-solid curve) and cylindrical (green-dashed curve) waveguides in figure \[Fig06\](b) are obtained by Fourier transforming the time domain signals to obtain the power spectrum, and are normalized against the setup response, i.e., the power spectrum measured without any waveguide. For both waveguides the transmittance vanishes at the lowest frequencies due to cutoff. The transmittance remains below 0.05 for the cylindrical waveguide even at higher frequencies. This reduced transmittance is due to the large area of the incident beam that is blocked. In our setup, roughly 95 % of the energy carried by the THz beam is contained in an area of , while the area of the aperture of the cylindrical waveguide is . This ratio of 1/25 matches the experimental results. The transmittance is enhanced for the conical waveguide, compared to the cylindrical one. Most of the characteristics from the simulations shown in figure \[Fig04\] are reproduced by the measurements. The transmittance approaches 0.3 at , while the output aperture only encloses around 5 % of the area of the incident pulse. The reduced transmittance around is also consistent with the simulations, and can be explained by the aforementioned destructive interference in the wavefront. The blue shift of this minimum in the measurements, compared to the simulations, can be attributed to the approximation of plane wave illumination used for the simulations. In the simulations, the complete input aperture is illuminated by a plane wave, whereas in the experiments the pulse has a Gaussian profile and it is slightly smaller than the input aperture of the waveguide. This smaller size of the beam reduces the effective height of the waveguide and introduces a blue-shift of the interference features. Figure \[Fig06\](c) displays the transmittance of the conically tapered waveguide normalized by the cylindrical waveguide, showing the enhancement of the transmittance of the conically tapered waveguide over the complete range of . The maximum intensity enhancement is around one order of magnitude at .
![Experimental characterisation of the conically tapered and cylindrical waveguides. (a) Time domain transmission measurements of the reference (blue-dotted), conically tapered (red-solid) and cylindrical (green-dashed) waveguide. (b) Fourier transform of the transmitted intensity of the conically tapered (red-solid) and cylindrical (green-dashed) waveguides normalized by the reference. (c) Transmittance enhancement of the conically tapered waveguide, defined as the transmittance through this waveguide normalized by the transmittance through the cylindrical waveguide.[]{data-label="Fig06"}]({Fig06}){width="12"}
A single bowtie antenna is placed at the output aperture of the conically tapered waveguide, as shown in the inset of figure \[Fig07\](a). The measured extinction, which is defined as 1 minus the transmittance, of this single antenna in front of the waveguide is shown in figure \[Fig07\](a) with the solid-red curve. The transmission measurements through the single antenna are referenced to the transmission of the waveguide with an empty quartz substrate at the output entrance, i.e., without the antenna. A resonance is clearly resolved in this measurement with a maximum extinction of 90 % around . This enhanced extinction corresponds to the excitation of a LSPR in the plasmonic antenna, which should lead to a large local field enhancement in the bowtie gap. The blue-dashed curve in figure \[Fig07\](a) corresponds to the extinction of the single antenna measured without the waveguide. The response is practically flat and the LSPR cannot be resolved.
To rule out any possible artifact in the measurements that could lead to an extinction peak similar to our measurements, we have confirmed the resonant response of the bowtie antenna by measuring the extinction of a random array of similar antennas without the conically tapered waveguide. An optical microscope image of the sample is shown in the inset of figure \[Fig07\](b). In this measurement, the THz beam illuminates approximately 30 antennas. Therefore, the extinction is enhanced in this sample by increasing the density of antennas, rather than by concentrating the THz beam with the conical waveguide. A similar extinction spectrum to the single antenna is measured for the random array (figure \[Fig07\](b)). The extinction reaches a maximum at 0.4 THz, with a resonant response that can be attributed to the excitation of LSPRs.
The demonstration of the enhanced extinction by a single bowtie antenna opens a range of possibilities for THz spectroscopy of nanostructures or of molecules at low concentrations. For example, the positioning of a nanostructure in the subwavelength gap defined by the two monomers, in which the field is locally enhanced, will enable to increase the THz field-matter interaction to a level at which far-field spectroscopy of single nanostructures at THz frequencies might be possible.
![Extinction measurements of bowtie antennas, illuminated with a polarization along the long axis and referenced against an empty quartz substrate. (a) Extinction spectra of a single bowtie antenna measured with the conically tapered waveguide (red-solid curve) and without any waveguide (blue-dotted curve). In the inset an optical microscope image of the antenna mounted in front of the conically tapered waveguide is shown. (b) Extinction spectrum of a random array of close packed antennas. The inset contains an optical microscope image of the array.[]{data-label="Fig07"}](Fig07){width="12"}
Conclusion {#label006}
==========
We have experimentally demonstrated that a conically tapered waveguide can be used to funnel and enhance the THz intensity. This intensity enhancement allows us to measure the extinction of a single THz plasmonic bowtie antenna, which otherwise cannot be detected due to the large background of unscattered radiation. The transmittance properties are also investigated numerically finding an excellent agreement with the measurements. The large localized field enhancements that can be achieved by bowtie antennas in subwavelength volumes, may open the possibility of using standard far-field THz time domain spectrometers for the detection and spectroscopy of single nanostructures.
This work is part of the research programme of the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM), which is part of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The work was partially supported by the European community’s 7th framework programme under grant agreement FP7-224189 (ULTRA project).
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
[10]{}
Ferguson B and Zhang X C 2002 Materials for terahertz science and technology [*Nature Materials*]{} [**1**]{} 26-32
Tonouchi M 2007 Cutting-edge terahertz technology [*Nature Photonics*]{} [**1**]{} 97-105
Dexheimer S L (ed) 2008 [*Terahertz Spectroscopy: Principles and Applications (Optical Science and Engineering series)*]{} (CRC Press)
Jepsen P U, Cooke D G and Koch M 2011 Terahertz spectroscopy and imaging - Modern techniques and applications [*Laser Phot. Rev.*]{} [**5**]{} 124-66 Shi X, Cleary A, Khalid A and Cumming D R S 2009 Multiple plasmon resonances at terahertz frequencies from arrays of arsenic doped silicon dots [*Microelec. Eng.*]{} [**86**]{} 1111-3
Tian Z, Azad A K, Lu X, Gu J, Han J, Xing Q, Taylor A J, O’Hara J F and Zhang W 2010 Large dynamic resonance transition between surface plasmon and localized surface plasmon modes [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 12482-8
Berrier A, Ulbricht R, Bonn M and Gómez Rivas J 2010 Ultrafast active control of localized surface plasmon resonances in silicon bowtie antennas [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 23226-35
Giannini V, Berrier A, Maier S A, Sanchez-Gil J A and Gómez Rivas J 2010 Scattering efficiency and near field enhancement of active semiconductor plasmonic antennas at terahertz frequencies [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 2797-807
Saxler J, Gómez Rivas J, Janke C, Pellemans H P M, Haring Bolivar P and Kurz H 2004 Time-domain measurements of surface plasmon polaritons in the terahertz frequency range [*B*]{} [**69**]{} 155427
Rusina A, Durach M, Nelson K A and Stockman M I 2008 Nanoconcentration of terahertz radiation in plasmonic waveguides [*Opt. Express*]{} [**23**]{} 18576-89
Kim S-H, Lee E S, Ji Y B and Jeon T I 2010 Improvement of THz coupling using a tapered parallel-plate waveguide [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 1289-1295 Zon V B and Zon B A 2011 Terahertz surface plasmon polaritons on a conductive right circular cone: Analytical description and experimental verification [*A*]{} [**84**]{} 013816
Zhang J and Grischkowsky H 2005 Adiabatic compression of parallel-plate metal waveguides for sensitivity enhancement of waveguide THz time-domain spectroscopy [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**86**]{} 061109 Zhan H, Mendis R and Mittleman D M 2010 Superfocusing terahertz waves below $\lambda /250$ using plasmonic parallel-plate waveguides [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 9643-50 Wächter M, Nagel M and Kurz H 2009 Tapered photoconductive terahertz field probe tip with subwavelength spatial resolution [*Appl. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**95**]{} 041112 Nguyen T D, Vardeny Z V and Nahata A 2010 Concentration of terahertz radiation through a conically tapered aperture [*Opt. Express*]{} [**18**]{} 25441-8 Berrier A, Albella P, Ameen Poyli M, Ulbricht R, Bonn M, Aizpurua J and Gómez Rivas J 2012 Detection of deep-subwavelength dielectric layers at terahertz frequencies using semiconductor plasmonic resonators [*Opt. Express*]{} [**20**]{} 5052-60
Ashcroft N W and Mermin N D 1976 [*Solid State Physics*]{} (Saunders)
Adachi S 2004 [*Handbook on physical properties of semiconductors*]{} vol 1 (Boston, Kluwer)
Marcovitz N 1964[*Waveguide Handbook*]{} (Lexington, MA: Boston Technical Publishers)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
address: 'L.P.N.H.E. Paris VI-VII, 4 place Jussieu, 75252 Paris, France'
author:
- 'X. Bertou, P. Billoir, O. Deligny, C. Lachaud, A. Letessier-Selvon'
title: 'Tau Neutrinos in the Auger Observatory : A New Window to UHECR Sources.'
---
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'As machine learning systems move from computer-science laboratories into the open world, their accountability becomes a high priority problem. Accountability requires deep understanding of system behavior and its failures. Current evaluation methods such as single-score error metrics and confusion matrices provide aggregate views of system performance that hide important shortcomings. Understanding details about failures is important for identifying pathways for refinement, communicating the reliability of systems in different settings, and for specifying appropriate human oversight and engagement. Characterization of failures and shortcomings is particularly complex for systems composed of multiple machine learned components. For such systems, existing evaluation methods have limited expressiveness in describing and explaining the relationship among input content, the internal states of system components, and final output quality. We present , a set of hybrid human-machine methods and tools for describing and explaining system failures. leverages both human and system-generated observations to summarize conditions of system malfunction with respect to the input content and system architecture. We share results of a case study with a machine learning pipeline for image captioning that show how detailed performance views can be beneficial for analysis and debugging.'
author:
- |
Besmira Nushi Ece Kamar Eric Horvitz\
Microsoft Research, Redmond, WA, USA
bibliography:
- 'document.bib'
title: |
Towards Accountable AI: Hybrid Human-Machine Analyses\
for Characterizing System Failure
---
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We evaluate the folk wisdom that algorithms trained on data produced by biased human decision-makers necessarily reflect this bias. We consider a setting where training labels are only generated if a biased decision-maker takes a particular action, and so bias arises due to selection into the training data. In our baseline model, the more biased the decision-maker is toward a group, the more the algorithm favors that group. We refer to this phenomenon as *algorithmic affirmative action*. We then clarify the conditions that give rise to algorithmic affirmative action. Whether a prediction algorithm reverses or inherits bias depends critically on how the decision-maker affects the training data as well as the label used in training. We illustrate our main theoretical results in a simulation study applied to the New York City Stop, Question and Frisk dataset.'
author:
- 'Ashesh Rambachan[^1]'
- 'Jonathan Roth[^2]'
bibliography:
- 'Bibliography.bib'
title: '[^3]'
---
Introduction
============
Algorithms have the promise to improve upon human decision-making in a variety of settings, but concerns abound that algorithms may produce decision rules that are biased against particular groups. A particular fear is that if the training data is generated by a process that is biased against a group, then the algorithm will reflect this bias. This concern is captured by the common refrain “bias in, bias out” [@BarocasSelbst2016; @Mayson(18)].
In this paper, we evaluate the folk wisdom that algorithms trained on data produced by biased human decision-makers will necessarily inherit bias. Through the lens of a classic model of discrimination in economics, we illustrate that algorithms trained over biased data do not necessarily inherit bias. In fact, for a common class of prediction exercises, we show that the opposite is true: The more biased the decision-maker is toward a group in the training data, the more favorable the algorithm is toward that group. We refer to this phenomenon as *algorithmic affirmative action*. We clarify the conditions that give rise to algorithmic affirmative action and discuss how alternative biases in the training data affect resulting algorithms.
We consider a baseline model with three elements that together produce algorithmic affirmative action. First, we consider a setting in which labels in the training data are created only if a decision-maker chooses to take a particular action. This is commonly known as the *selective labels problem* [@LKLLM2017; @KLLLM2018]. For instance, we may only obtain data on whether a pedestrian is carrying contraband if a police officer chooses to search the pedestrian.[^4] Second, we follow a classic literature in the economics of discrimination and assume that the decision-maker is a *taste-based discriminator* against the disadvantaged group [@Becker1957; @AltonjiBlank(99); @KnowlesPersicoTodd2001; @AnwarFang2006; @ArnoldDobbieYang2017]. This means that the decision-maker acts as if they receive a different payoff (or face a different cost) for taking the action of interest against a particular group. This may arise due to preferences, costs, or misperceptions. As a result, bias in our model manifests itself through selection into the training data. Finally, we assume that the decision-maker has access to *unobservables*, which are features that are informative about the label of interest but are unavailable in the observed training data. Each of these three elements – selective labels, taste-based discrimination and unobservables – are critical to algorithmic affirmative action.
In this baseline model, we then show that the *more biased* the decision-maker is toward the disadvantaged group, the *more favorable* the resulting algorithm is toward the disadvantaged group. To illustrate the intuition for this result, consider the example of police searches from earlier. Suppose that police assess the probability that an individual is carrying contraband, and search people with high assessed probabilities. Police base their search decision on a number of factors that are recorded in the data (the time of stop, location, demographics of the individual), as well as subjective information that is not recorded in the data (their evaluation of the individual’s behavior). Because police choose to search individuals with risky behavior that is unobservable to the data scientist, an algorithm trained to predict whether contraband was found using a sample of conducted searches will tend to make predictions that are too high for the general population. However, this selection issue will be mitigated for African Americans if police officers are racially biased. Indeed, in the extreme case where police officers are so biased that they search *all* African Americans, regardless of underlying risk, then there will be no selection on unobservable behavior for African Americans in the training data. Thus, the more biased are police officers, the more favorable is the training data for African Americans, and hence the more the algorithm learns to favor African Americans. Our results do not imply that biased data can never produce biased algorithms – rather, whether an algorithm does or does not inherit bias depends crucially on the form of the bias and the training of the algorithm. To illustrate this, we consider modifications to our baseline model that can produce effects in line with the usual “bias in, bias out” intuition. First, algorithmic affirmative action crucially depends on the fact that the algorithm is trained to predict the outcome of interest (carrying contraband in the policing example) in the sample where the outcome is available. The typical “bias in, bias out” result can be obtained if either i) the algorithm is instead trained to predict the human decision, or ii) the outcome of interest is assumed to be zero for those not selected by the human decision-maker. Second, while we assume that selection into the training data is determined by a biased decision-making process, we assume that the label of interest is measured without bias. This rules out “label bias,” an additional source of bias in training data that is often mentioned in the literature on algorithmic fairness – see [@CorbettDaviesGoel(18)] for a discussion.
This paper relates to several recent works that study fairness and discrimination in a variety of fields across computer science and the social sciences. First, several papers consider properties of algorithms that are trained on selectively-labelled data. [@KLLLM2018] and [@LKLLM2017] define the selective labels problem and discuss its implications for evaluating the predictive performance of algorithms. [@KallusZhou(18)] studies how the selective labels problem impacts fairness-adjusted predictors. [@DeArteaga(18)] illustrates that the selective labels problem cannot be addressed via standard sample selection procedures and propose a new techniques to deal with it. [@Cowgill2019] shows that even if there are selective labels, an algorithm trained on selectively-labelled data will not be biased provided that the human decisions are sufficiently noisy. [@MadrasEtAl2019] proposes a causal modeling approach to estimating fair prediction functions in the presence of unobserved features. Finally, [@KannanEtAl(18)] studies the related problem of how a fairness-minded decision-maker (e.g. college admissions officer) should select a screening rule if the selected data from that screening decision are used downstream by a Bayesian decision-maker (e.g. employer).
Our work is also related to a series of legal papers that have argued that automating decisions will magnify discrimination due to historical biases in existing training data – see [@BarocasSelbst2016], [@Chander(17)], [@Mayson(18)]. Our empirical application applies our result to police searches to New York Stop, Question and Frisk. A large literature raises concerns about biased training data in the context of the broader criminal justice system – see [@LumIsaac(16)] and [@Selbst(17)] among many others. In contrast, our results suggest that for certain prediction exercises, historical biases in training data can produce an automated decision rule that reverses discrimination. Conversely, our results also imply that if an algorithm is trained on data that is produced by a decision-maker that exhibits explicit affirmative action towards a group, the algorithm could, in fact, inherit bias.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section \[section:model\] presents our baseline model. Section \[section:main-results\] states and proves the main results. Section \[section:application\] illustrates our results in simulations based on New York Stop, Question and Frisk data. We place more involved proofs in the Appendix.
A Model of Biased Decisions {#section:model}
===========================
In this section, we develop a model wherein the training data given to a predictive algorithm is generated by a biased decision-making process. For the sake of exposition, we discuss the model in the context of police bias in pedestrian searches and refer to the decision-maker as the police throughout. This will more clearly connect our theoretical results with our empirical application to New York Stop, Question and Frisk. However, this model is broadly applicable to other settings with selective labels such as college admissions, loan decisions and bail decisions, among many others.
Police officers wish to search individuals that have a high probability of carrying contraband. Following [@Becker1957] and a large literature in economics, police officers are taste-based discriminators against African Americans.[^5] Based on the search decisions of police officers, data are then revealed to the data scientist. If a police officer searches an individual, the data scientist observes the result of that search (was the individual carrying contraband?), some characteristics of the individual and the stop (age, gender, location of stop, time of stop, etc.) as well the race of the individual. The data scientist then uses this training data to construct an algorithm to predict which individuals are most likely to carry contraband. We focus our attention on analyzing properties of the predictive algorithm produced by the data scientist.
The population
--------------
Individuals in the population are characterized by the random vector $(X, U, R, Y)$. Let $X \in \mathcal{X}$ denote some set of characteristics about the individual that are typically recorded after a police search such as age, gender, location of stop, time of stop, etc. Let $U \in \mathcal{U}$ denote characteristics of an individual that are observed by a police officer prior to a search but are typically not recorded. For example, this may consist of the police officer’s evaluation of the individual’s behavior prior to the stop or the individual’s behavior during the stop. Importantly, $U$ is observed by the police officer but is unobserved to the data scientist. Finally, $R \in \{0, 1\}$ denotes the race of the individual with $R = 1$ for African Americans, and $Y \in \{0, 1\}$ denotes whether the individual is carrying contraband. The population is then described by the joint distribution $\mathbb{P}$ of the random vector $(Y, X, R, U)$.
Police decisions
----------------
The police observe the characteristics $(X, U, R)$ of each individual and decide whether to search that individual. The police officer receives a positive payoff $b > 0$ if they find contraband after searching an individual and without loss of generality, we normalize this payoff to one, $b = 1$. The police officer incurs a cost $c > 0$ for every search. The police officer receives a payoff of zero if the individual is not searched.
In addition, the police are taste-based discriminators against African Americans and receive an additional payoff $\tau > 0$ from searching African Americans. The parameter $\tau$ parametrizes the degree to which the police are biased against African Americans. The larger the magnitude of $\tau$, the more biased the police are against African Americans. So the police’s payoffs from conducting a search are $Y + \tau R - c $. In order to maximize their expected payoff, the police will decide whether to search according to a threshold rule: $$S^*(X, U, R) = 1\left( \mathbb{E}[Y | X, U, R] \geq c - \tau \cdot R \right).$$ Notice that the bias of the police implies that a lower threshold for search is applied to African Americans. In this sense, the police are biased against African Americans.
The prediction problem
----------------------
The data scientist then observes data consisting of individuals that are stopped by the police. There are “selective labels” – the data scientist only observes whether an individual was carrying contraband ($Y$) if the police searched the individual ($S^* = 1$). The data-scientist thus observes the pair $(Y,X,R, S^*)$ for those with $S^* = 1$. In some of our results, we will also consider what happens if the data scientist is able to observe $(X, R, S^*)$ but not $Y$ for those who are not searched by the police. Let $\hat{\mathbb{P}}_{\tau}$ denote the joint distribution of the data that is revealed to the data scientist. We index the probability distribution of the observed data by the police’s discrimination parameter $\tau$ as our results will focus on comparative statics over $\tau$.
Using the observed data, the data scientist constructs a predictive algorithm of whether an individual is carrying contraband $Y$ using the observed features $(X, R)$. In our baseline model, we suppose that the data scientist trains the algorithm using only the data where the outcome is available ($S^* = 1$). For simplicity, we abstract from the estimation problem and simply consider properties of the optimal predictor under squared loss, $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{P}_{\tau}}[Y | X, R, S^* =1]$, where $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{P}_{\tau}}[\cdot]$ denotes the conditional expectation over the distribution of observed data.
Main results {#section:main-results}
============
Since the police incorporate the unobservable $U$ into their search decision, the training data of conducted searches will tend to be composed of individuals that have values of $U$ associated with higher probability of $Y=1$. As a result, the predictive algorithm trained on the selected training data will tend to over-predict the label $Y$ for the whole population.
However, as the police officers become more biased, this selection problem becomes less severe for African Americans. Intuitively, the more biased are the police officers against African Americans, the more likely they are to search any given African American, and so there is less selection on the unobservable $U$. In the extreme case where $\tau \geq c$, police officers search all African Americans, and there is no selection on the unobservable $U$ for African Americans. The predictive algorithm thus becomes more favorable to African Americans as the police officers become more biased. We state this result formally.
\[theorem:comparative-static\] $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{P}_\tau}[Y | X =x , R = 1, S^* =1]$ is weakly decreasing in $\tau$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}$ and $\tau$ such that $\hat{P}_{\tau}(S^* = 1 \,|\, X = x, R = 1) > 0$. Likewise, $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{P}_\tau}[Y | X =x , R = 0, S^* = 1]$ is constant in $\tau$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}$ and $\tau$ such that $\hat{P}_{\tau}(S^* = 1 \,|\, X = x, R = 0) > 0$.
Define $\mu_{X,R,U} := \mathbb{E}[Y | X, R, U]$ and $\mu_{X,R} := \mathbb{E}[Y | X, R]$. Let $U^* = \mu_{X,R,U} - \mu_{X,R}$, so that $\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_{X,R} + U^*.$ Note that $S^* = 1$ if and only if $U^* \geq T(X, R, \tau)$ for the threshold $T(X, R, \tau) = (c - \tau \cdot R) - \mu_{X,R}$. Applying the law of iterated expectations,
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}\left[Y | X=x, R =r, S^* = 1\right] = \mathbb{E}\left[Y | X=x, R=r, U^* \geq T(x,r, \tau) \right] \\
= \mathbb{E}\left[ \mathbb{E}\left[Y | X=x, R=r, U^*\right] | X=x, R=r, U^* \geq T(x,r,\tau)\right] \\
= \mu_{x,r} + \mathbb{E}\left[ U^* | X=x, R=r, U^* \geq T(x,r,\tau) \right].
\end{aligned}$$
Note that for $r=1$, $T(x,r,\tau)$ is weakly decreasing in $\tau$. It follows immediately that $E[ U^* | X=x, R=r, U^* \geq T(x,r,\tau) ]$ is weakly decreasing in $\tau$, which gives the first desired result. Likewise, when $r=0$, $T(x,r,\tau)$ does not depend on $\tau$, which gives the second result.
Theorem \[theorem:comparative-static\] shows that as the police become more biased against African Americans, the predictions of the algorithm trained on the selected data become more favorable to African Americans. Similarly, an automated search rule that decides whether to search an individual using the predictive algorithm will display similar behavior – the more biased the police are against African Americans, the fewer African Americans will be searched by the automated search rule.
\[corollary:automated-search\] Consider the automated search rule: $$S^{automated}(x, r) = 1\left(\mathbb{E}_{\hat{\mathbb{P}}_\tau}[Y | X = x, R = r, S^* =1] \geq c \right).$$ The fraction of African Americans searched under $S^{automated}$ (i.e, $E[ S^{automated}(X,R) \,|\, R = 1]$) is decreasing in $\tau$, whereas the fraction of whites searched under $S^{automated}$ is constant in $\tau$.
These results clarify the manner in which the bias of police officers influences the algorithmic treatment of African Americans. Surprisingly, the bias of police officers works in favor of African Americans. We note that this result describes how the algorithm’s treatment of African Americans changes as the bias of the police changes. We do not take a stance directly on whether the algorithm’s treatment of African Americans for any given $\tau$ is “fair” in a formal sense.[^6] However, any sensible notion of fairness would suggest that if a given algorithm is unfair to African Americans, then any algorithm that is “harsher” to African Americans (i.e. more likely to search any given African American) and treats whites the same is at least as unfair. Therefore, Theorem \[theorem:comparative-static\] and Corollary \[corollary:automated-search\] suggest that if an algorithm is unfair to African Americans when trained upon data produced by police officers that discriminate against African Americans at some rate ($\tau > 0$), then an algorithm trained upon data produced by police officers that are unbiased against African Americans ($\tau = 0$) would be even *more* unfair to African Americans. Hence, the taste-based discrimination of the police officers cannot be the fundamental source of unfairness in this setting.
It is important to note that while we presented these results in the context of police searches, they apply to any setting in which there is a selective labels problem, the decision-maker that produces the selective labels is a taste-based discriminator against a particular group, and the discriminator has access to unobservables. When these conditions hold, the more biased is the decision-maker, the more favorable is the algorithm to the group that is discriminated against. We refer to this phenomenon as “*algorithmic affirmative action*.”
Finally, these results made no assumptions about the underlying population distribution of $(Y, X, R, U)$. These results apply even if there are differences across groups in the population. For example, even if the conditional distributions of the features $X$ differ across groups or the conditional distribution of the label $Y$ given the features $X$ differs across groups, these results still hold. We now analyze the extent to which algorithmic affirmative action holds under a variety of different modifications to our baseline model.
Alternative labels
------------------
In Theorem \[theorem:comparative-static\] and Corollary \[corollary:automated-search\], we assumed that the data scientist constructs an algorithm to predict the observed label $Y$ using the training data for the searched sample ($S^* = 1$). We now consider what happens if a different label and sample is used. First, the data scientist may instead predict the human decision $S^*$ itself over the full population. This is a common type of prediction problem in some contexts. For example, a series of papers note that using the human decision as the label is common in training algorithms to automate hiring decisions [@Cowgill2018; @Cowgill2019; @RaghavanEtAl(19)]. For this prediction exercise, algorithmic affirmative action no longer holds. Instead, the comparative static in bias now goes in the usual “bias in, bias out” direction.
\[thm: comparative static for expectation of s-star\] $\mathbb{E}\left[S^* | X =x, R=1\right]$ is weakly increasing in $\tau$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}$.
By the law of iterated expectations, $\mathbb{E}[ S^* | X = x, R =1] = \mathbb{E}[ \mathbb{E}[ S^* \,|\, X = x, U, R =1] ]$. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}[ S^* | X=x, R=1] &= \int_{u \in \mathcal{U}} \mathbb{E}[ S^* | X=x, U = u, R=1 ] \, dF(u) \\
&= \int_{ \{u \in \mathcal{U} : S^*(x,u,1) = 1 \} } dF(u) \\
&= \int_{ \{u \in \mathcal{U} : \mathbb{E}[Y|X=x,U=u,R= 1] \geq c - \tau\} } dF(u).
\end{aligned}$$ It follows that for $\tau_1 < \tau_2$, $$\begin{aligned}
&\mathbb{E}[ S^* | X=x, R=1, \tau = \tau_2] - \mathbb{E}[ S^* | X=x, R=1, \tau = \tau_1] = \\ &\int_{u \in \mathcal{U}_{12}} dF(u),
\end{aligned}$$ for $\mathcal{U}_{12} = \{u \in \mathcal{U} : c - \tau_2 \leq \mathbb{E}[Y|X=x,U=u,R= 1] \leq c - \tau_1 \}$, which gives the desired result.
A second alternative prediction exercise that the data scientist may also consider is to predict the outcome that the individual was searched by the police and that the individual was carrying contraband. That is, construct an algorithm to predict the label $Y \cdot S^*$ over the full sample. Put otherwise, the data scientist imputes the missing label $Y$ to be zero if $S^* = 0$. This type of prediction exercise is common in certain medical applications (see, e.g. [@mullainathan2017does]). We again find that “bias in, bias out” holds for this prediction exercise.
\[thm: comparative static for y times s\] $\mathbb{E}\left[ Y S^* | X = x, R =1 \right]$ is weakly increasing in $\tau$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}$.
By the law of iterated expectations, $\mathbb{E}[ Y S^* | X = x, R =1] = \mathbb{E}[ \mathbb{E}[ Y S^* | X = x, U, R = 1] ]$. Then,
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}[ YS^* | X=x, R=1] = \int_{u \in \mathcal{U}} \mathbb{E}[Y S^* | X=x, U = u, R=1 ] \, dF(u) \\
= \int_{ \{u \in \mathcal{U} : S^*(x,u,1) = 1 \} } \mathbb{E}[Y | X= x, U=u, R=1] \, dF(u) \\
= \int_{ \{u \in \mathcal{U} : \mathbb{E}[Y|X=x,U=u,R= 1] \geq c - \tau\} } \mathbb{E}[Y | X= x, U=u, R=1] \, dF(u).
\end{aligned}$$
It follows that for $\tau_1 < \tau_2$, $$\begin{aligned}
E[ Y S^* | X=x, R=1, \tau = \tau_2] - E[ Y S^* | X=x, R=1, \tau = \tau_1] = \nonumber \\ \int_{u \in \mathcal{U}_{12}} E[Y | X= x, U=u, R=1] \, dF(u)
\end{aligned}$$ for $\mathcal{U}_{12} = \{u \in \mathcal{U} : c - \tau_2 \leq E[Y|X=x,U=u,R= 1] \leq c - \tau_2 \}$. Since the support of $Y$ is weakly positive, the final integral in the previous display is weakly positive, which gives the desired result.
The key distinction between these alternative prediction exercises and our earlier result is that bias now drives a wedge between the true outcome of interest and the label that the algorithm is trained on ($S^*$ or $Y \cdot S^*$). In the original setting that predicts $Y$ over the selected sample with $S^* = 1$, the bias affects the prediction exercise only through sample composition. This is a crucial yet subtle difference.
Taken together, these results show that the choice of label ($Y$ vs. $S^*$ vs. $Y \cdot S^*$) plays a key role in determining whether human biases propagate into algorithmic predictions and automated decisions, formalizing an argument made heuristically in [@KLMS(18)]. Table \[tbl:prediction\_setups\] summarizes our results across the three prediction exercises considered.
Outcome Training sample Comparative static
--------------- ----------------- --------------------
$Y$ $S^* = 1$ Bias reversal
$S^*$ Full sample Bias inheritance
$Y \cdot S^*$ Full sample Bias inheritance
: Summary of prediction exercises
\[tbl:prediction\_setups\]
Noisy decision-making
---------------------
We next show that the results of the previous two sections are robust to allowing for random noise in the officer’s decisions. So far, we assumed that the police officers are able to correctly combine the available information to construct accurate predictions about risk, $\mathbb{E}[Y | X, R, U]$ and thereby rank order individuals correctly. Extensive work in the social sciences suggest that this does not hold in many applications of interest. For example, [@KLLLM2018] suggest that even experienced judges are unable to accurately predict recidivism in bail decisions. In the following result, we show that the comparative static in Theorem \[theorem:comparative-static\] still holds if police officers have independent random noise in their risk assessments.
\[prop:noise\] Suppose police search according to $$S^{noise}(X, U, R, \epsilon) = 1\Big( \mathbb{E}[Y | X, U, R] + \epsilon \geq c - \tau \cdot R\Big),$$ for a random decision shock $\epsilon$, where $\epsilon$ has strictly increasing hazard and is independent of $X, U, R$. Then, $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{P}_{\tau}}[Y | X = x, R = 1, S^{noise} =1]$ is weakly decreasing in $\tau$ for all $x \in \mathcal{X}$ and $\tau$ such that $\hat{P}_{\tau}(S^{noise} = 1 \,|\, X = x, R = r) > 0$.
See Appendix for proof.
Similarly, the comparative statics derived for the alternative prediction exercises are also robust to noisy decision-making.
\[prop:noise-alternative\] The conclusions of Theorem \[thm: comparative static for expectation of s-star\] and Theorem \[thm: comparative static for y times s\] hold replacing $S^*$ with $S^{noise}$.
See Appendix for proof.
Excluding group membership from the predictive algorithm
--------------------------------------------------------
Next, we consider what happens if the data scientist is forbidden from using group status in the predictive algorithm. For example, it may be illegal for a predictive algorithm to explicitly use race as a feature [@KLMS(18); @GillisSpiess(19)]. In this case, the prediction function in the baseline model now takes the form $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{\mathbb{P}}_{\tau}}[Y | X, S^* =1]$.
Whether the comparative static in bias still holds now depends on whether group status $R$ is “reconstructable” from the observed features $X$. That is, it depends on whether group status is predictable from the observed features. If group status is perfectly reconstructable, then these results trivially hold for a prediction function that does not use group status as $\mathbb{E}_{\mathbb{P}_{\tau}}[Y | X, S^* = 1] = \mathbb{E}_{\hat{\mathbb{P}}_{\tau}}[Y | X, R, S^* =1]$.
If group status is not perfectly reconstructable, then one can construct examples in which the gap in average predictions across groups for a group-blind algorithm moves in the opposite direction as the gap in average predictions across groups for an algorithm that includes race. The direction of the effect will depend on whether the marginally searched individual in the $R = 1$ group is more “similar” to the average person with $R = 0$ or $R=1$. As a simple example to illustrate this, suppose there is only one observed, binary feature $X$. Suppose that among whites, $X = 1$ with probability $1 - \epsilon$ for some small $\epsilon > 0$. Among African Americans, $X = 0$ with probability $1 - \epsilon$. Then, if the marginally searched African American has feature $X = 1$, then an increase in the bias of police officers will have a larger effect on the average prediction for whites than African Americans, as there are relatively more whites among the group with $X = 1$ in the observed data. Conversely, if the marginally searched African American has feature $X = 0$, then it will have a larger effect on the average prediction for African Americans than whites. The same intuition holds for the alternative prediction exercises that we considered earlier.
The reconstruction problem has been discussed at length elsewhere – see, among many others, [@KLMR(18); @LiptonEtAl(18); @ChenEtAl2019; @DattaEtAl(17)]. Typically, the reconstruction problem is treated as a source of bias in algorithms. Our results illustrate that this is not true generally. If group status is reconstructable, then an algorithm that is blind to group status may reverse bias and implement algorithmic affirmative action.
Application: New York City Stop, Question and Frisk {#section:application}
===================================================
We now apply these results to the New York Stop, Question and Frisk (SQF) data. We synthetically create a training data set that is produced by biased search decisions and illustrate the key comparative static described in Section \[section:main-results\].
Data description
----------------
SQF was a program in New York City that allowed the police to temporarily stop, question, and search individuals on the street. We use publicly available, stop-level data that contains information on all stops conducted as part of the SQF program from 2008-2013, totalling over 4 million stops of pedestrians and over 350,000 searches [@GoelEtAl2016].
For each recorded stop, we observe whether the stopped individual was searched for contraband and if so, an indicator for whether contraband was found. The data also contains several detailed characteristics of the stopped individual and the circumstances of the stop. The features in the data include the stopped individual’s age, gender, and build, and the time and location of the stop. We treat these as the observable features $X$. Importantly, we also observe the race $R$ of the stopped individual. For simplicity, we restrict attention to stops of non-Hispanic whites and African Americans.
The data also records the officer’s stated reason for conducting the stop – for example, the officer can select that the stop was conducted because the pedestrian was “carrying a suspicious object” or “displayed behavior indicative of a drug transaction.” We treat these responses as the unobservable features $U$ that are available to the officer at the time of the search decision but are unavailable to the data scientist. This is analogous to “soft information” about the individual that may be available to the officer at the time of the stop but may be unavailable in certain data sets.
Simulation design
-----------------
We conduct a simulation exercise that trains an algorithm to predict whether a stopped individual is carrying contraband on synthetic training datasets that are generated from the original SQF data. Across synthetic training datasets, we vary the degree of bias against African Americans in search decisions by selectively “undoing” observed searches. We then examine how changing the degree of bias against African Americans affects the resulting algorithm’s predictions.
More concretely, we first subset the data to only include stops in which searches were conducted ($S^*=1$). We then randomly split the searched SQF stops into two partitions. In the first partition, we construct a predictor for carrying contraband among stops with searches. The predictor estimates $\mathbb{E}[Y | X, R, U, S^*=1]$, where $X$ is a feature vector that includes demographic information about the stopped individual such as age, gender and build as well as the location and time of the stop, and $U$ is the officer’s stated reason for the stop. We construct the predictor using logistic regression, matching the approach of previous research using this data [@GoelEtAl2016; @KallusZhou(18)].
In the held-out partition, we then use the estimated prediction function to construct a synthetic search flag $\hat{S}$. For individuals with $\hat{Y} = \hat{\mathbb{E}}[Y | X, R, U, S^*=1] \leq c_{R}$, we set $\hat{S} = 0$ and treat them as if they had not been searched. For individuals with $\hat{Y} > c_{R}$ for $R \in \{0, 1\}$, we set $\hat{S} = 1$. This produces a synthetic dataset at the search thresholds $(c_0, c_1)$ in which we observe $(Y, X, R, \hat{S})$ for each observation. Finally, we re-estimate the prediction function over the synthetically searched observations. We estimate the functions $\mathbb{E}[Y | X, R, \hat{S} = 1]$, $\mathbb{E}[\hat{S} | X, Y]$ and $\mathbb{E}[Y \hat S | X, R]$ using logistic regression and examine properties of the estimated prediction functions.
We repeat this simulation for a variety of different thresholds $c_0, c_1$ to construct a series of synthetically searched observations at different levels of bias against African Americans. We vary $c_0, c_1$ so that 50 percent of the synthetic dataset is always searched and only the composition of searches between African Americans and whites vary. We vary the fraction of searches that are conducted on African Americans from 80 percent to 95 percent.
Simulation results
------------------
Figure \[fig:NYC-SQF-sim\] plots the results from our simulation exercise. The X-axis plots the discrimination parameter $\tau = c_1 - c_0$ across synthetic datasets. As discussed earlier, larger values of $\tau$ correspond to more bias against African Americans relative to whites and so, larger values on the X-axis represent a more biased search rule. The Y-axis plots the fraction of African Americans that fall in the top 50 percent of predicted risk using the prediction function estimated over the synthetic dataset.
The predictions from our earlier results in Section \[section:main-results\] hold sharply. First, as the police become more biased against African Americans, the prediction function $\hat{\mathbb{E}}[Y | X, R, \hat{S} = 1]$ becomes more favorable to them. In particular, fewer African Americans fall in the top half of predicted risk as $\tau$ increases. This illustrates our result of algorithmic affirmative action in a concrete application of interest. Second, as the police become more biased against African Americans, the prediction functions $\hat{\mathbb{E}}[\hat{S} | X, R]$ and $\hat{\mathbb{E}}[Y \hat{S} | X, R]$ become less favorable to African Americans. As $\tau$ increases, more African Americans fall in the top half of predicted risk. Once again, for these prediction functions, “bias in” implies “bias out.”
{width=".5\textwidth"} \[fig:NYC-SQF-sim\]
Conclusion {#section:conclusion}
==========
In this paper, we evaluated the folk wisdom that algorithms trained on data that are produced by biased human decision-makers will necessarily inherit bias. We showed that in an important class of prediction exercises, the opposite holds: The more biased the decision-maker towards a group, the more favorable is the algorithm towards that group. We called this phenomenon “*algorithmic affirmative action*.” We then showed that the form of the bias and the label used in training are important determinants of whether one obtains algorithmic affirmative action or “bias in, bias out.”
These results suggest that when we consider whether algorithms will inherit human biases, it is important to think carefully about the form of the human bias, how it affects the training sample, as well as how the labels and features are selected for the algorithm. Additionally, while some of the literature on fairness in algorithms has focused on blinding algorithms from group membership, our results also suggest that there are cases in which it may be beneficial for the algorithm to be group aware. This is in line with results found by [@DworkEtAl(12); @KLMR(18); @GillisSpiess(19)].
Our analysis abstracted away from a number of potentially important considerations. First, we assumed that the outcome $Y$ is measured without bias. This is often a significant concern in many empirical settings of interest. Second, our results in Section \[section:main-results\] focused on properties of the optimal, population prediction function $\mathbb{E}_{\hat{\mathbb{P}}_\tau}[\cdot]$ under squared loss and abstracted away from finite-sample considerations. Although our simulation evidence indicates that our results still hold in finite-sample, this deserves further attention. Similarly, extending these results to more general loss functions may be of interest. Finally, we focused attention on a taste-based model for discrimination. Other models of discriminating behavior may yield different conclusions. For example, discrimination may arise due to stereotypes (e.g. [@ShleiferEtAl(16)]) or differential noise in the decision-maker’s predictions across groups (e.g. [@Li(17)]).
Proofs of Additional Results
============================
Proof of Proposition 3.1
------------------------
Proposition 3.1 follows immediately from the following lemma.
\[lem:noise\] Suppose the police search individuals according to $$S^{noise}(X, U, R, \epsilon) = 1\Big(\mathbb{E}[Y | X, U, R] + \epsilon \geq c - \tau \cdot R\Big),$$ for a random decision shock, $\epsilon$. Suppose that the distribution of $\epsilon \perp U | X, R$ and has an increasing hazard. That is, $f(\epsilon | X, R, U) = f(\epsilon | X, R)$ and $\frac{f(\epsilon | X, R)}{1 - F(\epsilon | X, R)} \mbox{ increasing in } \epsilon$. Then, $\mu_{X,R,U} | \{S=1, X, R=1\}$ has the monotone likelihood ratio property in $-\tau$, where $\mu_{X,R,U} = \mathbb{E}[Y | X, U, R]$ as before.
The police choose $S^{noise} = 1$ if and only if $\mu_{X,R,U} + \epsilon \geq c - \tau \cdot R$, or equivalently, if and only if $\epsilon > c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_{X,R,U}$. Consider $\mu_1 < \mu_2$. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
&\dfrac{ \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | S^{noise} = 1, X , R} }{ \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | S^{noise} = 1, X , R} } \\
&= \dfrac{ \prob{S^{noise}=1 | \mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 , X , R} }{ \prob{S^{noise}=1 | \mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 , X , R} } \times \\
& \dfrac{ \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | X, R } / \prob{ S^{noise} =1 | X, R }}{\prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | X, R } / \prob{ S^{noise} =1 | X, R }} \\
&= \dfrac{ \prob{\epsilon > c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 | X , R} \cdot \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | X, R } }{ \prob{\epsilon > c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 | X , R} \cdot \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | X, R } } \\
&= \dfrac{\left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] \right) \cdot \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | X, R } }{\left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \right) \cdot \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | X, R } }\end{aligned}$$ where the first equality follows from Bayes’ Rule and the second and third apply definitions. Now, differentiating with respect to $-\tau$:
$$\begin{aligned}
& \dfrac{\partial}{\partial (-\tau)} \left( \dfrac{ \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | S^{noise} = 1, X , R} }{ \prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | S^{noise} = 1, X , R} } \right) = \\
& R \cdot \left( \dfrac{ f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] \left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \right) }{\left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \right)^2} - \right. \\
& \left. \dfrac{ f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] \right) }{\left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \right)^2} \right) \times \dfrac{\prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_1 | X, R }}{\prob{\mu_{X,R,U} = \mu_2 | X, R }},\end{aligned}$$
Clearly, this derivative is zero if $R=0$. If $R=1$, the derivative is greater than or equal to zero if and only if $$\begin{aligned}
& f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] \left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \right) \\
&- f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] \left(1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] \right) \geq 0\end{aligned}$$ or equivalently, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn: comparison of hazards}
\dfrac{f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right]}{ 1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 \right] } \geq \dfrac{f_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right]}{ 1 - F_{\epsilon | X,R}\left[ c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2 \right] }.\end{aligned}$$ However, since $\mu_1 < \mu_2$, we have $c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_1 > c - \tau \cdot R - \mu_2$, and so (\[eqn: comparison of hazards\]) holds if $\epsilon | X, R$ has increasing hazard.
Proof of Proposition 3.2
------------------------
The modified claim for Theorem 2 follows from the proof of Theorem 2, replacing expectations over $U$ with expectations over the joint distribution of $(U, \epsilon)$. Similarly the modified claim for Theorem 3 follows from the proof of Theorem 3, replacing expectations over $U$ with expectations over the joint distribution of $(U, \epsilon)$. $\Box$
[^1]: Harvard University, Department of Economics. Email: <[email protected]>
[^2]: Harvard University, Department of Economics. Email: <[email protected]>
[^3]: We are grateful to Isaiah Andrews, Talia Gillis, Ed Glaeser, Nir Hak, Nathan Hendren, Larry Katz, Sendhil Mullainathan, Aaron Roth, Ben Roth, Hannah Shaffer, and Jann Spiess for valuable comments and feedback. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant DGE1745303 (Rambachan) and Grant DGE1144152 (Roth).
[^4]: Likewise, a college may only obtain data on a student’s performance in college if an admissions officer chooses to accept the student or a bank may only obtain data on a borrower’s creditworthiness if a loan officer chooses to grant the borrower a loan.
[^5]: Unlike [@AnwarFang2006] and [@KnowlesPersicoTodd2001], we do not assume that the individual’s decision to carry contraband responds to police search decisions. As a result, we do not introduce an equilibrium concept such as Nash equilibrium.
[^6]: Results in [@KLR(16)] highlight that an algorithm cannot simultaneously satisfy several common definitions of fairness if the base rates of risk differ across groups.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We first study coupled Hirota-Iwao modified KdV (HI-mKdV) systems and give all possible local and nonlocal reductions of these systems. We then present Hirota bilinear forms of these systems and give one-soliton solutions of them with the help of pfaffians. By using the soliton solutions of the coupled HI-mKdV systems for $N=2,3,$ and $N=4$ we find one-soliton solutions of the local and nonlocal reduced equations.\
**Keywords:** Ablowitz-Musslimani reduction, Nonlocal coupled Hirota-Iwao modified\
Korteweg-de Vries equations, Hirota bilinear form, Pfaffians, Soliton solutions.
author:
- |
Asl[i]{} Pekcan [^1]\
[Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science]{}\
[Hacettepe University, 06800 Ankara - Turkey]{}
date:
-
-
title: 'Nonlocal Coupled HI-MKdV Systems'
---
ł@paragraph[dottedtocline[4]{}[5.3em]{}[2.1em]{}]{}
Introduction
============
In last decade, it has been shown by many researchers that by using different local and nonlocal symmetry reductions one can obtain local and the time reflection symmetric (T-symmetric), the space reflection symmetric (S-symmetric), and the space-time reflection symmetric (ST-symmetric) nonlocal equations from the general AKNS formalism [@AKNS] and other integrable hierarchies. The main aim in these works is to find new integrable equations and to obtain new interesting wave solutions. Particular examples are nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger (NLS) equation [@AbMu1]-[@jianke], nonlocal real or complex modified Korteweg-de Vries (mKdV) equation [@AbMu2], [@AbMu3], [@GurPek2]-[@ma], nonlocal real or complex sine-Gordon equation [@AbMu2], [@AbMu3], [@aflm], nonlocal Fordy-Kulish equations [@GurPek3], [@GursesFK], nonlocal $N$-wave systems [@gerd2], nonlocal multidimensional versions of NLS [@fok]-[@gerd3], and so on. The relations between local and nonlocal reductions are given in [@Vincent], [@Yang].
In this work, we consider the coupled Hirota-Iwao modified Korteweg-de Vries (HI-mKdV) system [@IHT], [@IH] $$\label{generaleqn}
\displaystyle \mu v_{i,t}+3(\sum_{j,k=1}^N c_{jk}v_jv_k)v_{i,x}+v_{i,xxx}=0$$ for $i=1, 2, \ldots, N$ where $c_{jk}=c_{kj}$. Here we will study a type of (\[generaleqn\]) given by $$\label{coupledmKdVN}
\displaystyle \mu v_{i,t}+3\rho v_{i,x}+v_{i,xxx}=0, \quad i=1, 2,\ldots, N,$$ where $$\label{rho}
\rho=\sum_{j, k=1, \ldots, N } c_{jk}v_jv_k,$$ and $\mu$ is a constant. Here $c_{jk}=c_{kj}$ and $c_{jj}=0$. We examine all local and nonlocal reductions of HI-mKdV systems (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for any $N$ and present their soliton solutions expressed by pfaffians. We study all possible reductions and give one-soliton solutions of the HI-mKdV systems (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=2, 4$. From the system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=4$, by using the Ablowitz-Mussilimani type reductions we obtain local and nonlocal systems of two equations. For $N=3$, we give local and nonlocal reductions, and one-soliton solution of (\[coupledmKdVN\]) in Appendix. For this case we also have reductions to systems of two equations, but if we require one-soliton solution obtained by Type 1 approach [@GurPek2], they reduce to a single known equation.
Local Reductions
================
We define new sets of indices. Let the Greek indices $\alpha, \beta, \gamma, \ldots$ run from 1 to $M$ and let the Latin alphabet $a,b,c,\ldots $ runs from $M+1$ to $N$. Then $v_{i}=(v_{\alpha}, v_{a})$ and we can write $ \rho$ defined in (\[rho\]) as
$$\rho=c_{\alpha \beta}\, v_{\alpha}\, v_{\beta}+ 2c_{\alpha a}\, v_{\alpha} v_{a}+c_{ab}\, v_{a}\,v_{b},$$
where $c_{jk}=c_{kj}$, $c_{jj}=0$, and repeated indices are summed up over their range. There are two types of local reductions.
[**(a)**]{} Let $v_{a}=k_{a}+A_{a \alpha}\,v_{\alpha}$ then the system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) consistently reduces to
$$\label{eqn1}
\mu v_{\alpha,t}+3 \rho \,v_{\alpha,x}+v_{\alpha,xxx}=0,~~\alpha=1,2,\ldots, M,$$
where $k_{a}$ and $A_{a \alpha}$ are arbitrary constants and $$\rho=q_{\alpha \beta}\, v_{\alpha} \, v_{\beta}+q_{\alpha} \, v_{\alpha}+q,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
q&=&c_{ab}\, k_{a} k_{b}, \\
q_{\alpha}&=& 2k_{a}\, c_{a \alpha}+2k_{a}\, c_{ab} A_{b \alpha},~ \alpha=1,2,\ldots, M,\\
q_{\alpha \beta}&=&c_{\alpha \beta}+c_{a \alpha}\, A_{a \beta}+c_{a \beta}\, A_{a \alpha}+c_{a b}\,A_{a \alpha}\,A_{b \beta},~~\alpha, \beta=1,2,\ldots, M.\end{aligned}$$
[**(b)**]{} Let $v_{a}=A_{a \alpha}\,\bar{v}_{\alpha}$ where a bar over a letter denotes complex conjugation. Then (\[coupledmKdVN\]) consistently reduce to $$\label{eqn2}
\mu v_{\alpha,t}+3 \rho \,v_{\alpha,x}+v_{\alpha,xxx}=0,~~\alpha=1,2,\ldots, M,$$ where $$\rho=c_{\alpha \beta} v_{\alpha} v_{\beta}+2c_{\alpha a}\, A_{a \beta} v_{\alpha} \bar{v}_{\beta}+c_{ab} A_{a \alpha} A_{b \beta} \bar{v}_{\alpha}\, \bar{v}_{\beta}$$ with the following constraints $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{c}_{\alpha \beta}&=&c_{ab}\, A_{a \alpha}\, A_{b \beta},~ \alpha, \beta=1, 2, \ldots, M,\\
c_{\alpha a}\, A_{a \beta}&=&\bar{c}_{\beta b} \bar{A}_{b \alpha},~ \alpha, \beta=1,2, \ldots, M,\end{aligned}$$ so that $\rho=\bar{\rho}$.
Nonlocal Reductions
===================
Let $v_{\alpha}^{\varepsilon}=v_{\alpha}(\varepsilon_{1} t, \varepsilon_{2} x)$ where $\varepsilon_{1}^2=\varepsilon_{2}^2=1$. Then there are also two different types of nonlocal reductions.
[**(a)**]{} Let $v_{a}=A_{a \alpha}\,v_{\alpha}^{\varepsilon}$, then (\[coupledmKdVN\]) consistently reduce to
$$\label{eqn3}
\mu v_{\alpha,t}+3 \rho \,v_{\alpha,x}+v_{\alpha,xxx}=0,~~\alpha=1, 2, \ldots, M,$$
where $$\rho=c_{\alpha \beta} v_{\alpha} v_{\beta}+ 2c_{\alpha a} A_{a \beta} v_{\alpha} v_{\beta}^{\varepsilon}+c_{ab}\,A_{a \beta} A_{b \alpha} v_{\alpha}^{\varepsilon}\,v_{\beta}^{\varepsilon}$$ with the constraints $$\begin{aligned}
c_{\alpha \beta}&=&c_{ab} A_{b \alpha}\,A_{a \beta},~ \alpha, \beta=1, 2, \ldots, M,\\
c_{\alpha a}A_{a \beta}&=&c_{\beta b}\,A_{b \alpha}, ~ \alpha, \beta=1, 2, \ldots, M,\\
\varepsilon_{1} \varepsilon_{2}&=&1,\end{aligned}$$ so that $\rho=\rho^{\varepsilon}$.
[**(b)**]{} Let $v_{a}=A_{a \alpha}\,\bar{v}_{\alpha}^{\varepsilon}$, then (\[coupledmKdVN\]) consistently reduce to $$\label{eqn4}
\mu v_{\alpha,t}+3 \rho \,v_{\alpha,x}+v_{\alpha,xxx}=0,~~\alpha=1, 2, \ldots, M,$$ where $$\rho=c_{\alpha \beta} v_{\alpha} v_{\beta}+ 2c_{\alpha a} A_{a \beta} v_{\alpha} \bar{v}_{\beta}^{\varepsilon}+c_{ab}\,A_{a \alpha} a_{b \beta} \bar{v}_{\alpha}^{\varepsilon}\,\bar{v}_{\beta}^{\varepsilon}$$ with the constraints $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{c}_{\alpha \beta}&=&c_{ab} A_{b \alpha}\,A_{a \beta}, ~ \alpha, \beta=1, 2, \ldots, M,\\
c_{\alpha a}A_{a \beta}&=&\bar{c}_{\beta b}\bar{A}_{b \alpha}, ~\alpha, \beta=1, 2 ,\ldots, M,\\
\bar{\mu} \varepsilon_{1} \varepsilon_{2}&=&\mu,\end{aligned}$$ so that $\rho=\bar{\rho}^{\varepsilon}$.
Hirota Bilinear Method for Coupled HI-mKdV\
Systems
===========================================
Let $$\displaystyle v_i=\frac{g_i}{f}, \quad i=1, 2, \ldots, N$$ in (\[coupledmKdVN\]). Then Hirota bilinear form of (\[coupledmKdVN\]) can be found as $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mu D_t+D_x^2-3\lambda_i )\{g_i\cdot f\}=0,\\
&(D_x^2-\lambda_i)\{f\cdot f\}=\sum_{j, k=1, \ldots, N } c_{jk}g_jg_k.\end{aligned}$$ For simplicity let us take $\lambda_i=0$, $i=1, 2, \ldots, N$. Hence we have $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mu D_t+D_x^2)\{g_i\cdot f\}=0, \, i=1, 2,\ldots, N, \\
&D_x^2\{f\cdot f\}=\sum_{j, k=1, \ldots, N } c_{jk}g_jg_k\end{aligned}$$ as Hirota bilinear form of (\[coupledmKdVN\]). In [@IH], multi-soliton solution of (\[coupledmKdVN\]) which has $M_i$ solitons for $v_i$, $i=1,2,\ldots, N$, respectively is expressed by pfaffians as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{g_if}
&g_i=\mathrm{pf}(d_0,a_1,\ldots,a_L,b_1,\ldots,b_L,\beta_i)\\
&f=\mathrm{pf}(a_1,\ldots,a_L,b_1,\ldots,b_L)\end{aligned}$$ for $i=1,2,\ldots, N$ and $L=M_1+M_2+\ldots+M_N$. Here the elements of pfaffians are defined as $$\begin{aligned}
&\mathrm{pf}(d_n,a_i)=\frac{\partial^n}{\partial x^n}e^{\theta_i}=k_i^ne^{\theta_i},\, \theta_i=k_ix-k_i^3t+\alpha_i^0\nonumber\\
&\mathrm{pf}(a_i,a_m)=\frac{k_i-k_m}{k_i+k_m}e^{\theta_i+\theta_m}\nonumber\\
&\mathrm{pf}(b_i,b_m)=-\frac{c_{jk}}{k_i^2-k_m^2},\, b_i\in B_j,\, b_m\in B_k \label{pf1}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{pf2}
\mathrm{pf}(a_i,b_m)=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
1, & \hspace{5mm} \mathrm{if}\quad i=m \\
0, & \hspace{5mm} \mathrm{if}\quad i\neq m
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{pf3}
\mathrm{pf}(b_m,\beta_i)=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
1, & \hspace{5mm} \mathrm{if}\quad b_m\in B_i \\
0, & \hspace{5mm} \mathrm{if}\quad b_m \notin B_i
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$ and $\mathrm{pf}(\mathrm{otherwise})=0$. Here the class of the sets $B_i$ of letters chosen out of $\{b_1,\ldots, b_L\}$, $i=1, 2, \ldots, N$, satisfies the following condition $$\begin{aligned}
&M_i=\mathrm{number}\, \mathrm{of}\, \mathrm{elements}\, \mathrm{in}\, \mathrm{the}\, \mathrm{set} B_i\nonumber\\
& B_i \bigcap B_j=\emptyset,\,\mathrm{if}\, i\neq j\nonumber\\
&\displaystyle \bigcup\limits_{i=1}^N B_i=\{b_1,\ldots,b_L \}.\label{pf4}\end{aligned}$$
N=2 Coupled HI-mKdV System
==========================
The system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=2$ is $$\begin{aligned}
& \mu v_{1,t}+3\rho v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\label{N=2a}\\
& \mu v_{2,t}+3\rho v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0,\label{N=2b}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\rho= 2c_{12}v_1v_2.$$ The corresponding Hirota bilinear form is $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mu D_t+D_x^3)\{g_i\cdot f\}=0,\quad i=1, 2, \\
&D_x^2\{f\cdot f\}= 2c_{12}g_1g_2.\end{aligned}$$
One-Soliton Solution of N=2 Coupled HI-mKdV System
--------------------------------------------------
Here we will consider the solution given by (\[g\_if\]) with the pfaffian elements (\[pf1\])-(\[pf3\]) under the condition (\[pf4\]). The solution which has one-soliton for every $\displaystyle v_i=\frac{g_i}{f}$, $i=1, 2$, i.e., $M_1=1$, $M_2=1$ so $L=M_1+M_2=2$ with $B_1=\{b_1\}$ and $B_2=\{b_2\}$ is expressed by $$\begin{aligned}
&g_i=\mathrm{pf}(d_0,a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2,\beta_i),\, i=1,2,\\
&f=\mathrm{pf}(a_1,a_2,b_1,b_2),\end{aligned}$$ which are explicitly given as $$\begin{aligned}
& g_i=-e^{\theta_i},\quad \theta_i=k_ix-\frac{k_i^3}{a}t+\delta_i,\,\, i=1, 2,\\
&f=-1-\frac{c_{12}}{(k_1+k_2)^2}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence one-soliton solution of the system (\[N=2a\])-(\[N=2b\]) is $$\displaystyle v_i=\frac{e^{\theta_i}}{1+\frac{c_{12}}{(k_1+k_2)^2}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2}},\,\, i=1,2.$$ Here $k_i, \delta_i$, $i=1, 2$ are arbitrary constants. The above solution is exactly the solution we obtained in [@GurPek2] for $c_{12}=-1$.
Local and Nonlocal Reductions for N=2
=====================================
The coupled HI-mKdV system for $N=2$ given by (\[N=2a\])-(\[N=2b\]) has four consistent reductions; two of them are local and the others are nonlocal. To obtain one-soliton solution of the reduced equations we use Type 1 and Type 2 approaches given in [@GurPek2]. Since the solutions for $N=2$ case are given in [@GurPek2] we will not present them here.
Local Reductions for N=2
------------------------
The coupled HI-mKdV system for $N=2$ given by (\[N=2a\])-(\[N=2b\]) has two local reductions. To obtain one-soliton solution of the reduced equations we use Type 1 and Type 2 approaches [@GurPek2].//
**i.** $v_2=a_2+a_1v_1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2$ are constants. When we apply the reduction to the equation (\[N=2b\]) we obtain the equation (\[N=2a\]) $$\mu v_{1,t}+3\rho v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ without any additional condition on the parameters. Hence the reduction is consistent and the reduced equation is $$\label{localiN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}+6\alpha v_1v_{1,x}+6\beta v_1^2v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0$$ for $\alpha=c_{12}a_2$ and $\beta=c_{12}a_1$. This equation is a combination of KdV and mKdV equations.
If we follow the Type 1 approach, the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of (\[localiN=2\]) are obtained from $$\frac{g_2}{f}=a_2+a_1\frac{g_1}{f} \Rightarrow g_2=a_2f+a_1g_1,$$ as $$1)\, a_2=0,\quad 2)\, k_2=k_1,\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_2}=a_1e^{\delta_1}.$$
**ii.** $v_2=a_2+a_1\bar{v}_1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2$ are constants. We use this reduction in (\[N=2b\]) and obtain the following conditions to have consistent reduction: $$\label{condlocaliiN=2}
1)\,\, \mu=\bar{\mu},\,\, 2)\,\, a_2=0, \,\, 3)\,\, c_{12}a_1=\bar{c}_{12}\bar{a}_1.$$ So the reduced equation is the complex mKdV (cmKdV) equation $$\label{localiiN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}+6\alpha |v_1|^2v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ where $\alpha=c_{12}a_1$ and $\mu$ are real numbers.
From the Type 1 approach, the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of (\[localiiN=2\]) are obtained from $$\frac{g_2}{f}=a_1\frac{\bar{g}_1}{\bar{f}} \Rightarrow g_2=a_1\bar{g}_1,\quad f=\bar{f}$$ as $$1)\, k_2=\bar{k}_1,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_2}=a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1},$$ besides the conditions (\[condlocaliiN=2\]).
Nonlocal Reductions for N=2
---------------------------
**i.** **$v_2(t,x)=a_2+a_1v_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_2+a_1v_1^{\varepsilon}$**, $\varepsilon_i^2=1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2$ are constants. When we use this reduction in (\[N=2b\]) for consistency of reduction we get the following conditions: $$1)\,\, \varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2=1,\,\, 2)\,\, a_2=0.$$ Therefore to have a nonlocal equation, there is only one possibility; $(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)=(-1,-1)$. The reduced equation is ST-symmetric nonlocal mKdV equation, $$\label{nonlocaliN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6\alpha v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ where $\alpha=c_{12}a_1$.
In this case, if we use the Type 1 approach to find one-soliton solution of (\[nonlocaliN=2\]) we get trivial solution. Hence we use the Type 2 approach. Therefore the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of (\[localiiN=2\]) are obtained from $$g_2f^{\varepsilon}-a_1fg_1^{\varepsilon}=0,\, \mathrm{where}\, g_1^{\varepsilon}=g_1(-t,-x),\, f^{\varepsilon}=f(-t,-x),$$ as $$1)\, e^{\delta_1}=\pm\frac{(k_1+k_2)}{\sqrt{c_{12}a_1}} ,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_2}=\pm\frac{\sqrt{a_1}(k_1+k_2)}{\sqrt{c_{12}}}.$$
**ii.** **$v_2(t,x)=a_2+a_1\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_2+a_1\bar{v}_1^{\varepsilon}$**, $\varepsilon_i^2=1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2$ are constants. Applying this reduction to (\[N=2b\]) gives the constraints on the parameters as $$\label{condnonlocaliiN=2}
1)\, \mu=\bar{\mu}\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2,\quad 2)\, a_2=0,\quad 3)\, c_{12}a_1=\bar{c}_{12}\bar{a}_1.$$ Hence we have three different nonlocal cmKdV equations:\
**a.** **T-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\label{TsymmN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6\alpha v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and $\alpha=c_{12}a_1\in \mathbb{R}$.\
**b.** **S-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\label{SsymmN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6\alpha v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and $\alpha=c_{12}a_1\in \mathbb{R}$.\
**c.** **ST-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\label{STsymmN=2}
\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6\alpha v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ where $\mu=\bar{\mu}$ and $\alpha=c_{12}a_1\in \mathbb{R}$.\
If we use the Type 1 approach, we get the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solutions of (\[TsymmN=2\])-(\[STsymmN=2\]) from $\frac{g_2}{f}=a_1\frac{\bar{g}_1^{\varepsilon}}{\bar{f}^{\varepsilon}}$ that is $$g_2=a_1\bar{g}_1^{\varepsilon},\, f=\bar{f}^{\varepsilon},\, \mathrm{where}\, \bar{g}_1^{\varepsilon}=\bar{g}_1(\varepsilon_1 t,\varepsilon_2 x),\,
\bar{f}^{\varepsilon}=\bar{f}(\varepsilon_1 t,\varepsilon_2 x),\, \varepsilon_i^2=1, i=1, 2,$$ as $$1)\, k_2=\varepsilon_2 \bar{k}_1,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_2}=a_1e^{\delta_1},$$ besides the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiN=2\]).
Note that since we have given one-soliton solutions of the local and nonlocal reduced equations for $N=2$ in [@GurPek2], we are not presenting them here also.
N=4 Coupled HI-mKdV System
==========================
The system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=4$ is $$\begin{aligned}
& \mu v_{1,t}+3\rho v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\label{N=4a}\\
& \mu v_{2,t}+3\rho v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0,\label{N=4b}\\
& \mu v_{3,t}+3\rho v_{3,x}+v_{3,xxx}=0,\label{N=4c}\\
& \mu v_{4,t}+3\rho v_{4,x}+v_{4,xxx}=0,\label{N=4d}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\rho= 2(c_{12}v_1v_2+c_{13}v_1v_3+c_{14}v_1v_4+c_{23}v_2v_3+c_{24}v_2v_4+c_{34}v_3v_4),$$ and $\mu$ is a constant. The corresponding Hirota bilinear form is $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mu D_t+D_x^3)\{g_i\cdot f\}=0,\quad i=1, 2, 3, 4,\\
&D_x^2\{f\cdot f\}= 2(c_{12}g_1g_2+c_{13}g_1g_3+c_{14}g_1g_4+c_{23}g_2g_3+c_{24}g_2g_4+c_{34}g_3g_4).\end{aligned}$$
One-Soliton Solution of N=4 Coupled HI-mKdV System
--------------------------------------------------
If we consider the solution given by (\[g\_if\]) with the pfaffian elements (\[pf1\])-(\[pf3\]) under the condition (\[pf4\]), the solution which has one-soliton for every $\displaystyle v_i=\frac{g_i}{f}$ i.e., $M_i=1$, $i=1, 2, 3, 4$ so $L=M_1+M_2+M_3+M_4=4$ with $B_i=\{b_i\}$, $i=1, 2, 3, 4$ is expressed by $$\begin{aligned}
&g_i=\mathrm{pf}(d_0,a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4,b_1,b_2,b_3,b_4,\beta_i),\, i=1, 2, 3, 4,\\
&f=\mathrm{pf}(a_1,a_2,a_3,a_4,b_1,b_2,b_3,b_4),\end{aligned}$$ which are explicitly written as $$\begin{aligned}
& g_1=e^{\theta_1}+\alpha_{12}\alpha_{13}\alpha_{23}\beta_{23}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3}
+\alpha_{12}\alpha_{14}\alpha_{24}\beta_{24}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_4}+\alpha_{13}\alpha_{14}\alpha_{34}\beta_{34}e^{\theta_1+\theta_3+\theta_4},\\
& g_2=e^{\theta_2}-\alpha_{12}\alpha_{13}\alpha_{23}\beta_{13}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3}-
\alpha_{12}\alpha_{14}\alpha_{24}\beta_{14}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_4}+\alpha_{23}\alpha_{24}\alpha_{34}\beta_{34}e^{\theta_2+\theta_3+\theta_4},\\
& g_3=e^{\theta_3}+\alpha_{12}\alpha_{13}\alpha_{23}\beta_{12}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3}
-\alpha_{13}\alpha_{14}\alpha_{34}\beta_{14}e^{\theta_1+\theta_3+\theta_4}-\alpha_{23}\alpha_{24}\alpha_{34}\beta_{24}e^{\theta_2+\theta_3+\theta_4},\\
&f=1+\alpha_{12}\beta_{12}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2}+\alpha_{13}\beta_{13}e^{\theta_1+\theta_3}+\alpha_{14}\beta_{14}e^{\theta_1+\theta_4}
+\alpha_{23}\beta_{23}e^{\theta_2+\theta_3}+\alpha_{24}\beta_{24}e^{\theta_2+\theta_4}\nonumber\\
&\hspace{1cm}+\alpha_{34}\beta_{34}e^{\theta_3+\theta_4}+\alpha_{12}\alpha_{13}\alpha_{14}\alpha_{23}\alpha_{24}\alpha_{34}[\beta_{12}\beta_{34}-\beta_{13}\beta_{24}
+\beta_{14}\beta_{23}]e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3+\theta_4},\end{aligned}$$ where $\theta_i=k_ix-\frac{k_i^3}{\mu}t+\delta_i$, $\displaystyle \alpha_{ij}=\frac{k_i-k_j}{k_i+k_j}$, and $\displaystyle \beta_{ij}=\frac{c_{ij}}{k_i^2-k_j^2}$ for $i,j=1,2,3,4$. Here $k_i, \delta_i$, $i=1, 2, 3, 4$ are arbitrary constants.
Local and Nonlocal Reductions for N=4
=====================================
The coupled HI-mKdV system for $N=4$ given by (\[N=4a\])-(\[N=4d\]) has four consistent reductions; two of them are local and the others are nonlocal. To obtain one-soliton solution of the reduced equations we use Type 1 and Type 2 approaches given in [@GurPek2].
Local Reductions for N=4
------------------------
Here we present two different local reductions of the coupled HI-mKdV system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=4$.
**i.** **$v_4=a_1v_2$, $v_3=b_1v_1$**, $a_1$ and $b_1$ are constants. The system (\[N=4a\])-(\[N=4d\]) is reduced to a system of two equations without any additional condition by this reduction. The reduced system is $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}+6[(c_{12}+c_{14}a_1+c_{23}b_1+c_{34}a_1b_1)v_1v_2+c_{24}a_1v_2^2+c_{13}b_1v_1^2]v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0\\
&\mu v_{2,t}+6[(c_{12}+c_{14}a_1+c_{23}b_1+c_{34}a_1b_1)v_1v_2+c_{24}a_1v_2^2+c_{13}b_1v_1^2]v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0.\label{localiN=4}\end{aligned}$$ If we use the Type 1 approach, the constraints for the parameters of one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiN=4\]) are found from the following equalities: $$\begin{aligned}
\displaystyle
&v_4=a_1v_2 \Rightarrow \frac{g_4}{f}=a_1\frac{g_2}{f} \Rightarrow g_4=a_1g_2,\\
&v_3=b_1v_1 \Rightarrow \frac{g_3}{f}=b_1\frac{g_1}{f} \Rightarrow g_3=b_1g_1.\end{aligned}$$ To satisfy the above equalities one of the cases for the parameters is $$1)\, k_4=k_2, \quad 2)\, k_3=k_1,\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_4}=a_1e^{\delta_2},\quad 4)\, e^{\delta_3}=b_1e^{\delta_1}.$$ Under these constraints, one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiN=4\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{g_1}{f},\quad v_2=\frac{g_2}{f}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&g_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}+\frac{a_1c_{24}(k_1-k_2)^2}{4k_2^2(k_1+k_2)^2}e^{(k_1+2k_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+2k_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+2\delta_2}\\
&g_2=e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}+\frac{b_1c_{13}(k_1-k_2)^2}{4k_1^2(k_1+k_2)^2}e^{(2k_1+k_2)x-\frac{(2k_1^3+k_2^3)}{\mu}t+2\delta_1+\delta_2}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
f=&1+\frac{1}{(k_1+k_2)^2}[c_{12}+a_1c_{14}+b_1c_{23}+a_1b_1c_{34}]e^{(k_1+k_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{b_1c_{13}}{4k_1^2}e^{2k_1x-\frac{2k_1^3}{\mu}t+2\delta_1}
+\frac{a_1c_{24}}{4k_2^2}e^{2k_2x-\frac{2k_2^3}{\mu}t+2\delta_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{a_1b_1c_{13}c_{24}(k_1-k_2)^4}{16k_1^2k_2^2(k_1+k_2)^4}e^{(2k_1+2k_2)x-\frac{(2k_1^3+2k_2^3)}{\mu}t+2\delta_1+2\delta_2}.\end{aligned}$$
Consider the following example.\
**Example 1.** Choose the parameters as $\mu=3, k_1=\frac{1}{2}, k_2=\frac{3}{2}$, and $a_1=b_1=e^{\delta_1}=e^{\delta_2}=c_{ij}=1$, $1\leq i< j\leq 4$. Hence the pair of the solution of the system (\[localiN=4\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\displaystyle
&v_1=\frac{4e^{\frac{1}{2}x+\frac{85}{24}t}(36e^{\frac{9}{4}t}+e^{3x})}{144e^{\frac{35}{6}t}+16e^{3x+\frac{43}{12}t}+144e^{2x+\frac{14}{3}t}
+144e^{x+\frac{23}{4}t}+e^{4x+\frac{7}{2}t}}\\
&v_2=\frac{36e^{\frac{3}{2}x+\frac{37}{8}t}(4e^{\frac{1}{12}t}+e^{x})}{144e^{\frac{35}{6}t}+16e^{3x+\frac{43}{12}t}+144e^{2x+\frac{14}{3}t}
+144e^{x+\frac{23}{4}t}+e^{4x+\frac{7}{2}t}}.\end{aligned}$$ These solutions are finite and bounded for $t\geq 0$. The graphs of the functions $v_1$ and $v_2$ are given in Figure 1(a) and Figure 1(b) respectively.
**ii.** $v_4=a_1\bar{v}_2$, $v_3=b_1\bar{v}_1$, $a_1$ and $b_1$ are constants. To have a consistent reduction of the system (\[N=4a\])-(\[N=4d\]) we must have $$\mu=\bar{\mu},\quad \rho=\bar{\rho}.$$ The relation $\rho=\bar{\rho}$ is satisfied when $$\label{N=4localiicond}
1)\, c_{12}=\bar{c}_{34}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_1,\quad 2)\, c_{14}a_1=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1,\quad 3)\, c_{24}a_1=\bar{c}_{24}\bar{a}_1, \quad 4)\, c_{13}b_1=\bar{c}_{13}\bar{b}_1.$$ The reduced system is $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}+6[c_{12}v_1v_2+c_{13}b_1|v_1|^2+c_{14}a_1v_1\bar{v}_2+\bar{c}_{14}\bar{a}_1\bar{v}_1v_2+c_{24}a_1|v_2|^2+
\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1\bar{v}_2]v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}+6[c_{12}v_1v_2+c_{13}b_1|v_1|^2+c_{14}a_1v_1\bar{v}_2+\bar{c}_{14}\bar{a}_1\bar{v}_1v_2+c_{24}a_1|v_2|^2+
\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1\bar{v}_2]v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0,\label{localiiN=4}\end{aligned}$$ where the conditions (\[N=4localiicond\]) are satisfied and $a\in \mathbb{R}$.
If we use the Type 1 approach by checking the equalities $$\begin{aligned}
\displaystyle
&v_4=a_1\bar{v}_2(t,x) \Rightarrow \frac{g_4}{f}=a_1\frac{\bar{g}_2}{\bar{f}} \Rightarrow g_4=a_1\bar{g}_2, f=\bar{f},\\
&v_3=b_1\bar{v}_1(t,x) \Rightarrow \frac{g_3}{f}=b_1\frac{\bar{g}_1}{\bar{f}} \Rightarrow g_3=b_1\bar{g}_1, f=\bar{f},\end{aligned}$$ we obtain the conditions on the parameters of one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiiN=4\]) as $$1)\, k_4=\bar{k}_2,\quad 2)\, k_3=\bar{k}_1,\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_4}=a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_2},\quad 4)\, e^{\delta_3}=b_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1},$$ besides the conditions (\[N=4localiicond\]). With all of these constraints one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiiN=4\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{g_1}{f},\quad v_2=\frac{g_2}{f}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&g_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t
+\delta_1}+\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-\bar{k}_1)(k_2-\bar{k}_1)}{(k_1+k_2)
(k_1+\bar{k}_1)(k_2+\bar{k}_1)}\frac{\bar{c}_{14}\bar{a}_1}
{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\bar{k}_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-\bar{k}_2)(k_2-\bar{k}_2)}{(k_1+k_2)
(k_1+\bar{k}_2)(k_2+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{c_{24}a_1}
{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-\bar{k}_1)(k_1-\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}{(k_1+\bar{k}_1)
(k_1+\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}
{(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{k_1^3+\bar{k}_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&g_2=e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{\mu}t
+\delta_2}-\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-\bar{k}_1)(k_2-\bar{k}_1)}{(k_1+k_2)
(k_1+\bar{k}_1)(k_2+\bar{k}_1)}\frac{c_{13}b_1}
{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\bar{k}_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-\bar{k}_2)(k_2-\bar{k}_2)}{(k_1+k_2)
(k_1+\bar{k}_2)(k_2+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{c_{14}a_1}
{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_2-\bar{k}_1)(k_2-\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}{(k_2+\bar{k}_1)
(k_2+\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}
{(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_2+\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{k_2^3+\bar{k}_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2},\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&f=1+\frac{c_{12}}{(k_1+k_2)^2}e^{(k_1+k_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2}
+\frac{\bar{a}_1\bar{c}_{14}}{(k_2+\bar{k}_1)^2}e^{(k_2+\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_2^3+\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{b_1c_{13}}{(k_1+\bar{k}_1)^2}e^{(k_1+\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_1^3+\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_1}
+\frac{a_1c_{24}}{(k_2+\bar{k}_2)^2}e^{(k_2+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_2^3+\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{a_1c_{14}}{(k_1+\bar{k}_2)^2}e^{(k_1+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_2}
+\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)^2}e^{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(\bar{k}_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+a_1b_1\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-\bar{k}_1)(k_1-\bar{k}_2)(k_2-\bar{k}_1)(k_2-\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_1+k_2)(k_1+\bar{k}_1)(k_1+\bar{k}_2)(k_2+\bar{k}_1)(k_2+\bar{k}_2)(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}[\frac{c_{12}\bar{c}_{12}}
{a_1b_1(k_1^2-k_2^2)(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{c_{13}c_{24}}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_1^2)(k_2^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}+\frac{c_{14}c_{23}}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)(k_2^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}]
e^{(k_1+k_2+\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\bar{k}_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2}.\end{aligned}$$
When the parameters $k_1, k_2$ are real then the Example 1 given in part i. is also valid for this case.
Nonlocal Reductions for N=4
---------------------------
Here we present two different nonlocal reductions of the coupled HI-mKdV system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=4$.\
**i.** $v_4=a_1v_2^{\varepsilon}$, $v_3=b_1v_1^{\varepsilon}$, $v_i^{\varepsilon}=v_i(\varepsilon_1 t,\varepsilon_2 x)$, $\varepsilon_i^2=1$, $i=1, 2$, $a_1$ and $b_1$ are constants. We have a consistent reduction if the following conditions hold: $$\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2=1, \quad \rho=\rho^{\varepsilon}.$$ To have a nonlocal system we have only one choice $(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)=(-1,-1)$. The relation $\rho=\rho^{\varepsilon}$ is satisfied if $$\label{N=4nonlocalcondi}
1)\, c_{12}=c_{34}a_1b_1,\quad 2)\, c_{14}a_1=c_{23}b_1.$$ Then the reduced system is $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{23}b_1v_1(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)+c_{12}v_1(-t,-x)v_2(-t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{23}b_1v_1(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)+c_{12}v_1(-t,-x)v_2(-t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\label{nonlocalreducediN=4}\end{aligned}$$
To obtain one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocalreducediN=4\]), we use the Type 2 approach since Type 1 gives trivial solution. Hence we take $$\begin{aligned}
&g_4f^{\varepsilon}-a_1g_2^{\varepsilon}=0,\label{relationnonlocalia}\\
&g_3f^{\varepsilon}-b_1g_1^{\varepsilon}=0,\label{relationnonlocalib}\end{aligned}$$ to get constraints for the parameters of one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocalreducediN=4\]). Here we obtain the following cases satisfying both (\[relationnonlocalia\]) and (\[relationnonlocalib\]).\
**Case A.** One of the sets of the relations solving the equation (\[relationnonlocalia\]) is $$\label{caseA}
1)\, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=0, \quad 2)\, e^{\delta_2}=\sigma_1\frac{(k_2+k_4)}{\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}},\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_4}=\sigma_2\sqrt{a_1}\frac{(k_2+k_4)}{\sqrt{c_{24}}}, \sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1, 2.$$ In this case the system (\[nonlocalreducediN=4\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x)v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\label{nonlocalreducediAN=4}\end{aligned}$$
From the equation (\[relationnonlocalib\]) we get the following cases:\
**Case A.I.** In addition to the constraints (\[caseA\]), one of the sets of the conditions that the equation (\[relationnonlocalib\]) yields, is $\{ k_1=k_2, k_3=k_4, e^{\delta_3}=\sigma_1\sigma_2b_1e^{\delta_1}\}$ for $\sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1, 2.$. Hence one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) is $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{a}t+\delta_1}}{1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_2+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3+k_4^3)}{a}t}},\,\,
v_2=\frac{\sigma_1(k_2+k_4)e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{a}t}}{\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}[1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_2+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3+k_4^3)}{a}t}]}.$$ Clearly, here we have $v_2=\xi v_1$, where $\xi=\frac{\sigma_1(k_2+k_4)}{e^{\delta_1}\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}}$. Hence the system (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) reduces to a single nonlocal ST-symmetric mKdV equation [@GurPek2] $$\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6c_{24}a_1\xi^2v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0.$$ Note that another set of the conditions $\{ k_1=k_4, k_2=k_3, e^{\delta_3}=\sigma_1\sigma_2b_1e^{\delta_1}\}$ yielded form (\[relationnonlocalib\]) gives similar solution.
**Example 2.** If we take the parameters as $k_4=2, \mu=k_2=e^{\delta_1}=a_1=c_{24}=\sigma_1=\sigma_2=1$, then one-soliton solution becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{x-t}}{1+e^{3x-9t}},$$ and $v_2=3v_1$. This solution is finite and bounded for any $(x,t)$. The graph of the solution $v_1$ is given in Figure 2.
![One-soliton solution for (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) with the parameters $k_4=2, \mu=k_2=e^{\delta_1}=a_1=c_{24}=\sigma_1=\sigma_2=1$.](figurec.jpg)
**Case A.II.** In addition to the constraints (\[caseA\]), another set of the conditions obtained from the equation (\[relationnonlocalib\]) is $\displaystyle \{ k_1=-k_3, k_2=-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4}, e^{\delta_3}=-b_1e^{\delta_1}\}$. In this case one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\displaystyle
&v_1=\frac{e^{-k_3x+\frac{k_3^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}-\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_4-k_3-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4})x-\frac{1}{\mu}(k_4^3-k_3^3-\frac{k_3^6}{k_4^3})t+\delta_1} }{1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_4-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4})x-\frac{(k_4^3-\frac{k_3^6}{k_4^3})}{\mu}t}},\\
&v_2=\frac{\sigma_1(k_4-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4})e^{-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4}x+\frac{k_3^6}{\mu k_4^3}t} }{\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}[1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_4-\frac{k_3^2}{k_4})x-\frac{(k_4^3-\frac{k_3^6}{k_4^3})}{\mu}t}]},\end{aligned}$$ for $\sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1, 2$.\
**Example 3.** Take the parameters as $k_4=4, \mu=10, k_3=e^{\delta_1}=a_1=c_{24}=\sigma_1=\sigma_2=1$. Therefore one-soliton solution of (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{-x+\frac{1}{10}t}-e^{\frac{11}{4}x-\frac{4031}{640}t}}{1+e^{\frac{15}{4}x-\frac{819}{128}t}},
\quad v_2=\frac{15e^{-\frac{1}{4}x+\frac{1}{640}t}}{4(1+e^{\frac{15}{4}x-\frac{819}{128}t})}.$$ The solutions are finite but not bounded. The graphs of the functions $v_1$ and $v_2$ are given in Figure 3(a) and Figure 3(b) respectively.
**Case A.III.** In addition to the constraints (\[caseA\]), the last set of the conditions obtained from the equation (\[relationnonlocalib\]) is $\displaystyle \{ k_1=-k_3, e^{\delta_3}=-b_1e^{\delta_1}\frac{(k_3+k_4)(k_2+k_3)}{(k_3-k_4)(k_2-k_3)}\}$. Therefore one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\displaystyle
&v_1=\frac{e^{-k_3x+\frac{k_3^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}-\sigma_1\sigma_2\frac{(k_3+k_4)(k_2+k_3)}{(k_3-k_4)(k_2-k_3)}e^{(k_2-k_3+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3-k_3^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1} }{1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_2+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t}},\\
&v_2=\frac{\sigma_1(k_2+k_4)e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{\mu}t} }{\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}
[1+\sigma_1\sigma_2e^{(k_2+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t}]},\end{aligned}$$ for $\sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1, 2$.
**Example 4.** If we choose the parameters as $k_2=2, k_3=-1, k_4=3, e^{\delta_1}=\frac{1}{10}, a_1=1, \mu=c_{24}=\sigma_1=\sigma_2=-1$ one-soliton solution of (\[nonlocalreducediAN=4\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{6e^{x+t}+e^{6x+36t}}{60(1+e^{5x+35t})},\quad |v_2|^2=\frac{25e^{4x+16t}}{(1+e^{5x+35t})^2}.$$ Both of the solutions $v_1$ and $v_2$ are finite. The solution $v_2$ is bounded but $v_1$ not. The graphs of the functions $v_1$ and $|v_2|^2$ are given in Figure 4(a) and Figure 4(b) respectively.
Note that if we start with the conditions $c_{12}=c_{23}=c_{24}=0$ then the system (\[nonlocalreducediN=4\]) turns to be $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0,\label{nonlocalreducediAsimilar}\end{aligned}$$ which is very similar to the Case A.
**Case B.** Another set of the constraints solving both of the equations (\[relationnonlocalia\]) and (\[relationnonlocalib\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{caseB}\displaystyle
&1)\, c_{12}=c_{23}=k_2=0,\quad 2)\,k_1=\frac{k_4[a_1k_4^2(k_3+k_4)+e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}(k_3-k_4) ]}{-k_4^2a_1(k_3+k_4)+e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}(k_3-k_4)},\nonumber\\
& 3)\, e^{\delta_2}=\sigma_1\frac{k_4}{\sqrt{a_1c_{24}}},\quad 4)\, e^{\delta_3}=\sigma_2\frac{\sqrt{b_1(k_3^2-k_4^2)}}{\sqrt{c_{13}}}\frac{(e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}-a_1k_4^2)(k_3+k_4)}{a_1k_4^2(k_3+k_4)
-e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}(k_3-k_4)},\nonumber\\
&5)\, e^{\delta_1}=\frac{\sigma_1e^{\delta_4}c_{24}(k_3-k_4)^2(k_3+k_4)[a_1k_4^2-e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}]}
{\sigma_2[a_1k_4^2(k_3+k_4)-e^{2\delta_4}c_{24}(k_3-k_4)]k_4\sqrt{a_1b_1c_{13}c_{24}(k_3^2-k_4^2)}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1, 2$. In this case the system (\[nonlocalreducediN=4\]) reduces to $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6(c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x))v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6(c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)v_2(-t,-x))v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\label{nonlocalreducediBN=4}\end{aligned}$$ One-soliton solution of the reduced system (\[nonlocalreducediBN=4\]) is given by $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{g_1}{f}, \quad v_2=\frac{g_2}{f},$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
g_1&=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}+\frac{(k_1-k_4)c_{24}}{(k_1+k_4)k_4^2}e^{(k_1+k_4)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_4},\\
g_2&=e^{\delta_2}+\frac{c_{13}}{(k_1+k_3)^2}e^{(k_1+k_3)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_3^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_3},\\
f&=1+\frac{c_{13}}{(k_1+k_3)^2}e^{(k_1+k_3)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_3^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_3}
+\frac{c_{24}}{k_4^2}e^{k_4x-\frac{k_4^3}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\delta_4}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-k_4)(k_3-k_4)c_{13}c_{24}}{(k_1+k_4)(k_3+k_4)(k_1+k_3)^2k_4^2}e^{(k_1+k_3+k_4)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_3^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_3+\delta_4}.\end{aligned}$$
**Example 5.** Let us take the parameters as $k_3=2, a=4, k_4=a_1=b_1=c_{13}=c_{24}=\sigma_1=\sigma_2=1, e^{\delta_4}=2$. In this case one-soliton solution of (\[nonlocalreducediBN=4\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{-3\sqrt{3}[2e^{7x-\frac{343}{4}t}+3e^{8x-86t}]}{1+2e^{9x-\frac{351}{4}t}+2e^{x-\frac{1}{4}t}+e^{10x-88t}},\quad v_2=\frac{1+2e^{9x-\frac{351}{4}t}}{1+2e^{9x-\frac{351}{4}t}+2e^{x-\frac{1}{4}t}+e^{10x-88t}}.$$ These solutions are finite and bounded. The graphs of the functions $v_1$ and $v_2$ are given in Figure 5(a) and Figure 5(b) respectively.
**Case C.** The last set of the constraints solving both of the equations (\[relationnonlocalia\]) and (\[relationnonlocalib\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{caseC}\displaystyle
&1)\,c_{12}=c_{23}=0,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_1}=\sigma_1(k_1+k_3)\sqrt{\frac{(k_1+k_2)(k_1+k_4)}{(k_1-k_2)(k_4-k_1)b_1c_{13}}},\nonumber\\
&3)\, e^{\delta_2}=\sigma_2(k_2+k_4)\sqrt{\frac{(k_1+k_2)(k_2+k_3)}{(k_1-k_2)(k_2-k_3)a_1c_{24}}},\quad
4)\, e^{\delta_3}=\sigma_3(k_1+k_3)\sqrt{b_1\frac{(k_2+k_3)(k_3+k_4)}{(k_2-k_3)(k_4-k_3)c_{13}}},\nonumber\\
&5)\, e^{\delta_4}=\sigma_4(k_2+k_4)\sqrt{a_1\frac{(k_1+k_4)(k_3+k_4)}{(k_1-k_4)(k_3-k_4)c_{24}}},\, \sigma_i=\pm 1, i=1,2,3,4.\end{aligned}$$ Here the reduced system is the same with (\[nonlocalreducediBN=4\]). One-soliton solution of this system is given by $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{g_1}{f}, \quad v_2=\frac{g_2}{f},$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
g_1&=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}+\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-k_4)c_{24})}{(k_1+k_2)(k_1+k_4)(k_2+k_4)^2}e^{(k_1+k_2+k_4)x
-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_4},\\
g_2&=e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_2}-\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_2-k_3)c_{13}}{(k_1+k_2)(k_2+k_3)(k_1+k_3)^2}e^{(k_1+k_2+k_3)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+k_3^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_3},\\
f&=1+\frac{c_{13}}{(k_1+k_3)^2}e^{(k_1+k_3)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_3^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_3}
+\frac{c_{24}}{(k_2+k_4)^2}e^{(k_2+k_4)x-\frac{(k_2^3+k_4^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\delta_4}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{(k_1-k_2)(k_1-k_4)(k_2-k_3)(k_3-k_4)c_{13}c_{24}e^{(k_1+k_2+k_3+k_4)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+k_3^3+k_4^3)}
{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\delta_3+\delta_4}}{(k_1+k_2)(k_1+k_4)(k_2+k_3)(k_3+k_4)(k_1+k_3)^2(k_2+k_4)^2}.\end{aligned}$$
**Example 6.** Let us choose the parameters as $k_1=4, k_2=1, k_3=3, k_4=2, \mu=3, a_1=b_1=c_{13}=c_{24}=\sigma_i=1, i=1, 2, 3, 4$. Hence we obtain the following one-soliton solution of (\[nonlocalreducediBN=4\]): $$\displaystyle
|v_1|^2=\frac{W_1}{Y}, \quad |v_2|^2=\frac{W_2}{Y^2},$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
W_1&=245(2e^{6x}+e^{6t})e^{8x+18t},\\
W_2&=15e^{2x+\frac{14}{3}t}[882e^{24x+34t}+196e^{10x+\frac{284}{3}t}+9e^{34x+\frac{2}{3}t}+109e^{14x+\frac{202}{3}t}\nonumber\\
&+452e^{20x+\frac{184}{3}t}+100e^{6x+122t}+450e^{28x+\frac{20}{3}t}+2e^{128t}],\\
Y&=e^{\frac{200}{3}t}+e^{20x}+98e^{10x+\frac{100}{3}t}+50e^{14x+6t}+50e^{6x+\frac{182}{3}t}.\end{aligned}$$ These solutions are finite and bounded. The graphs of the functions $|v_1|^2$ and $|v_2|^2$ are given in Figure 6(a) and Figure 6(b) respectively.
**ii.** **$v_4=a_1\bar{v}_2^{\varepsilon}$, $v_3=b_1\bar{v}_1^{\varepsilon}$**, $ \bar{v}_i^{\varepsilon}=\bar{v}_i(\varepsilon_1 t,\varepsilon_2 x)$, $\varepsilon_i^2=1$, $i= 1, 2$, $a_1$ and $b_1$ are constants. To have a consistent reduction the following conditions must hold: $$\mu=\bar{\mu}\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2, \quad \rho=\bar{\rho}^{\varepsilon}.$$ The relation $\rho=\bar{\rho}^{\varepsilon}$ is satisfied if $$\label{N=4nonlocalcondii}
1)\, c_{12}=\bar{c}_{34}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_1,\quad 2)\, c_{14}a_1=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1,\quad 3)\, c_{13}b_1=\bar{c}_{13}\bar{b}_1,\quad 4)\, c_{24}a_1=\bar{c}_{24}\bar{a}_1.$$
Here $(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)=\{(-1,1), (1,-1), (-1, -1)\}$. Hence we have $T$-, $S$-, and $ST$-symmetric nonlocal coupled complex HI-mKdV systems. If we use the Type 1 approach, the conditions that the parameters of the one-soliton solutions of nonlocal coupled complex HI-mKdV systems satisfy are obtained from $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{g_4}{f}=a_1\frac{\bar{g}_2^{\varepsilon}}{\bar{f}^{\varepsilon}} \Rightarrow g_4=a_1\bar{g}_2^{\varepsilon}, f=\bar{f}^{\varepsilon},\\
&\frac{g_3}{f}=b_1\frac{\bar{g}_1^{\varepsilon}}{\bar{f}^{\varepsilon}} \Rightarrow g_3=b_1\bar{g}_1^{\varepsilon}, f=\bar{f}^{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence we obtain the following constraints: $$1)\,k_4=\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2,\,\, 2)\, k_3=\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1,\,\, 3)\, e^{\delta_4}=a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_2},\,\, 4)\, e^{\delta_3}=b_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1},$$ with $\mu=\bar{\mu}\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2$ and (\[N=4nonlocalcondii\]). Hence one-soliton solutions of the nonlocal coupled complex HI-mKdV systems are $$\displaystyle v_1=\frac{g_1}{f}, \quad v_2=\frac{g_2}{f},$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&g_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{c_{23}b_1}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{c_{24}a_1}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}
{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}{(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}
{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&g_2=e^{k_2x-\frac{k_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_2}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{c_{13}b_1}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}
{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}
{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}{(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)x-\frac{(k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t
+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2},\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&f=1+\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{c_{12}}{(k_1^2-k_2^2)}e^{(k_1+k_2)x-\frac{(k_1^3+k_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{c_{13}b_1}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)x
-\frac{(k_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_1+\varepsilon\bar{k}_2)x
-\frac{(k_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\bar{\delta}_2}+
\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}\frac{c_{23}b_1}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}e^{(k_2+\varepsilon\bar{k}_1)x
-\frac{(k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{c_{24}a_1}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{(k_2+\varepsilon\bar{k}_2)x
-\frac{(k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_2}+
\frac{(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}{(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}e^{\varepsilon_2(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)x
-\frac{\varepsilon_2(\bar{k}_1^3+\bar{k}_2^3)}{\mu}t+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2}\nonumber\\
&+\frac{(k_1-k_2)}{(k_1+k_2)}\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
\frac{(k_1-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}{(k_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}{(k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1)}
\frac{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}{(k_2-\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)}\frac{(\bar{k}_1-\bar{k}_2)}{(\bar{k}_1+\bar{k}_2)}\Big[\frac{c_{12}}{(k_1^2-k_2^2)}
\frac{\bar{c}_{12}}{a_1b_1(\bar{k}_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{c_{13}}{(k_1^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}
\frac{c_{24}}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}+\frac{\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1}{a_1(k_1^2-\bar{k}_2^2)}
\frac{c_{23}}{(k_2^2-\bar{k}_1^2)}\Big]a_1b_1e^{(k_1+k_2+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2)x
-\frac{k_1^3+k_2^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3+\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_2^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1+\delta_2+\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_2}\end{aligned}$$
The reduced nonlocal complex HI-mKdV systems are given by,\
a) **T-Symmetric Nonlocal Complex HI-mKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
\label{TsymmcompN=4sys}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(-t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(-t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\end{aligned}$$
**Example 7.** Consider the following parameters: $\mu=2i, a_1=b_1=1, k_1=1, k_2=2, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=c_{24}=e^{\delta_1}=e^{\delta_2}=1$. Hence the pair of the solutions of (\[TsymmcompN=4sys\]) becomes $$\displaystyle
|v_1|^2=\frac{81e^{2x}}{(4e^{3x}+9\cos(\frac{9}{2}t))^2+81\sin^2(\frac{9}{2}t)},\,
|v_2|^2=\frac{81e^{4x}}{(4e^{3x}+9\cos(\frac{9}{2}t))^2+81\sin^2(\frac{9}{2}t)}.$$ Both of the functions have singularity at $(t,x)=(\frac{(4n+2)}{9}\pi, x=\frac{2}{3}\ln (\frac{3}{2}))$. The graph of the solution is given in Figure 7.
![Singular solution for (\[TsymmcompN=4sys\]) with $\mu=2i, a_1=b_1=1, k_1=1, k_2=2, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=c_{24}=e^{\delta_1}=e^{\delta_2}=1$.](figurel.jpg)
b\) **S-Symmetric Nonlocal Complex HI-mKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SsymmcompN=4sys}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(t,-x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(t,-x)\bar{v}_2(t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\end{aligned}$$
**Example 8.** Take the following set of the parameters: $\mu=4i, a_1=b_1=1, k_1=\frac{i}{4}, k_2=\frac{i}{2}, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=c_{24}=e^{\delta_1}=e^{\delta_2}=1$. Hence the solutions of (\[SsymmcompN=4sys\]) become $$\displaystyle
|v_1|^2=\frac{81e^{\frac{1}{128}t}}{(64e^{\frac{9}{256}t}-9\cos(\frac{3}{4}x))^2+\sin^2(\frac{3}{4}x)}, \,|v_2|^2=\frac{81e^{\frac{1}{16}t}}{(64e^{\frac{9}{256}t}-9\cos(\frac{3}{4}x))^2+\sin^2(\frac{3}{4}x)}.$$ The solutions are finite for $t\geq 0$ and bounded for any $(x,t)$. The graph of the function $|v_1|^2$ is given in Figure 8.
![Periodic wave solution for (\[SsymmcompN=4sys\]) with $\mu=4i, a_1=b_1=1, k_1=\frac{i}{4}, k_2=\frac{i}{2}, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=c_{24}=e^{\delta_1}=e^{\delta_2}=1$.](figurem.jpg)
c\) **ST-Symmetric Nonlocal Complex HI-mKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
\label{STsymmcompN=4sys}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{12}v_1(t,x)v_{2}(t,x)+c_{13}b_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{b}_1v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}b_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+c_{24}a_1v_2(t,x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)+\bar{c}_{12}\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\end{aligned}$$ **Example 9.** Let us take the parameters as $\mu=20, a_1=1, b_1=2i, k_1=-\frac{i}{2}, k_2=2i, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=i, c_{24}=1, e^{\delta_1}=20, e^{\delta_2}=2i$. In this case the solutions of (\[STsymmcompN=4sys\]) become $$\displaystyle
|v_1|^2=\frac{32400}{102481+5760\cos(\frac{3}{2}x+\frac{63}{160}t)}, \,|v_2|^2=\frac{324}{102481+5760\cos(\frac{3}{2}x+\frac{63}{160}t)}.$$ The above functions are finite and bounded for any $(x,t)$. The graph of the function $|v_1|^2$ is given in Figure 9.
![Periodic wave solution for (\[STsymmcompN=4sys\]) with $\mu=20, a_1=1, b_1=2i, k_1=-\frac{i}{2}, k_2=2i, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=i, c_{24}=1, e^{\delta_1}=20, e^{\delta_2}=2i$.](figuren.jpg)
Concluding Remarks
==================
In this work we studied a type of coupled HI-mKdV systems. We presented all possible consistent local and Ablowitz-Musslimani type nonlocal reductions for general $N$. We obtained the Hirota bilinear forms of the systems and recalled the multi-soliton solutions expressed by pfaffians for any $N$. We mentioned about local and nonlocal reductions of the coupled HI-mKdV system for $N=2$ and one-soliton solution of the reduced systems which have been already presented in our previous works. We examined all possible reductions for $N=3$. We noticed that the system for $N=3$ has reductions to systems of two equations but if we use Type 1 approach to find one-soliton solution of these systems, because of the set of the constraints obtained, these systems of two equations reduce to single equations. We studied the case for $N=4$ in detail. We found one-soliton solution of $N=4$ coupled HI-mKdV system by using the pfaffians. We have two local and two nonlocal consistent reductions for this system. These reductions yield local and nonlocal systems of two equations. By using the one-soliton solution of the system with the reductions we also obtained one-soliton solutions of the local and nonlocal reduced systems by the help of Type 1 and Type 2 approaches.
Appendix
========
Here we present local and nonlocal reductions, and one-soliton solution of the system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=3$. Note that even this system has reductions to systems of two equations, if we require Type 1 one-soliton solution [@GurPek2], all the systems of two equations reduce to single well-known equations.
N=3 Coupled HI-mKdV System
--------------------------
The system (\[coupledmKdVN\]) for $N=3$ is $$\begin{aligned}
& \mu v_{1,t}+3\rho v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\label{N=3a}\\
& \mu v_{2,t}+3\rho v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0,\label{N=3b}\\
& \mu v_{3,t}+3\rho v_{3,x}+v_{3,xxx}=0,\label{N=3c}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\rho= 2(c_{12}v_1v_2+c_{13}v_1v_3+c_{23}v_2v_3).$$ The corresponding Hirota bilinear form is $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mu D_t+D_x^3)\{g_i\cdot f\}=0,\quad i=1, 2, 3, \\
&D_x^2\{f\cdot f\}= 2(c_{12}g_1g_2+c_{13}g_1g_3+c_{23}g_2g_3).\end{aligned}$$
### One-Soliton Solution of N=3 Coupled HI-mKdV System
Similar to $N=2$ case we take the solution given by (\[g\_if\]) with the pfaffian elements (\[pf1\])-(\[pf3\]) under the condition (\[pf4\]). The solution which has one-soliton for every $\displaystyle v_i=\frac{g_i}{f}$, $i=1, 2, 3$, i.e., $M_j=1$, $j=1, 2, 3$ so $L=M_1+M_2+M_3=3$ with $B_j=\{b_j\}$, $j=1, 2, 3$ is expressed by $$\begin{aligned}
&g_i=\mathrm{pf}(d_0,a_1,a_2,a_3,b_1,b_2,b_3,\beta_i),\, i=1,2,3,\\
&f=\mathrm{pf}(a_1,a_2,a_3,b_1,b_2,b_3),\end{aligned}$$ which are explicitly given as $$\begin{aligned}
& g_1=-e^{\theta_1}-\alpha_{13}\alpha_{12}\alpha_{23}\beta_{23}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3},\\
& g_2=-e^{\theta_2}+\alpha_{13}\alpha_{12}\alpha_{23}\beta_{13}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3},\\
& g_3=-e^{\theta_3}-\alpha_{13}\alpha_{12}\alpha_{23}\beta_{12}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2+\theta_3},\\
&f=-1-\alpha_{12}\beta_{12}e^{\theta_1+\theta_2}-\alpha_{13}\beta_{13}e^{\theta_1+\theta_3}-\alpha_{23}\beta_{23}e^{\theta_2+\theta_3},\end{aligned}$$ where $\theta_i=k_ix-\frac{k_i^3}{\mu}t+\delta_i$, $\displaystyle \alpha_{ij}=\frac{k_i-k_j}{k_i+k_j}$, and $\displaystyle \beta_{ij}=\frac{c_{ij}}{k_i^2-k_j^2}$ for $i,j=1,2,3$. Here $k_i, \delta_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are arbitrary constants.
Local and Nonlocal Reductions for N=3
-------------------------------------
The coupled HI-mKdV system for $N=3$ given by (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]) has eight consistent reductions; four of them are local and the others are nonlocal. To obtain one-soliton solution of the reduced equations one can use Type 1 and Type 2 approaches given in [@GurPek2]. Here we will only use Type 1.
### Local Reductions for N=3
We have four different local reductions for (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]).
**i.** $v_3=a_3+a_2v_2+a_1v_1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. When we use this reduction, the system (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]) consistently reduces to $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}+6((c_{12}+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_1)v_1v_2+c_{13}a_1v_1^2+c_{23}a_2v_2^2+c_{13}a_3v_1+c_{23}a_3v_2)v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}+6((c_{12}+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_1) v_1v_2+c_{13}a_1v_1^2+c_{23}a_2v_2^2+c_{13}a_3v_1+c_{23}a_3v_2)v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0, \label{localiN=3}\end{aligned}$$ without any additional condition. If we follow the Type 1 approach, the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiN=3\]) are obtained from $$\frac{g_3}{f}=a_3+a_2\frac{g_2}{f}+a_1\frac{g_1}{f} \Rightarrow g_3=a_3f+a_2g_2+a_1g_1$$ as $$1)\, a_3=0,\quad 2)\, k_1=k_2=k_3,\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_2}+a_1e^{\delta_1}.$$ In this case we have $v_2=\alpha v_1$, where $\alpha=e^{\delta_2-\delta_1}$, and the system (\[localiN=3\]) becomes a single equation, usual mKdV equation, $$\label{reducedeqlocaliN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6\zeta v_1^2 v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ where $\zeta=(c_{12}+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_1)\alpha+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2\alpha^2$. We obtain the one-soliton solution of (\[reducedeqlocaliN=3\]) as $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}}{1+\frac{1}{4k_1^2}[c_{13}a_1e^{2\delta_1}+c_{23}a_2e^{2\delta_2}
+(c_{12}+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_1)e^{\delta_1+\delta_2}]e^{2k_1x-\frac{2k_1^3}{\mu}t}}.$$
**ii.** $v_3=a_3+a_2\bar{v}_2+a_1\bar{v}_1$, $a_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. If we apply this reduction to the system (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]), it consistently reduces if $$\mu=\bar{\mu},\quad \rho=\bar{\rho}.$$ The relation $\rho=\bar{\rho}$ is satisfied if $$\label{condlocaliN=3}
1)\, c_{12}=0,\, 2)\, a_3=0,\, 3)\, c_{13}a_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1,\, 4)\, c_{13}a_1=\bar{c}_{13}\bar{a}_1,\,
5)\,c_{23}a_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_2.$$ The reduced system is $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}+6(c_{13}a_2 v_1\bar{v}_2+c_{23}a_1\bar{v}_1v_2+c_{13}a_1|v_1|^2+c_{23}a_2|v_2|^2)v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}+6(c_{13}a_2 v_1\bar{v}_2+c_{23}a_1\bar{v}_1v_2+c_{13}a_1|v_1|^2+c_{23}a_2|v_2|^2)v_{2,x}+v_{2,xxx}=0,\label{localiiN=3}\end{aligned}$$ with the conditions (\[condlocaliN=3\]) satisfied and $\mu \in \mathbb{R}$. If we use the Type 1 approach to find one-soliton solution of the above system, we obtain the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of the system (\[localiiN=3\]) from $$\frac{g_3}{f}=a_2\frac{\bar{g}_2}{\bar{f}}+a_1\frac{\bar{g}_1}{\bar{f}} \Rightarrow f=\bar{f}, \, g_3=a_2\bar{g}_2+a_1\bar{g}_1,$$ as $$1)\, k_3=\bar{k}_2=\bar{k}_1,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\bar{\delta}_2}+a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1}.$$ In this case we have $v_2=e^{\delta_2-\delta_1} v_1$ and the system (\[localiiN=3\]) becomes a single cmKdV equation, $$\label{reducedeqlocaliiN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6[c_{13}(\bar{\alpha}a_2+a_1)+c_{23}(\alpha a_1+\alpha^2 a_2)]|v_1|^2 v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0.$$ One-soliton solution of the equation (\[reducedeqlocaliiN=3\]) is $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}}{1+\frac{1}{(k_1+\bar{k}_1)^2}(c_{13}e^{\delta_1}+c_{23}e^{\delta_2})(a_2e^{\bar{\delta}_2}
+a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1})e^{(k_1+\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_1^3+\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t}}.$$
**iii.** $v_3=a_1+a_2v_1$, $v_2=b_1+b_2v_1$ $a_i, b_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. When we apply this reduction to the system (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]) it consistently reduces to the equation $$\label{localiiiN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6([c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2]v_1^2+[c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_1b_2+c_{23}a_2b_1]v_1+c_{23}a_1b_1)v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ without any additional condition. When we use the Type 1 approach, we obtain the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of the equation (\[localiiiN=3\]) are obtained from $$\frac{g_3}{f}=a_1+a_2\frac{g_1}{f},\, \frac{g_2}{f}=b_1+b_2\frac{g_1}{f} \Rightarrow g_3=a_1f+a_2g_1,\, g_2=b_1f+b_2g_1$$ as $$1)\, a_1=b_1=0,\, 2)\, k_1=k_2=k_3,\, 3)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_1},\, 4)\, e^{\delta_2}=b_2e^{\delta_1},
\, 5)\, c_{12}=-a_2c_{23}, \, 6)\, c_{13}=-b_2c_{23}.$$ In this case the equation (\[localiiiN=3\]) becomes the usual mKdV equation, $$\label{reducedeqlocaliiiN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6c_{12}b_2 v_1^2 v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ and its one-soliton solution is $$\displaystyle
v_1=\frac{e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}}{1+\frac{e^{2\delta_1}}{4k_1^2}c_{12}b_2e^{2k_1x-\frac{2k_1^3}{\mu}t}}.$$
**iv.** $v_3=a_1+a_2v_1+a_3\bar{v}_1$, $v_2=b_1+b_2v_1+b_3\bar{v}_1$ $a_i, b_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. If we apply this reduction to the system (\[N=3a\])-(\[N=3c\]), it consistently reduces when $$\mu=\bar{\mu},\quad \rho=\bar{\rho}.$$ The relation $\rho=\bar{\rho}$ is satisfied if $$\begin{aligned}
&1)\, c_{23}a_1b_1=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_1,\nonumber\\
&2)\, c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1=\bar{c}_{12}\bar{b}_1+\bar{c}_{13}\bar{a}_1+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_2+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_2\bar{b}_1,\nonumber\\
&3)\, c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3,\nonumber\\
&4)\, c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2=\bar{c}_{12}\bar{b}_3+\bar{c}_{13}\bar{a}_3+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_2\bar{b}_3+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_2.\label{condlocalivN=3}\end{aligned}$$ The reduced equation is $$\label{localivN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6(\gamma_1v_1^2+\gamma_2v_1+\gamma_3\bar{v}_1^2+\gamma_4\bar{v}_1+\gamma_5v_1\bar{v}_1+\gamma_6)v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&\gamma_1=c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2,\, \gamma_2=c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_1b_2+c_{23}a_2b_1,\, \gamma_3=c_{23}a_3b_3 \\
&\gamma_4=c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1, \gamma_5=c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_3b_2+c_{23}a_2b_3,\, \gamma_6=c_{23}a_1b_1,\end{aligned}$$ with the conditions (\[condlocalivN=3\]) satisfied and $\mu \in \mathbb{R}$. When we use Type 1, we obtain the conditions on the parameters of one-soliton solution of the equation (\[localivN=3\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
&1)\, a_1=b_1=0,\,\,\, 2)\, k_1=k_2=k_3, k_i\in \mathbb{R}, i=1, 2, 3, \,\,\, 3)\, e^{\delta_2}=b_2e^{\delta_1}+b_3e^{\bar{\delta}_1},\nonumber \\
&4)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_1}+a_3e^{\bar{\delta}_1},\,\,\, 5)\, c_{ij}e^{\delta_i+\delta_j}=\bar{c}_{ij}e^{\bar{\delta}_i+\bar{\delta}_j}, i,j= 1, 2, 3.\end{aligned}$$ With the above conditions, the equation (\[localivN=3\]) becomes a cmKdV equation $$\label{reducedlocalivN=3}
\mu v_{1,t}+6(\gamma_1v_1^2+\gamma_3\bar{v}_1^2+\gamma_5|v_1|^2)v_{1,x}+v_{1,xxx}=0,$$ and one-soliton solution of (\[reducedlocalivN=3\]) is $$v_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}.$$
### Nonlocal Reductions for N=3
**i.** $v_3(t,x)=a_3+a_2v_2(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)+a_1v_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_3+a_2v_2^{\varepsilon}+a_1v_1^{\varepsilon}$, $\varepsilon_j^2=1$, $j=1, 2$, and $a_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. When we use this reduction in (\[N=3b\]) for consistency of reduction we get the following conditions: $$1)\, \varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2=1,\quad 2)\, a_3=0,\quad 3)\, c_{12}=0,\quad 4)\, c_{13}a_2=c_{23}a_1.$$ Therefore to have a nonlocal equation, there is only one possibility; $(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)=(-1,-1)$. The reduced equation is ST-symmetric nonlocal mKdV system, $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1v_1(-t,-x)+a_2v_2(-t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1v_1(-t,-x)+a_2v_2(-t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\label{nonlocaliN=3}\end{aligned}$$ If we use the Type 1 approach, the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of the system (\[nonlocaliN=3\]) are obtained from $$\frac{g_3}{f}=a_2\frac{g_2^{\epsilon}}{f^{\epsilon}}+a_1\frac{g_1^{\epsilon}}{f^{\epsilon}} \Rightarrow f=f^{\epsilon},\, g_3=a_2g_2^{\epsilon}+a_1g_1^{\epsilon}$$ as $$1)\, k_1=k_2=-k_3,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_2}+a_1e^{\delta_1},\quad 3)\, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=0.$$ The above conditions yields that $v_2=e^{\delta_2-\delta_1}v_1$. The nonlocal system (\[nonlocaliN=3\]) reduces to local linear equation $$\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ and one-soliton solution of the above equation is $$v_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}.$$
**ii.** $v_3(t,x)=a_3+a_2\bar{v}_2(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)+a_1\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_3+a_2\bar{v}_2^{\varepsilon}+a_1\bar{v}_1^{\varepsilon}$, $\varepsilon_j^2=1$, $j=1, 2$, and $a_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants. Applying this reduction to (\[N=3c\]) gives the constraints on the parameters as $$\label{condnonlocaliiN=3}
1)\, \mu=\bar{\mu}\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2,\, 2)\, a_3=0,\, 3)\, c_{12}=0,\, 4)\, c_{13}a_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1,\, 5)\, c_{13}a_1=\bar{c}_{13}\bar{a}_1,\,
6)\, c_{23}a_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_2$$ for consistent reduction. Hence we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(\epsilon_1t,\epsilon_2x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(\epsilon_1t,\epsilon_2x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)
+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(\epsilon_1t,\epsilon_2x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(\epsilon_1t,\epsilon_2x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)
+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0.\label{NONLOCALiiN=3}\end{aligned}$$ According to $(\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)=\{(-1,1),(1,-1),(-1,-1)\}$ we have three different nonlocal cmKdV systems:\
**a.** **T-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(-t,x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(-t,x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0,\label{TsymmN=3}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiN=3\]) hold.\
**b.** **S-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0,\label{SsymmN=3}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiN=3\]) hold.\
**c.** **ST-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV System:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\nonumber\\
&\mu v_{2,t}(t,x)+6[c_{13}v_1(t,x)+c_{23}v_2(t,x)][a_1\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+a_2\bar{v}_2(-t,-x)]v_{2,x}(t,x)+v_{2,xxx}(t,x)=0,\label{STsymmN=3}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiN=3\]) hold.\
When we apply the Type 1 approach, the constraints that the parameters of the one-soliton solution of the system (\[NONLOCALiiN=3\]) are obtained as $$1)\, k_3=\epsilon_2\bar{k}_2=\epsilon_2\bar{k}_1,\quad 2)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\bar{\delta}_2}+a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1},
\quad 3)\, c_{13}e^{\delta_1+\delta_3}=\bar{c_{13}}e^{\bar{\delta}_1+\bar{\delta}_3}, \quad 4)\, c_{23}e^{\delta_2+\delta_3}=\bar{c_{23}}e^{\bar{\delta}_2+\bar{\delta}_3}.$$ In this case $v_2(t,x)=e^{\delta_2-\delta_1}v_1(t,x)$ and the system (\[NONLOCALiiN=3\]) reduces to a single nonlocal cmKdV equation [@GurPek2] $$\mu v_1(t,x)+6(c_{13}+c_{23}e^{\delta_2-\delta_1})(a_1+a_2e^{\bar{\delta}_2-\bar{\delta}_1})v_1(t,x)
\bar{v}_1(\epsilon_1t,\epsilon_2x)v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0.$$ One-soliton solution of the above equation is $$v_1=\frac{e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}}{1+\frac{1}{(k_1+\epsilon_2\bar{k}_1)^2}[c_{13}e^{\delta_1}+c_{23}e^{\delta_2}]
[a_2e^{\bar{\delta}_2}+a_1e^{\bar{\delta}_1}]e^{(k_1+\epsilon_2\bar{k}_1)x-\frac{(k_1^3+\epsilon_2\bar{k}_1^3)}{\mu}t}},$$ with the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiN=3\]) hold.
**iii.** $v_3(t,x)=a_1+a_2v_1(t,x)+a_3v_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_1+a_2v_1+a_3v_1^{\varepsilon}$, $v_2(t,x)=b_1+b_2v_1(t,x)+b_3v_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=b_1+b_2v_1+b_3v_1^{\varepsilon}$ where $a_i, b_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants, and $\varepsilon_j^2=1$, $j=1, 2$. Applying this reduction to (\[N=3b\]) and (\[N=3c\]) gives the constraints on the parameters as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{condnonlocaliiiN=3}
&1)\, \varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2=1,\nonumber\\
&2)\, c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2=c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1,\nonumber\\
&3)\, c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2=c_{23}a_3b_3,\end{aligned}$$ for consistent reduction. Here we have one possibility; $(\varepsilon_1,\varepsilon_2)=(-1,-1)$. The reduced equation is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{nonlocaliiiN=3}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[(c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2)v_1^2(t,x)+(c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2)v_1(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}a_3b_3v_1^2(-t,-x)+(c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1)v_1(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)v_1(-t,-x)+c_{23}a_1b_1]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\end{aligned}$$ with the conditions (\[condnonlocaliiiN=3\]) hold. If we use the Type 1 approach to obtain the one-soliton solution of the equation we get the following constraints: $$1)\, a_1=a_3=b_1=b_2=0,\, 2)\, k_1=-k_2=k_3,\, 3)\, c_{12}=c_{13}=c_{23}=0,\, 4)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_1},\, 5)\, e^{\delta_2}=b_3e^{\delta_1}.$$ Hence the equation (\[nonlocaliiiN=3\]) reduces to the local linear equation $$\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,$$ and one-soliton solution of this equation is $$v_1=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}.$$
**iv.** $v_3(t,x)=a_1+a_2v_1(t,x)+a_3\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=a_1+a_2v_1+a_3\bar{v}_1^{\varepsilon}$, $v_2(t,x)=b_1+b_2v_1(t,x)+b_3\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)=b_1+b_2v_1+b_3\bar{v}_1^{\varepsilon}$ where $a_i, b_i$, $i=1, 2, 3$ are constants, and $\varepsilon_j^2=1$, $j=1, 2$. When we apply this reduction to (\[N=3b\]) and (\[N=3c\]) we obtain the constraints on the parameters as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{condnonlocalivN=3}
&1)\, \bar{\mu}\varepsilon_1\varepsilon_2=\mu,\nonumber\\
&2)\, c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_3+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_1,\nonumber\\
&3)\, c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3,\nonumber\\
&4)\, c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_3b_2+c_{23}a_2b_3=\bar{c}_{12}\bar{b}_3+\bar{c}_{13}\bar{a}_3+
\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_2+\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_2\bar{b}_3,\nonumber\\
&5\, c_{23}a_1b_1=\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_1\bar{b}_1,\end{aligned}$$ for consistent reduction. Hence we have a single nonlocal cmKdV equation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{nonlocalivN=3}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3v_1^2(t,x)+(c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2)v_1(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}a_3b_3\bar{v}_1^2(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)+(c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1)\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)+c_{23}a_1b_1]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0.\end{aligned}$$
Therefore we have three different nonlocal cmKdV equations:\
**a.** **T-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3v_1^2(t,x)+(c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2)v_1(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}a_3b_3\bar{v}_1^2(-t,x)+(c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,x)+c_{23}a_1b_1]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocalivN=3\]) hold.\
**b.** **S-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3v_1^2(t,x)+(c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2)v_1(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}a_3b_3\bar{v}_1^2(t,-x)+(c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3
+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(t,-x)+c_{23}a_1b_1]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=-\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocalivN=3\]) hold.\
**c.** **ST-Symmetric Nonlocal CMKdV Equation:** $$\begin{aligned}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[\bar{c}_{23}\bar{a}_3\bar{b}_3v_1^2(t,x)+(c_{12}b_1+c_{13}a_1+c_{23}a_2b_1+c_{23}a_1b_2)v_1(t,x)\nonumber\\
&+c_{23}a_3b_3\bar{v}_1^2(-t,-x)+(c_{23}a_1b_3+c_{23}a_3b_1)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(-t,-x)+c_{23}a_1b_1]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=\bar{\mu}$ and the conditions (\[condnonlocalivN=3\]) hold.\
By using Type 1 approach, we obtain the constraints that the parameters of one-soliton solution of the equation (\[nonlocalivN=3\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
&1)\, a_1=b_1=0,\quad 2)\, k_1=k_2=k_3=\varepsilon_2\bar{k}_1,\quad 3)\, e^{\delta_2}=b_2e^{\delta_1}+b_3e^{\bar{\delta}_1},\nonumber\\
&4)\, e^{\delta_3}=a_2e^{\delta_1}+a_3e^{\bar{\delta}_1},\quad 5)\, c_{ij}e^{\delta_i+\delta_j}=\bar{c}_{ij}e^{\bar{\delta}_i+\bar{\delta}_j},\, i, j=1, 2, 3.\end{aligned}$$ With these conditions, the equation (\[nonlocalivN=3\]) becomes the following nonlocal cmKdV equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{reducednonlocalivN=3}
&\mu v_{1,t}(t,x)+6[(c_{12}b_2+c_{13}a_2+c_{23}a_2b_2)v_1^2(t,x)+c_{23}a_3b_3\bar{v}_1^2(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)\nonumber\\
&+(c_{12}b_3+c_{13}a_3+c_{23}a_2b_3+c_{23}a_3b_2)v_1(t,x)\bar{v}_1(\varepsilon_1t,\varepsilon_2 x)]v_{1,x}(t,x)+v_{1,xxx}(t,x)=0.\end{aligned}$$ One-soliton solution of the equation (\[reducednonlocalivN=3\]) is $$v_1(t,x)=e^{k_1x-\frac{k_1^3}{\mu}t+\delta_1}.$$
For $N=3$ we have reductions to system of two equations, but if we require Type 1 one-soliton solution, they reduce to a single equation.
Acknowledgment
==============
This work is partially supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK).
[99]{}
Ablowitz, M.J., Kaup, D.J., Newell, A.C., Segur H.: The inverse scattering transform-Fourier analysis for nonlinear problems, Stud. Appl. Math. **53**(4), 249–315 (1974)
Ablowitz, M.J., Musslimani, Z.H.: Integrable nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Phys. Rev. Lett. **110**, 064105 (2013)
Ablowitz, M.J., Musslimani, Z.H.: Inverse scattering transform for the integrable nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Nonlinearity **29**, 915–946 (2016)
Ablowitz, M.J., Musslimani, Z.H.: Integrable nonlocal nonlinear equations. Stud. App. Math. **139**(1), 7–59 (2016)
Chen, K., Deng X., Lou S., Zhang D.: Solutions of nonlocal equations reduced from the AKNS hierarchy. Stud. App. Math. **141**(1), 113–141 (2018) [(arXiv:1710.10479\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Feng, B.F., Luo, X.D., Ablowitz, M.J., Musslimani, Z.H.: General soliton solution to a nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation with zero and nonzero boundary conditions. [(arXiv:1712.09172\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Gerdjikov, V.S., Saxena, A.: Complete integrability of nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation. J. Math. Phys. **58**(1), 013502 (2017) [(arXiv:1510.00480\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Gürses, M., Pekcan, A.: Nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equations and their soliton solutions. J. Math. Phys. **59**, 051501 (2018) [(arXiv:1707.07610v1 \[nlin.SI\])]{}
Huang, X., King, L.: Soliton solutions for the nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **131**, 148 (2016)
Li, M., Xu, T.: Dark and antidark soliton interactions in the nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation with the self-induced parity-time-symmetric potential. Phys. Rev. E **91**, 033202 (2015)
Sakkaravarthi, K., Kanna, T.: Bright solitons in coherently coupled nonlinear Schrödinger equations with alternate signs of nonlinearities. J. Math. Phys. **54**, 013701 (2013)
Wen, X.Y., Yan, Z., Yang, Y.: Dynamics of higher-order rational solitons for the nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equation with the self-induced parity-time-symmetric potential. Chaos **26**, 063123 (2015)
Khare, A., Saxena, A.: Periodic and hyperbolic soliton solutions of a number of nonlocal nonlinear equations. J. Math. Phys. **56**, 032104 (2015)
Gürses, M., Pekcan, A.: Integrable Nonlocal Reductions, “Symmetries, Differential Equations and Applications SDEA-III, Istanbul, Turkey, August 2017”, Editors: Kac, V.G., Olver, P.J., Winternitz, P.,and T. Ozer, Springer Proceedings, in Mathematics and Statistics, No:266 (2018). \[hep-th/1805.01695\].
Yang, J.: General N-solitons and their dynamics in several nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equations. [(arXiv:1712.01181\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Gürses, M., Pekcan, A.: Nonlocal nonlinear modified KdV equations and their soliton solutions. Comm. Non. Sci. Numer. Simulat. **67**, 427–448 (2019) [(arXiv:1711.01588\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Ji, J.L., Zhu, Z.N.: On a nonlocal modified Korteweg-de Vries equation: Integrability, Darboux transformation and soliton solutions. Commun. Non. Sci. Numer. Simulat. **42**, 699–708 (2017)
Ji, J.L., Zhu, Z.N.: Soliton solutions of an integrable nonlocal modified Korteweg-de Vries equation through inverse scattering transform. J. Math. An. and App. **453**, 973–984 (2017) [(arXiv:1603.03994\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Ma, L.Y., Shen, S.F., Zhu, Z.N.: Integrable nonlocal complex mKdV equation: soliton solution and gauge equivalence. [( arXiv:1612.06723 \[nlin.SI\])]{}
Ablowitz, M.J., Feng, B.F., Luo, X.D., and Musslimani, Z.H.: Inverse scattering transform for the nonlocal reverse space-time sine-Gordon, sinh-Gordon and nonlinear Schrödinger equation with nonzero boundary conditions [(arXiv:1703.02226v1\[math-ph\])]{}
Gürses, M.: Nonlocal Fordy-Kulish equations on symmetric spaces. Phys. Lett. A **381**, 1791–1794 (2017)
Gerdjikov, V.S., Grahovski, D.G., Ivanov, R.I.: On the N-wave equations with PT symmetry. Theor. and Math. Phys. **188**(3), 1305–1321 (2016)
Fokas, A.S.: Integrable multidimensional versions of the nonlocal Schrödinger equation. Nonlinearity **29**, 319–324 (2016) Sinha, D., Ghosh, P.K.: Integrable nonlocal vector nonlinear Schrödinger equation with self-induced parity-time symmetric potential. Phys. Lett. **A381**, 124–128 (2017) Yan, Z.: Integrable PT-symmetric local and nonlocal nonlinear Schrödinger equations: A unified two parameter model. Appl. Math. Lett. **47**, 61–68 (2015) Gerdjikov, V.S., Grahovski, D.G., Ivanov, R.I.: On integrable wave interactions and Lax pairs on symmetric spaces, Wave Motion [**71**]{}, 53–70 (2017) Gerdjikov, V.S.: On nonlocal models of Kulish-Sklyanin type and generalized Fourier transforms. Stud. Comp. Int. **681**, 37–52 (2017) [(arXiv:1703.03705\[nlin.SI\])]{}
Caudrelier, V.: Interplay between the inverse scattering method and Fokas’s unified transform with an application. Stud. App. Math. **140**(1), 3–26 (2017) [(arXiv:1704.05306v4\[math-ph\])]{} Yang, B., Yang, J.: Transformations between nonlocal and local integrable equations. Stud. App. Math. **140**, 178–201 (2017) [(arXiv:1705.00332v1 \[nlin.PS\])]{}
Iwao M., Hirota R.: Tsujimoto S., Abstracts of the Meeting of the Phys. Soc. Jpn. (1994) Sectional Meeting Pt. 4, p. 100.
Iwao M., Hirota R.: Soliton solutions of a coupled modified KdV equations, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn 66 (3), 577 (1997).
[^1]: Email:[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The time-delayed Adler equation is arguably the simplest model for an injected semiconductor laser with coherent injection and optical feedback. It is able to reproduce the existence of topological localized structures (LSs) and their rich interactions. In this paper we perform the first extended bifurcation analysis of this model and we explore the mechanisms by which LSs emerge. We also derive the effective equations governing the motion of distant LSs and we stress how the lack of parity in time-delayed systems leads to exotic, non-reciprocal, interactions between topological localized states.'
author:
- 'L. Munsberg'
- 'J. Javaloyes'
- 'S. V. Gurevich'
title: 'Topological Localized states the time delayed Adler model: Bifurcation analysis and interaction law'
---
Introduction
============
Localized structures (LSs) appear in driven dissipative nonlinear systems and they can be observed in a variety of complex systems [@WKR-PRL-84; @MFS-PRA-87; @NAD-PSS-92; @UMS-NAT-96; @AP-PLA-01]. They are *attractors* of the dynamics, i.e. stable solutions towards which the system converges from a wide set of initial conditions [@NP-SelfOrg-77]. In Optics, LSs are usually envisioned as light pulses in time or localized beams in space, see [@L-CSF-94; @MT-JOSAB-04; @AFO-AAM-09] for reviews, and one distinguishes between systems in which the LSs are locked to an external injection beam from the ones that possess a phase invariance. The former situation leads to the so-called cavity solitons [@FS-PRL-96; @BLP-PRL-97] observed either in the transverse plane of broad area amplifiers [@BTB-NAT-02] or in the temporal output of fibers [@LCK-NAP-10; @HBJ-NAP-14]. In phase invariant situations, spatial diffractive autosolitons were predicted and observed either in cavities composed of a gain medium coupled to a saturable absorber [@RK-OS-88; @RK-JOSAB-90; @GBG-PRL-10] or to an external diffraction grating [@TAF-PRL-08]. Temporal localization was also achieved in passively mode-locked lasers operated in the long cavity regime [@MJB-PRL-14] and it was demonstrated that a similar setup could also lead to full thee-dimensional spatio-temporal localization [@J-PRL-16].
Spatial and temporal LSs of light have often been analyzed using similar theoretical frameworks. However, while space is isotropic, temporal dynamics usually exhibits a symmetry breaking due to the causal response of the active medium. The dynamics of temporal LSs may break the action-reaction principle, an effect that was discussed for instance in the framework of mode-locking [@JCM-PRL-16; @CJM-PRA-16]. Building upon the strong analogies between spatially extended and time-delayed systems [@AGL-PRA-92; @GP-PRL-96; @K-CMMP-98] (TDSs), the latter have been proposed for *generating* temporal LSs, see [@YG-JPA-17] for a recent review. In TDSs, propagation and nonlinearity occur in well separated stages, which is at variance with distributed systems, such as, e.g., the nonlinear Schrödinger equation governing light propagation in fibers. In most cases, LSs appear in TDSs as mutually independent light peaks [@MJB-PRL-14; @RAF-SR-16]. However, topological LSs were also predicted and observed in semiconductor lasers; They exist either as $2\pi$ kinks in the polarization orientation [@MJB-NAP-15] or in the phase of the optical field [@GJT-NC-15]. In this latter case, it was shown that a simple time-delayed model for the phase of the lasing field is able to reproduce the results obtained in [@GJT-NC-15; @GJB-CHA-17]. Despite its simplicity, this model contains the effects of optical injection, frequency locking and time-delayed feedback and can be termed *the time-delayed Adler equation*.
In this manuscript, we perform an extended analysis of the delayed Adler equation using the path continuation package `dde-biftool` [@DDEBT] and asymptotic analysis. In particular, we provide the effective equations of motion for distant, weakly interacting, topological LSs and we give the conditions under which repulsive and attractive forces can give rise to stable molecules. Finally, we show that the interaction between LSs are not reciprocal, a feature typical of system with broken parity symmetry.
Model
=====
Topological LSs can be obtained by combining two elements. The first is a semiconductor laser with coherent optical injection operated in the so-called “excitable” regime [@GDP-PRE-17]. In this regime, the phase of the semiconductor laser is stably locked to the external forcing. Upon small perturbations, the phase, that evolve on a circle, relaxes (e.g., clockwise) exponentially to its equilibrium state. However, when responding to a sufficiently large external perturbation, the phase performs a $2\pi$ anti-clockwise rotation, after which the system locks again to the external forcing. This mechanism leads to a simple scenario of excitability. To this injected laser system, we add a delayed feedback loop. Here, the delayed feedback plays the role of the extended (spatial) degree of freedom [@GP-PRL-96] in which multiple independently addressable topological LSs can be stored and regenerated indefinitely [@GJT-NC-15]. Each $2\pi$ phase structures, embedded in a homogeneously locked background field, propagate into the external feedback loop, similarly to the sine-Gordon solitons[@CDT-PRE-98]. When these kinks come back into the semiconductor laser they act as triggers for new excitable dynamics and, hence they get regenerated. By assuming small injection and optical feedback, as well as a small detuning between the injection field and the laser natural frequency, a multiple time scale analysis yields the time-delayed Adler equation for the phase evolution $\theta\left(t\right)$ $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\theta} & = & \Delta-\sin\theta+\chi\sin\left[\theta\left(t-\tau\right)-\theta-\psi\right]\,,\label{eq:adler}\end{aligned}$$ where the dot denotes the time derivative with respect to a slow time $t$, $\Delta$ the ratio and of the detuning between the injection and the laser normalized to the injection field amplitude, $\chi>0$ the ratio of the feedback rate and of the amplitude of the injection field, while the parameter $\psi$ is directly related to the feedback phase, see Sup. Mat. in [@GJT-NC-15] for more details. In the absence of feedback $\left(\chi=0\right)$, Eq. becomes an Adler equation that describes e.g., a time evolution of the phase difference of two weakly coupled oscillators with a small detuning in their frequencies. Here, one notices the presence of saddle node on a circle bifurcation that arises at $\Delta_{\pm}=\pm1$; It is in the vicinity of $\Delta_{\pm}$ that the Adler equation exhibits excitability. Temporal LSs are found in the long time delay limit [@YRS-PRL-19] in which the excitable orbit duration is shorter than the time delay. From the strict point of view of TDSs, temporal LSs are peculiar periodic solutions that consists in a localized waveform, that is independent of the precise value of $\tau$, if $\tau$ is large enough, embedded into an arbitrary large chunk of the homogeneous solution. Recently, a complete classification of the spectrum of TDSs into interface and pseudo-continuous spectrum was achieved [@YRS-PRL-19] and the link between LSs periodic orbits with homoclinic solutions was clarified.
Results
=======
We start the analysis by searching the steady states of Eq. that are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
0= & \Delta-\sin\theta-\chi\sin\psi,\end{aligned}$$ which is solved by $$\begin{aligned}
\theta_{s}= & \arcsin\left(\Delta-\chi\sin\psi\right)+2\pi n, & n\in\mathbb{Z},\\
\theta_{u}= & \pi-\arcsin\left(\Delta-\chi\sin\psi\right)+2\pi n. & n\in\mathbb{Z}.\end{aligned}$$ making that $\theta_{s}$ (resp. $\theta_{u}$) belongs to the right (resp. left) half of the unit circle, i.e. $\theta_{s}\in\left[-\frac{\pi}{2},\,\frac{\pi}{2}\right]$ and $\theta_{u}\in\left[\frac{\pi}{2},\,\frac{3\pi}{2}\right]$. The linear stability analysis information for the surroundings of the steady states is obtained setting $\theta_{s,u}+\varepsilon\delta$ with $\varepsilon\ll1$, which yields $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\delta}= & A\delta(t)+B\delta(t-\tau),\\
A= & -\cos\theta_{s,u}-\chi\cos\psi,\label{eq:A}\\
B= & \chi\cos\psi\,,\label{eq:B}\end{aligned}$$ where $A$ and $B$ are the instantaneous and delayed Jacobian matrices of the linearized problem evaluated at the steady state. The characteristic equation is found setting $\delta\left(t\right)=\delta_{0}\exp\left(\lambda t\right)$, leading to the transcendental equation $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda= & A+Be^{-\lambda\tau}.\label{eq:ststeigenvalues}\end{aligned}$$
Note that without delayed feedback ($\chi=0$) the eigenvalues $\lambda_{s,u}$ are given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{s,u} = & -\cos\theta_{s,u},\end{aligned}$$ leading to $\lambda_{s}<0$ and $\lambda_{u}>0$. Therefore without delay the solution $\theta_{s}$ is always stable and $\theta_{u}$ is always unstable. Furthermore, for $\Delta_{\pm}=\pm1$ both steady states coincide at: $$\begin{aligned}
\theta_{\pm}= & \pm\frac{\pi}{2}+2\pi n, & n\in\mathbb{Z}\end{aligned}$$ and disappear in a saddle-node bifurcation for $|\Delta|>1$.
Considering the influence of the delay, the steady states only exist for: $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta-\chi\sin\psi\in & [-1,\,1]\end{aligned}$$ leading to the boundaries of existence for the steady states as $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_{sn}^{+}= & 1+\chi\sin\psi,\label{eq:saddlenode1}\\
\Delta_{sn}^{-}= & -1+\chi\sin\psi,\label{eq:saddlenode2}\end{aligned}$$ which effectively shifts the saddle-node bifurcation to higher values of $\Delta$ for $\psi\in[0,\,\pi]$ and to lower values for $\psi\in[\pi,\,2\pi]$. The amplitude of the shift is given by $\chi$.
The characteristic equation can not be solved analytically for $\chi\neq0$ as it is transcendental. However solutions for $\lambda$ can be found using the Lambert $W$ functions[@CGHJK-ACM-96] $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_{n}= & A+\frac{1}{\tau}W_{n}\left(B\tau e^{-A\tau}\right).\label{eq:lambert}\end{aligned}$$ The resulting number of eigenvalues is infinite because of the infinite number of branches of the Lambert $W$ functions denoted $W_{n}$ with $n\in\mathbb{Z}$. In the limit of long delays the infinite number of eigenvalues accumulate over a quasi-continuous spectrum [@Y-DCDS-15]. By expanding the eigenvalues in real and imaginary part $\lambda=\frac{\alpha}{\tau}+i\beta$ in Eq. one obtains $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha= & \frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{B^{2}}{A^{2}+\beta^{2}}\right).\label{eq:pseudocont}\end{aligned}$$ In figure \[fig:eigenvalues\] the quasi-continuous spectrum as well as the leading eigenvalues obtained from Eq. are plotted. One can observe that even for small values of the delay time $\tau=5$ (see the panel (a)), the quasi-continuous spectrum is a good approximation for the exact eigenvalues obtained from Eq. . For larger values of $\tau$ the distance between the discrete eigenvalues is smaller leading to an increasing number of relevant eigenvalues.
![Eigenvalues $\lambda_{s}$ (blue) and $\lambda_{u}$ (red) of Eq. corresponding to the steady states $\theta_{s,u}$ for (a) $\tau=5$ and (b) $\tau=15$. The dashed lines show the quasi-continuous spectrum while the stars represent the exact solutions given by the Lambert W functions . Other parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.5,1,0.5\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:eigenvalues"}](EV_5 "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"} ![Eigenvalues $\lambda_{s}$ (blue) and $\lambda_{u}$ (red) of Eq. corresponding to the steady states $\theta_{s,u}$ for (a) $\tau=5$ and (b) $\tau=15$. The dashed lines show the quasi-continuous spectrum while the stars represent the exact solutions given by the Lambert W functions . Other parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.5,1,0.5\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:eigenvalues"}](EV_15 "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}
For large delays one can estimate the instability threshold for the steady states by calculating the set of parameters leading to a crossing of the quasi-continuous spectrum with the imaginary axis. Depending on whether the leading discrete eigenvalues are real or a set of complex conjugates, the occurring bifurcation is a saddle-node (SN) or Andronov-Hopf (AH) bifurcation. In our case, the first AH point is given by $\alpha=0$ that we approximate in the long delay limit as $\beta\sim1/\tau=0$. Because the maximum real part of Eq. is obtained for a vanishing imaginary part, this leads to the relation $A^{2}=B^{2}$. The first two borders obtained by setting $A=-B$ correspond to the SN bifurcation identified previously in Eqs. (,) while the branch $A=B$ yields the following borders of stability at which the steady state gets AH unstable; for the solutions $\theta_{s}$ and $\theta_{u}$, these borders have an explicit expression that reads $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_{s}^{\pm} & = & \pm\sqrt{1-4\chi^{2}\cos^{2}\psi}+\chi\sin\psi\,,\cos\psi<0\label{eq:border3}\\
\Delta_{u}^{\pm} & = & \pm\sqrt{1-4\chi^{2}\cos^{2}\psi}+\chi\sin\psi\,,\cos\psi>0\label{eq:border5}\end{aligned}$$
![Dependence of AH unstable regime, shaded in blue, on feedback strength $\chi$ in the long delay limit . Blue lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{s}$, while red lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{u}$ and black lines correspond to the SN bifurcation of both steady states. Feedback strength changes from (a) $\chi=0.45$, (b) $\chi=0.5$ to (c) $\chi=0.55$.[]{data-label="fig:hopfregionlongdelay"}](hopf_045 "fig:"){width="0.32\columnwidth"}![Dependence of AH unstable regime, shaded in blue, on feedback strength $\chi$ in the long delay limit . Blue lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{s}$, while red lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{u}$ and black lines correspond to the SN bifurcation of both steady states. Feedback strength changes from (a) $\chi=0.45$, (b) $\chi=0.5$ to (c) $\chi=0.55$.[]{data-label="fig:hopfregionlongdelay"}](hopf_05 "fig:"){width="0.32\columnwidth"}![Dependence of AH unstable regime, shaded in blue, on feedback strength $\chi$ in the long delay limit . Blue lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{s}$, while red lines show the AH instabilities of $\theta_{u}$ and black lines correspond to the SN bifurcation of both steady states. Feedback strength changes from (a) $\chi=0.45$, (b) $\chi=0.5$ to (c) $\chi=0.55$.[]{data-label="fig:hopfregionlongdelay"}](hopf_055 "fig:"){width="0.32\columnwidth"}
The area in which the steady state $\theta_{s}$ is AH unstable is especially important because this results in an oscillating background for LSs. The change of size and shape of the AH unstable area as a function of the feedback strength $\chi$ was investigated in Fig. \[fig:hopfregionlongdelay\]; the four borders resulting from Eqs. , are plotted for different values of $\chi$ and the region of instability of $\theta_{s}$ is colored in blue. For low feedback strengths, there are two areas in which the steady state $\theta_{s}$ is AH unstable and they are close to the SN bifurcation between $\psi=\pi/2$ and $\psi=3\pi/2$, see Fig. \[fig:hopfregionlongdelay\](a). With increasing feedback strength, these areas stretch further away from the SN border, until they meet at a critical point defined by $\left(\Delta_{c},\chi_{c},\psi_{c}\right)=\left(0,1/2,\pi\right)$ as shown in Fig. \[fig:hopfregionlongdelay\](b). For even bigger feedback strengths of $\chi>\chi_{c}$ the two areas merge into one area of instability (cf. Fig. \[fig:hopfregionlongdelay\](c)).
![Borders of the AH instability obtained from the path-continuation (green) for (a) $\tau=10$ and (b) $\tau=20$, respectively. Steady state instabilities in the long delay limit are shown in black (SN) blue (AH of $\theta_{s}$) and red (AH of $\theta_{u}$). []{data-label="fig:hopfcontinuation"}](hopf_cont_10 "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}![Borders of the AH instability obtained from the path-continuation (green) for (a) $\tau=10$ and (b) $\tau=20$, respectively. Steady state instabilities in the long delay limit are shown in black (SN) blue (AH of $\theta_{s}$) and red (AH of $\theta_{u}$). []{data-label="fig:hopfcontinuation"}](hopf_cont_20 "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}
Using the `dde-biftool` framework it is possible to follow the steady state $\theta_{s}$ while varying the parameters $\Delta$ and $\psi$. If there an AH bifurcation occurs, it is possible to follow the AH bifurcation point in the $\left(\Delta,\psi\right)$ plane. Since several pairs of eigenvalues can cross the imaginary axis, this method allows obtaining several curves corresponding to the crossing of the imaginary axis. In Fig. \[fig:hopfcontinuation\] the results of the continuation are shown for two different time delays $\tau$. For each $\tau$ one can observe an AH border close to but not exactly at the border obtained from the long delay limit approximation, corresponding to the crossing of the first pair of complex conjugate eigenvalues with the imaginary axis. For small delay times as shown in Fig.\[fig:hopfcontinuation\](a) for $\tau=10$, the regions where a second pair of complex conjugate eigenvalues have a positive real part form two separate small ovals centered around $\psi=\pi$. With increasing delay time the distance between the discrete eigenvalues becomes smaller, while they still follow the quasi-continuous spectrum which is independent on the delay time. This leads to a larger region of instability for each pair of complex conjugate eigenvalues crossing the imaginary axis. In the case of Fig. \[fig:hopfcontinuation\](b), the larger delay $\tau=20$ leads to a merging of the two small regions of secondary instability into one large region. Notice that a good approximation of these additional AH lines, and more generally of the complex eigenvalue spectrum, can be obtained setting $\beta_{n}\sim2\pi\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)/\tau$ in Eq. to find $\alpha_{n}$. Setting $\alpha_{n}$ allows finding the green curves depicted in Fig. \[fig:hopfcontinuation\]. We note that the first AH bifurcation appears with frequency $\beta_{1}\sim\pi/\tau$ which corresponds to a period two regime, characteristic of time delayed systems.
![Bifurcation diagram of periodic solutions of Eq. . Here blue bold lines show stable solutions while red thin lines show unstable ones. In (a) the y-axis displays the period $T$ of the solution while in (b) the topological charge $Q$ is shown on the y-axis. The inset in (a) represents the exemplary periodic solution profile. The black crosses in (b) show results of a direct numerical integration with varying detuning $\Delta$. Parameters are $\chi=0.3$, $\tau=30$ and $\psi=1.4$.[]{data-label="fig:bifurcationdiagramm"}](bifdiag_period "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}![Bifurcation diagram of periodic solutions of Eq. . Here blue bold lines show stable solutions while red thin lines show unstable ones. In (a) the y-axis displays the period $T$ of the solution while in (b) the topological charge $Q$ is shown on the y-axis. The inset in (a) represents the exemplary periodic solution profile. The black crosses in (b) show results of a direct numerical integration with varying detuning $\Delta$. Parameters are $\chi=0.3$, $\tau=30$ and $\psi=1.4$.[]{data-label="fig:bifurcationdiagramm"}](bifdiag_hyst "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}
In the region surrounding the SN bifurcations the system is excitable. A small perturbation from the stable state $\theta_{s}$ decays exponentially because the system is linearly stable. If however the system is close to the SN bifurcation, the states $\theta_{s}$ and $\theta_{u}$ are close. In this case, a finite size perturbation can excite the system beyond the linearly unstable state $\theta_{u}$ leading to a trajectory towards $\theta_{s}+2\pi$ instead of relaxing back directly towards $\theta_{s}$. This means that a small perturbation of a stable state can lead to a large orbit in phase space. If we now introduce time delay into this excitable system, one excitation at the time $t-\tau$ can lead to another excitation at time $t$ resulting in a periodic repetition of excitations with an approximate period of the delay time $\tau$. In the inset of figure \[fig:bifurcationdiagramm\] (a) an example of a periodic orbit from $\theta_{s}$ to $\theta_{s}+2\pi$ is shown. In the following, we shall concentrate our attention on positive (upward) kinks. Downward (anti-kinks) can be deduced from the kink regimes by using the symmetry of Eq. .(\[eq:adler\]) $\left(\theta,\Delta,\psi\right)\rightarrow-\left(\theta,\Delta,\psi\right)$. Hence if kinks are found for parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(\Delta^{*},\chi^{*},\psi^{*}\right)$, identical anti-kinks exist at $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(-\Delta^{*},\chi^{*},-\psi^{*}\right)$.
We further investigate these regenerative excitable orbits with the help of `dde-biftool`. They are implemented as $T-$periodic orbits, going from from $\theta_{s}$ towards $\theta_{s}\;\left[2\pi\right]$. We note that $\left[2\pi\right]$ modulo operator is implemented automatically in the recent versions of `dde-biftool`. The periodic solutions were then continued in $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)$ and $T$ while adjusting the profile of $\theta\left(t\right)$ on an adaptive grid. The resulting branch of solutions is shown in Fig. \[fig:bifurcationdiagramm\](a). One can observe two stable regions, one having a period slightly above $\tau=30$ and the other one having a period slightly above $\frac{\tau}{2}=15$. To achieve a better visualization of the periodic solutions, the topological charge $Q$, corresponding to the number of $2\pi$-phase differences per time delay $\tau$ is introduced: $$\begin{aligned}
Q= & \frac{\tau}{T_{1}-T_{0}}\int_{T_{0}}^{T_{1}}\frac{\text{d}\theta}{2\pi}.\label{eq:topocharge}\end{aligned}$$
For the parameters used in Fig. \[fig:bifurcationdiagramm\] ($\psi=1.4$,$\chi=0.3$), the steady state $\theta_{s}$ vanishes at $\Delta=1.296$ but the continuation clearly shows stable periodic solutions for values of $\Delta>1.296$. To investigate this region further, a direct numerical integration was performed starting with the state $\theta_{s}$ at $\Delta=1.25$. After integrating for a time long enough to ensure stability of the result, the parameter $\Delta$ was changed and the next step of integration was performed starting with the result of the former integration. First $\Delta$ was increased up to $1.35$ which lies outside of the range of existence of $\theta_{s}$. After reaching $\Delta=1.35$ the process was continued in the other direction till $\Delta=1$. For each step the topological charge $Q$ was calculated using Eq. . In Fig. \[fig:bifurcationdiagramm\](b) the topological charge $Q$ is shown for the results of the time integration and the continuation. One can observe that the system starts and stays in the state $\theta_{s}$ which has a topological charge of $0$ until around $\Delta=1.296$ the system jumps to the stable branch with $Q\approx1$. At the point where the stable periodic solution with $Q\approx1$ disappears in a SN bifurcation the system jumps to the stable solution with $Q\approx2$ which is stable up to values of $\Delta>1.35$. In the reverse direction where $\Delta$ is decreased from $\Delta=1.35$ to $\Delta=1$ one can observe a hysteresis because there is a region ranging from $\Delta\approx1.1$ to $\Delta\approx1.3$ where all three solutions with $Q=0$, $Q\approx1$ and $Q\approx2$ are stable. After reaching $\Delta\approx1.1$ the system falls back to the solution with $Q\approx1$ which also gets unstable for $\Delta\approx1.075$ resulting in the system falling back to $\theta_{s}$ with $Q=0$.
{width="2\columnwidth"}
A global way of displaying the instabilities of the periodic solutions such as torus and period-doubling bifurcation consists in representing the charge $Q$ as a function of $\Delta$ and $\psi$. To this aim, several branches of periodic solutions were calculated for equidistant values of $\psi$. The resulting point cloud was then interpolated into a two-dimensional surface of periodic solutions. There is certainly a loss of accuracy in this interpolation but the resulting surface is only used for illustrative purposes. In Fig. \[fig:3Dview\] one perspective of this surface is plotted in the three-dimensional representation, as well as the background instabilities of the steady state at $Q=0$ and the three types of instabilities for the periodic solutions. A video of the full thee-dimensional structure can be found in the Supplementary Material. Here one can clearly see that the stable regions of periodic solutions form one connected surface that increase in $Q$ by $1$ if one increases $\phi$ gradually by $2\pi$. This band of stable solutions is in some cases interrupted by the torus or period doubling bifurcations leading to unstable regions inside the stable surface. Since all branches of periodic solutions that were continued in $\Delta$ for a specific value of $\psi$ represent a cut of this surface, those regions of instability lead to a splitting of the stable regions as seen in Fig. \[fig:bifurcationdiagramm\].
![Bifurcation diagram in ($Q$-$\tau)$ plane, showing branches of rotating solutions and librations around the steady state $\theta_{s}$. Unstable and stable solutions are indicated as red thin lines and blue bold lines, respectively. Results obtained by direct numerical integration with varying delay $\tau$ are also shown as a gray circles. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.7,1,2.84\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:globalbifurcation"}](connect_stst_kink_biff){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
An interesting kind of periodic solution are those, whose period $T$ are diverging and that can be much greater than the delay $\tau$. These solutions have a small value of $Q$ and therefore approach the steady state for which $Q=0$. In Fig. \[fig:3Dview\] these solutions were left out due to computation time. We investigate those solutions with low topological charge $Q$ to learn more about their connection to the branch of periodic solutions and to the steady state. One possible connection involves the AH instability of the steady state $\theta_{s}$. In Fig. \[fig:hopfcontinuation\] we indeed showed that several AH instabilities appear increasing the time delay $\tau$. We could therefore prepare the system in a parameter regime such that there is a stable steady state $\theta_{s}$ for small delay values and make it AH unstable by increasing the delay time. With a further increase in $\tau$ the amplitude of the libration grows up to the point that it induces the nucleation of as a fully developed rotating solution. Notice that these solutions can not be considered as LSs since the latter need a stable background. Since an AH instability leads to small amplitude periodic oscillations and due to the frequent use of the term *periodic solutions* for the LSs, we will constrict the use of the term *rotating solutions* to LSs and, more generally, to the unlocked solutions where the temporal variations of the phase are unbounded. We will refer to the small oscillations arising from the AH instabilities as *librations*.
In order to compare the branches corresponding to rotations and librations in a single bifurcation diagram, we have to adjust our measure $Q$ since using the definition given in Eq. both the steady state and the librations would have a topological charge of $0$. While this accurately represents the number of $2\pi$ phase flips that happen in a period $T$, we want to observe the transition between those states. For this reason a different measure was used to display the different branches in Fig. \[fig:globalbifurcation\]:
$$\begin{aligned}
Q & = & \frac{\delta\theta}{2\pi}\frac{\tau}{T}\label{eq:Charge_bis}\end{aligned}$$
defining $\delta\theta$ as the amplitude of the phase variation over the period $T$. In Fig. \[fig:globalbifurcation\] the three branches of solutions are displayed with this new measure on the vertical axis. One can clearly see the stable oscillating branch emerging from the AH bifurcation point of the steady state at $\tau_{AH}\approx1.6$. The branch of rotating solutions, however, does not seem to emerge from the branch of librations, but to connect with the homogeneous solution using this measure. One notices that the branch of rotating solutions reaches values of $Q$ that are much lower than unity. With our definition of $Q$ given in Eq. \[eq:Charge\_bis\], this is only possible if the period $T$ of the branch of LSs diverges, thereby indicating a global bifurcation connecting the rotating solution with the steady states.
![(a) Profile of the periodic solution (a) at $\tau=\tau^{*}$ that connects the unstable steady state $\theta_{u}$ (dashed lines) with itself. The solution $\theta_{s}$, that is AH unstable at this value of $\tau$ is marked by a dotted line. (b) Scaling of the period in the vicinity of the bifurcation point as a function of $\mu=\tau-\tau^{*}$ with $\tau^{*}\simeq1.684511$. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.7,1,2.84\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:global_scaling"}](scalling_period){width="1\columnwidth"}
A possible candidate would be a homoclinic bifurcation, however, the Adler equation without delay is sometimes considered to be the normal form of the global saddle-node infinite period bifurcation (SNIPER) [@Strogatz2015]. As such, one may expect the global bifurcation connecting the steady state and the periodic solution of the delayed Adler equation to be a SNIPER as well. The two possible bifurcations can be distinguished by the scaling of the period as a function of the distance $\mu$ to the bifurcation point, while approaching the latter. Figure \[fig:global\_scaling\](a) depicts a profile obtained as close as possible to the bifurcation point, using $150$ collocation points and sixth order polynomials, that we approximate at $\tau^{*}\simeq1.684511$, and for which the period is $T\sim51$. One notices clearly that this rotating orbit connects the unstable steady state $\theta_{u}$ onto itself. Figure \[fig:global\_scaling\](b) allows us to verify that the period scales with $\log\mu$ with $\mu=\left|\tau-\tau^{*}\right|$ indicating a homoclinic orbit. We noticed that the transition layer in Figure \[fig:global\_scaling\](a) is relatively smooth indicating that, considering the low values of $\tau$ used, $\theta\left(t-\tau\right)$ could be expanded in Taylor series. At second order in the truncation, Eq. \[eq:adler\] transforms into an ordinary differential equation for a forced, damped, nonlinear oscillator whose inertia and damping terms depend on $\tau$. It is in principle possible to search for specific values of $\tau$ at which infinite period solutions exist, leading to an approximation of $\tau^{*}$.
![(a) Bifurcation diagram showing the branches of libration and of rotation and the unstable steady branch $\theta_{s}$ as a function of $\tau$. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.1,1,2.84\right)$ and the stability is indicated as red thin lines for unstable solutions and blue bold lines for stable solutions. (b) libration and (c) rotation are bistable at $\tau=12.87$ and both solutions have a period close to $2\tau$. []{data-label="fig:P2story"}](connect_stst_kink_biff_saddle "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}![(a) Bifurcation diagram showing the branches of libration and of rotation and the unstable steady branch $\theta_{s}$ as a function of $\tau$. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.1,1,2.84\right)$ and the stability is indicated as red thin lines for unstable solutions and blue bold lines for stable solutions. (b) libration and (c) rotation are bistable at $\tau=12.87$ and both solutions have a period close to $2\tau$. []{data-label="fig:P2story"}](fig_8bc "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth" height="4.1cm"}
![Bifurcation diagram showing the deformation of the branches of rotations with varying distance from the saddle node of steady states in a range of detuning $\Delta\in\left[0.7,2\right]$, while other parameters are $\chi=1$ and $\psi=\pi/2$. The leftmost branches correspond to the larger values of $\Delta$ and the stability is indicated as red thin lines for unstable solutions and blue bold lines for stable solution. In all cases the steady solution $\theta_{s}$ is stable and the stable rotating orbits correspond to LSs, for large values of $\tau$. []{data-label="fig:reconnect"}](branchdeforming){width="1\columnwidth"}
![Branch of periodic solutions with $\tau$ as a free parameter for varying feedback phases calculated at the saddle node of steady states $\Delta=\Delta_{sn}^{+}$. (a) $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(1,1,0\right)$ shows snaking on the diverging branch. (b) $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(2,1,\pi/2\right)$ shows no snaking. In both cases, the period does not scale with $\mu^{-1/2}$ or with $\log\mu$.[]{data-label="fig:branchdiverge"}](snaking){width="1\columnwidth"}
More surprisingly, we have found that the homoclinic bifurcation scenario is not always the reason behind the emergence of rotating solutions. This can be observed in Fig. \[fig:P2story\](a) where we depict the bifurcation diagram including steady states, librations and rotating solutions for a set of parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi\right)=\left(0.1,1,2.84\right)$ for which the steady states are AH unstable but where the solutions are far from the SN bifurcation of steady states. The panels Fig. \[fig:P2story\](b,c) display the profile of these period two (P2) solutions for which $T\sim2\tau$, which explains why $Q\sim0.5$ for the rotating solution. It is well known that time delayed systems can give rise to such P2 regimes, see for instance [@N-PRE-04; @JAH-PRL-15] and reference therein.
We are interested, in particular, in understanding by which bifurcation scenario temporal LSs appear. In all the non-pathological cases explored, i.e. when the background solution is linearly stable, we have always found the LSs to appear from homoclinic bifurcations, with the period scaling as $\log\mu$, of from SN bifurcations of periodic solutions. We represent several branches of rotations for various values of $\Delta$ in Fig. \[fig:reconnect\]. Multiple branches of periodic solutions were calculated for different distances from the SN bifurcation of the steady states which is at $\Delta_{sn}^{+}=2$ for the given values of $\psi$ and $\chi$. A transition from a global bifurcation for the largest values of $\Delta$ towards a SN bifurcation of periodic solutions is clearly visible. Periodic solutions in the vicinity of the SN of the steady states show a global bifurcation while for larger distances of $\Delta$ with respect to $\Delta_{sn}^{+}$ the branch deforms, while conserving the homoclinic period divergence at the branching point, and finally shows a regular saddle-node of limit cycle bifurcation for values of $\Delta<0.825$. The deformation of the branches in Fig. \[fig:reconnect\] indicates that a reconnection mechanism with other unstable branches of periodic solutions underlies the qualitative change in the bifurcation scenario.
Finally, we followed the evolution of the point at which the period diverges as a function of delay $\tau$ and feedback strength $\mathcal{\chi}$ by calculating several branches *in the limit case* where the background solution $\theta_{s}$ is marginally stable. The detuning $\Delta$ was chosen such that the system is on the border of the steady state SN bifurcation, which is given by $\Delta=\Delta_{sn}^{+}$. Figure \[fig:branchdiverge\] shows the branches for two parameter sets. In both cases, the period diverges for small delay yet it does not scales with $\mu^{-1/2}$ or with $\log\mu$. It is particularly salient in Fig. \[fig:branchdiverge\](b), where the branch shows a snaking behavior. For larger delays, the solutions get more and more localized with a period that scales as $T=\tau+r$ with $r=\mathcal{O}\left(1\right)$. However, the background is marginally stable leading to solutions that can hardly be called LSs. They correspond to the pathological case discussed in [@YRS-PRL-19] Fig. 4.
effective interaction law
==========================
We now turn our attention to the interaction law governing the relative motion of multiple LSs that can be embedded in a sufficiently long value of the time delay. Distant LSs interact via their exponentially decaying tails. While in many salient examples the solitons are even functions, as e.g, those found as solutions of the Nonlinear Schrödinger, Ginzburg-Landau or Lugiato-Lefever equations, the left and right exponential tails are not necessarily identical in non-parity preserving systems. As such, the interactions between LSs may not be reciprocal and disobey with the action-reaction principle, as demonstrated recently in passively mode-locked laser [@JCM-PRL-16]. For our analysis, it is convenient to factor out the value of the steady state $\theta_{s}$. We define $\theta\left(t\right)=\theta_{s}+\phi\left(t\right)$ in such a way that $\phi\left(t\right)$ can represents stable LSs from $0$ to $2\pi$. Then the right hand side of the original delayed Adler equation transforms to $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\phi}= & F\left(\phi,\phi^{\tau}\right)\label{eq:phi}\end{aligned}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
F\left(\phi,\phi^{\tau}\right) & = & \Delta-\sin\left(\theta_{s}+\phi\right)+\chi\sin\left(\phi^{\tau}-\phi-\psi\right)\,,\end{aligned}$$ where we used the shorthand $\phi^{\tau}=\phi\left(t-\tau\right)$. Sufficiently far from the kink, the LSs can be approximated by their exponential tails. The latter govern the approach of the steady state. The left and right tails can be expanded as $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(t)= & \phi(-\infty)+\sum_{i}a_{-}^{\left(i\right)}\exp\left(\sigma_{-}^{\left(i\right)}t\right),\label{eq:genexpminus}\\
\phi(t)= & \phi(+\infty)+\sum_{i}a_{+}^{\left(i\right)}\exp\left(\sigma_{+}^{\left(i\right)}t\right)\label{eq:genexpplus}\end{aligned}$$ with the asymptotic values $\phi(-\infty)=0$ and $\phi(+\infty)=2\pi$ and $\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}$ being complex eigenvalues and $a_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}$ the corresponding eigenvectors. Note that a real-valued $\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}$ leads to a monotonic tail while $\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}\in\mathbb{C}$ induces oscillatory tails. For the solution to remain bounded, all coefficients $a_{+}^{\left(i\right)}$ with $\sigma_{+}^{\left(i\right)}>0$ and $a_{-}^{\left(i\right)}$ with $\sigma_{-}^{\left(i\right)}<0$ have to be zero. If the LSs are sufficiently far away from each other, their interaction is governed by the slowest decaying mode; we denote $\sigma_{+}$ (resp. $\sigma_{-}$) the eigenvalues with smallest negative (resp. positive) real part associated with the eigenvector $a_{\pm}$. As the eigenvalue can be complex, the tail is in general approximated by $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(t) & =\phi(\pm\infty)+\Re\left(a_{\pm}e^{\sigma_{\pm}t}\right)\,.\label{eq:exponentialLS}\end{aligned}$$
Because we are considering periodic solutions with period $T=\tau+r$, where $r$ is defined as the solution drifts $r=T-\tau$, we can rewrite Eq. as an advanced time-delayed equation [@N-PRE-04; @YRS-PRL-19], replacing $\phi\left(t-\tau\right)$ by $\phi\left(t+r\right)$. How $T-$periodic solutions approach the uniform state is found by inserting the exponential expansion Eqs. (,) into the advanced delayed equation $\dot{\phi}=F\left(\phi,\phi^{-r}\right)$. A linear analysis allows to obtain the equation governed the eigenvalues $\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}= & A+B\exp\left(\sigma_{\pm}^{\left(i\right)}r\right)\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $A$ and $B$ are the same coefficients as in Eqs. and . The exponents of the expansion are therefore the solutions of the eigenvalue problem for the steady states, in which the delay $\tau$ is replaced with a small negative time $r$. Notice that $r$ can only be obtained numerically using direct time integration or during continuation with `dde-biftool` while the amplitudes $a_{\pm}$ are obtained by a best fit of the tails of the LS using Eq. (\[eq:exponentialLS\]).
To approximate the interaction between two distant LSs located in $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ with $x_{1}<x_{2}$, we assume an ansatz $$\begin{aligned}
\phi(t) & = & \phi_{1}(t)+\phi_{2}\left(t\right),\label{eq:multiLS}\end{aligned}$$ where $\phi_{i}(t)=\Phi\left[t-x_{i}(t)\right]$ is a $2\pi$ kink centered around the position $x_{i}\left(t\right)$ and the function $\Phi$ is a $T-$periodic solution that verifies the equation of motion of a single LS, i.e. $\dot{\Phi}=F\left(\Phi,\Phi^{\tau}\right)$. One can expand the left hand side of Eq. and find $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\phi} & = & \left(1-\dot{x}_{1}\right)\dot{\phi}_{1}-\left(1-\dot{x}_{2}\right)\dot{\phi}_{2}\,.\end{aligned}$$
In the vicinity of the second LS one can approximate the right hand side of Eq. as $$\begin{aligned}
F\left(\phi,\phi^{\tau}\right) & \simeq & F\left(\phi_{2},\phi_{2}^{\tau}\right)+\phi_{1}\frac{\partial F}{\partial\phi}\left(\phi_{2},\phi_{2}^{\tau}\right)+\phi_{1}^{\tau}\frac{\partial F}{\partial\phi^{\tau}}\left(\phi_{2},\phi_{2}^{\tau}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Expressing the instantaneous and delayed tail of $\phi_{1}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\phi_{1} & = & \phi\left(t-x_{1}\right)=\Re\left[a_{+}e^{\sigma_{+}\left(t-x_{1}\right)}\right],\\
\phi_{1}^{\tau} & = & \phi\left(t+r-x_{1}^{\tau}\right)=\Re\left[a_{+}e^{\sigma_{+}\left(t+r-x_{1}^{\tau}\right)}\right],\end{aligned}$$ one can derive the following equation: $$\begin{aligned}
-\dot{x}_{1}\dot{\phi}_{1}-\dot{x}_{2}\dot{\phi}_{2} & = & \Re\left\{ a_{+}e^{\sigma_{+}\left(t-x_{1}\right)}\left[\partial_{1}F\left(\phi_{2},\phi_{2}^{\tau}\right)-\sigma_{+}\right]\right.\nonumber \\
& + & \left.a_{+}e^{\sigma_{+}\left(t+r-x_{1}^{\tau}\right)}\partial_{2}F\left(\phi_{2},\phi_{2}^{\tau}\right)\right\} \,.\label{eq:rule}\end{aligned}$$
Before proceeding to the projection of Eq. (\[eq:rule\]) onto the neutral mode of the adjoint problem, some useful simplifications can be performed by noticing that the displacements $\dot{x}_{i}$ are already small quantities, as their source stem from overlap integrals. As such, in the equation for $\dot{x}_{2}$, the cross inertia term $\dot{x}_{1}$ will be multiplied by an overlap integral $\int\dot{\phi}_{2}^{\dagger}\dot{\phi}_{1}$ which is a small quantity. Similarly, the time delay $x_{1}\left(t-\tau\right)$ in Eq. (\[eq:rule\]) can be expanded to first order in $\tau$, which will generate another contribution proportional to $\dot{x}_{1}$, that can be neglected for the same reason.
For the $T-$periodic solution $\Phi\left(t\right)$, the Floquet analysis is obtained setting $\phi\left(t\right)=\Phi\left(t\right)+\varepsilon u\left(t\right)$ which results in a linear delay equation with $T$-periodic coefficients $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{u} & = & a\left(t\right)u\left(t\right)+b\left(t\right)u\left(t-\tau\right)\,.\label{eq:Direct}\end{aligned}$$
Performing the linear stability analysis of Eq. \[eq:Direct\] yields a neutral eigenfunction with the Floquet multiplier $\mu=1$ and denoted $u_{0}=\dot{\Phi}$ that represents a translation along the periodic orbit. The adjoint problem is defined with respect to the standard scalar product of two functions $\left(u,v\right)=\int u\bar{v}dt$ and reads $$\begin{aligned}
-\dot{v} & = & a^{\dagger}\left(t\right)v\left(t\right)+b^{\dagger}\left(t+\tau\right)v\left(t+\tau\right)\label{eq:Adjoint}\end{aligned}$$ which can be simplified using that $a$ and $b$ are real valued scalar functions for which $\left(a^{\dagger},b^{\dagger}\right)=\left(a,b\right)$. Equation (\[eq:Adjoint\]) corresponds to delayed equation with a negative delay and $T-$periodic coefficients that must be integrated backward in time. The adjoint problem given by Eq. \[eq:Adjoint\] possesses the same eigenvalues than the direct problem Eq. \[eq:Direct\], although the eigenvalue $\mu=1$ is associated to a different eigenvector that we note in the following $v_{0}=\dot{\Phi}^{\dagger}$. We note the eigenvectors of Eq. \[eq:Direct\] and of Eq. \[eq:Adjoint\] $\left\{ u_{j}\right\} $ and $\left\{ v_{j}\right\} $, respectively. Since these two sets are bi-orthogonal with respect to they other, we have, by a proper normalization choice, $\left(u_{j,}v_{k}\right)=\delta_{jk}$. The motion induced by the tail of a distant LS over another can be calculated by projecting its contribution in Eq. (\[eq:rule\]) along $v_{0}$. In order to find this particular eigenfunction, we partially diagonalized the evolution operator corresponding to Eq. (\[eq:Adjoint\]) using the Implicitly Restarted Arnoldi Method (IRAM) [@IRAM] with a method similar to the one described in [@GJT-NC-15]. However, as we are mainly interested in the LS solutions that are stable, the largest multiplier in both the direct and adjoint linearized problem is $\mu=1$. Hence one could evaluate $\dot{\Phi}^{\dagger}$ by simply integrating numerically Eq. (\[eq:Adjoint\]) starting from a random initial condition until the solution converges towards a periodic profile. Repeating the same analysis in the vicinity of the first LS and using the asymptotic expansion for the second LS that involves $\left(a_{-},\sigma_{-}\right)$ yields the equation of motion for $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{x}_{2} & = & \Re\left[F_{+}e^{\sigma_{+}(x_{2}-x_{1})}\right],\label{eq:rhs+}\\
\dot{x}_{1} & = & \Re\left[F_{-}e^{\sigma_{-}(x_{1}-x_{2})}\right],\label{eq:rhs-}\end{aligned}$$ with the coefficients $F_{\pm}$ given by:
$$\begin{aligned}
F_{\pm}= & \frac{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\dot{\Phi}^{\dagger}\left(s\right)e^{\sigma_{\pm}s}\times\left[\frac{\partial F}{\partial\phi}\left(\Phi,\Phi^{\tau}\right)-\sigma_{\pm}+e^{\sigma_{\pm}r}\frac{\partial F}{\partial\phi^{\tau}}\left(\Phi,\Phi^{\tau}\right)\right]\text{d}s}{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\dot{\Phi}^{\dagger}\left(s\right)\dot{\Phi}\left(s\right)\text{d}s}a_{\pm}\,.\end{aligned}$$
The equation of motion for the distance between the two LSs $l=x_{2}-x_{1}$ can be recast as to depend on the gradient of a potential $U\left(l\right)$ $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{l} & = & -\frac{dU}{dl}\;,\;U\left(l\right)=\Re\left(\frac{F_{-}}{\sigma_{-}}e^{-\sigma_{-}l}-\frac{F_{+}}{\sigma_{+}}e^{\sigma_{+}l}\right).\label{eq:rhsdist}\end{aligned}$$
![Asymmetrical interactions between LSs. The DNS of the delayed Adler equation Eq. and of the reduced model Eqs. , are shown as shades of gray and red lines, respectively. Left: Repulsive “causal” interaction for parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.9393,0.99,0,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(4.88,0.003\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.8,1.21\right)$. Right: Repulsive “anti-causal” interaction for parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.9974,2,1.396,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(5\times10^{-4},-4159\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.48,0.4\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:interaction"}](causal "fig:"){width="0.5\columnwidth"}![Asymmetrical interactions between LSs. The DNS of the delayed Adler equation Eq. and of the reduced model Eqs. , are shown as shades of gray and red lines, respectively. Left: Repulsive “causal” interaction for parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.9393,0.99,0,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(4.88,0.003\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.8,1.21\right)$. Right: Repulsive “anti-causal” interaction for parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.9974,2,1.396,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(5\times10^{-4},-4159\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.48,0.4\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:interaction"}](anticausal "fig:"){width="0.5\columnwidth"}
![Creation of drifting bound states of LSs. The DNS of the delayed Adler Eq. and of the reduced model Eqs. , are shown as shades of gray and red lines, respectively. Left: One of the LSs in the Adler equation disappear while the effective model shows the presence of the bound state. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.842,0.99,0.698,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(341,2\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-1.7,0.6\right)$. Right: A molecule is formed in the Adler equation while the effective model give rise to a singularity. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(1.1,0.5,1.323,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(69,536\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.9,0.92\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:spaceship"}](spaceship_a "fig:"){width="0.5\columnwidth"}![Creation of drifting bound states of LSs. The DNS of the delayed Adler Eq. and of the reduced model Eqs. , are shown as shades of gray and red lines, respectively. Left: One of the LSs in the Adler equation disappear while the effective model shows the presence of the bound state. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.842,0.99,0.698,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(341,2\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-1.7,0.6\right)$. Right: A molecule is formed in the Adler equation while the effective model give rise to a singularity. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(1.1,0.5,1.323,100\right)$ leading to $\left(F_{+},F_{-}\right)=\left(69,536\right)$ and $\left(\sigma_{+},\sigma_{-}\right)=\left(-0.9,0.92\right)$.[]{data-label="fig:spaceship"}](spaceship_b "fig:"){width="0.5\columnwidth"}
In order to visualize the interaction between the LSs we use a pseudo-space-time representation as introduced in [@GP-PRL-96]. This is achieved by cutting the time trace in slices of one period $T$ and rearranging them in a second dimension. This is similar to the approach of multiple timescale analysis, since we display the dynamics happening in one period on one axis and show the slow evolution from one period to the next on the other axis. One example of such a pseudo-space time representation can be seen in Fig. \[fig:interaction\] where we prepared two LSs close to each other as an initial condition. The vertical axis represents the fast time scale and goes from $0$ to $T$, yet only the region containing the two LSs is shown. The horizontal axis displays the round-trip number. The results of the direct numerical simulations (DNSs) are displayed in gray scale of the variable $\cos\phi$. In this way, the steady states appear white and the LSs appear in a shade of gray representing their distance to $\theta_{s}$. The red lines overlaying the diagram are the results of an integration of the reduced system given by Eqs. ,.
One can generally observe a good agreement between the results of the reduced equations of motion Eqs. , and that of the DNS, as seen for instance in Fig. \[fig:interaction\] when the LSs are not too close. The non-reciprocity of the interactions is clearly observed and it is mainly due to the asymmetry of the tails of the LSs and of the overlap integrals; in general $\sigma_{+}\neq-\sigma_{-}$ and $F_{+}\neq-F_{-}$. In particular, $F_{+}>0$ (resp. $F_{+}<0$) corresponds to LS$_{2}$ being repulsed (resp. attracted) by LS$_{1}$ while and $F_{-}<0$ (resp. and $F_{-}>0$) corresponds to LS$_{1}$ being attracted (resp. repulsed) by LS$_{1}$. Notice that the left panel situation in Fig. \[fig:interaction\] corresponds very well to the experimental results in Figs. 1(c) of [@GJB-CHA-17]. While these results can be reproduced numerically with a Class-C laser model in Fig. 5 of [@GJB-CHA-17], we show that the interaction are properly accounted for in our simplified Adler model.
The absence of parity make it so that it is possible to obtain stable bound states even in the cases in which $\sigma_{\pm}\in\mathbb{R}$. We show how non-reciprocal attractive interactions can lead to drifting, stable bound states in Fig. \[fig:spaceship\]. Unfortunately, as the LSs are extremely close to each other, the reduced set of Eqs. , diverges in some cases instead of showing a molecule bound state at this parameter set. Yet, other parameter sets allows finding such drifting bound states. For very small distance between the LSs the assumption of weak, single exponential long range interaction is not valid anymore. A possible improvement over Eqs. , would be to include higher order terms in the approximation of the tails in Eq. and the projection onto the weakly damped eigenmodes of Eq. \[eq:Adjoint\].
![(a) Potential of the distance between two LSs. (b) DNS of the Adler Eq. showing a precursor of a period-two instability of a single LS. (c) Evolution of the distance between two LSs obtained from DNS of Adler Eq. in dotted black lines and reduced model Eq. , in solid black lines as well as minima and maxima of the potential in blue dashed and red dot-dashed lines. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.49,0.99,2.1,100\right)$ in all three cases.[]{data-label="fig:locking"}](locking_potential "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}![(a) Potential of the distance between two LSs. (b) DNS of the Adler Eq. showing a precursor of a period-two instability of a single LS. (c) Evolution of the distance between two LSs obtained from DNS of Adler Eq. in dotted black lines and reduced model Eq. , in solid black lines as well as minima and maxima of the potential in blue dashed and red dot-dashed lines. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.49,0.99,2.1,100\right)$ in all three cases.[]{data-label="fig:locking"}](p2example "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}\
![(a) Potential of the distance between two LSs. (b) DNS of the Adler Eq. showing a precursor of a period-two instability of a single LS. (c) Evolution of the distance between two LSs obtained from DNS of Adler Eq. in dotted black lines and reduced model Eq. , in solid black lines as well as minima and maxima of the potential in blue dashed and red dot-dashed lines. Parameters are $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.49,0.99,2.1,100\right)$ in all three cases.[]{data-label="fig:locking"}](locking_distances "fig:"){width="1\columnwidth"}
There is a special regime in parameter space, where the exponential tails become complex. This region lies in the vicinity of the AH instability of the steady states and the tails of the LS starts to oscillate at the frequencies given by $\Im\left(\sigma_{\pm}\right)$. This opens the possibility for multiple roots for Eq. and thus a potential $U\left(l\right)$ with multiples (almost) equidistant minima and maxima. One set of parameters $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.49,0.99,2.1,100\right)$ exhibiting this behavior is displayed in Fig. \[fig:locking\]. The corresponding potential $U\left(l\right)$ is depicted in Fig. \[fig:locking\](a). The DNS of the Adler Eq. with two LSs at varying distances was performed and Fig. \[fig:locking\](c) shows the evolution of the distance between the LSs over multiple round-trips. The maxima and minima of the potential are shown in red and blue dashed lines, respectively while the distances obtained from the reduced Eqs. are displayed in black lines. The distance obtained from DNS is also shown in dotted lines. The results of the DNS do not seem to match very well with that of the reduced model in this particular case. While converging to the same distances after many round-trips the transients are different. The reason for the discrepancy was found in the pathological values of the parameters we chose for the periodic solution; The feedback phases $\psi>\pi/2$ bring the system close to a period doubling regime. A precursor of that period doubling instability can be observed in the DNS of a single LS which is shown in Fig. \[fig:locking\](b). The time trace is zoomed into the vicinity of the steady state $\theta_{s}$ to show the small deviation between the relaxations into the steady state happening every other period. It is well-known that period-two oscillations of LSs can modify strongly their interactions, up to the point of canceling the coarsening dynamics as shown in [@JAH-PRL-15].
![Pseudo space-time representation of the positions of multiple LSs obtained by DNSs of the Adler Eq. . The simulation starts with five LSs at varying distances. Parameters are $\Delta=1.1$, $\chi=1.7$, $\chi=0.99$ and $\tau=100$. The parameters change at the dashed line to $\Delta=0.6$, $\psi=2.1$, $\chi=0.99$ and $\tau=100$.[]{data-label="fig:multiplelss"}](spaceship_order){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
In the following we will combine some of the results obtained in the previous sections to show how one could manipulate a system of multiple LSs by changing the systems parameters. We start the simulation in the regime where LSs can form a molecule bound state, if they are close enough $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(1.1,0.99,1.7,100\right)$ as seen in Fig. \[fig:interaction\](b), with five LSs at varying starting distances. Two of the LSs are close enough to form a molecule bound state that starts to drift. Figure \[fig:multiplelss\] shows the DNS in pseudo-space-time. Upon reaching another LS the molecule bound state splits in two while one of the LSs forms another molecule bound state with the newly encountered LS. Since the domain is periodic this molecule bound state moves trough it repetitively and interacts with every other LSs in the delay line. This dynamics is in good agreement with the experimental results of Fig. 3 of [@GJB-CHA-17]. After round trip $850$ (indicated by a dashed line) the system parameters were changed to $\left(\Delta,\chi,\psi,\tau\right)=\left(0.6,0.99,2.1,100\right)$ which is close to the parameters in Fig. \[fig:locking\] and leads to the same regular locking behavior. One can clearly see that the LSs organize themselves in an equidistant pattern since every LS locks the next one into a minimum of the induced potential. However there are only four LSs on the right side of the dashed line while the system started with five LSs prior to the parameter change. The annihilation of one LS is most likely caused by the abrupt change of parameters, combined with the small distance with neighbors.
Conclusion
==========
The time-delayed Adler equation is a prototypical model for the dynamics of the phase of an injected semiconductor laser with coherent injection and delayed feedback. It consists in a single, $2\pi$ periodic degree of freedom and of only three control parameters. It is arguably one of the simplest model giving rise to topological localized structures. In this paper we studied the bifurcation mechanisms that govern the stability of the locked solution and the appearance of stable LSs. We have found that the locked solution can become unstable via saddle-node bifurcations, as in the standard, not delayed Adler equation, but also via Andronov-Hopf bifurcations, which is a direct consequence of the presence of the time delay. In the long delay limit, approximations of the SN and AH borders were given using the quasi-continuous spectrum method. We have found that the branches of single and multiple LSs are usually connected and that parameter sweeps induce transitions between states with different numbers of evenly spaced LSs. The branches of LSs were found to emerge either from diverging period solutions or from saddle-node of limit cycle bifurcations. Finally, we provided the derivation of the effective equations of motion governing the distance between LSs. We have found that the leading eigenvalue expansions can be obtained solving a linear, time-advanced, equation and that the lack of parity leads to non-reciprocal interactions and drifting bound states. Finally, we observed how the transition from real towards complex eigenvalues explains the creation of stable bound states. Further works would consider the statistical dynamics of a large ensemble of LSs.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
J.J. acknowledge the financial support of the MINECO Project MOVELIGHT (PGC2018-099637-B-100 AEI/FEDER UE). S.G. acknowledges the PRIME program of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) with funds from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).
[10]{}
J. Wu, R. Keolian, and I. Rudnick. Observation of a nonpropagating hydrodynamic soliton. , 52:1421–1424, Apr 1984.
E. Moses, J. Fineberg, and V. Steinberg. Multistability and confined traveling-wave patterns in a convecting binary mixture. , 35:2757–2760, Mar 1987.
F. J. Niedernostheide, M. Arps, R. Dohmen, H. Willebrand, and H. G. Purwins. Spatial and spatio-temporal patterns in pnpn semiconductor devices. , 172(1):249–266, 1992.
P. B. Umbanhowar, F. Melo, and H. L. Swinney. Localized excitations in a vertically vibrated granular layer. , (382):793–796, 1996.
Yuri A. Astrov and H.G. Purwins. Plasma spots in a gas discharge system: birth, scattering and formation of molecules. , 283(5-6):349 – 354, 2001.
G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine. . Wiley, 1977.
L.A. Lugiato. Transverse nonlinear optics: Introduction and review. , 4(8-9):1251 – 1258, 1994. Special Issue: Nonlinear Optical Structures, Patterns, Chaos.
P. Mandel and M. Tlidi. Transverse dynamics in cavity nonlinear optics (2000-2003). , 6(9):R60, 2004.
T. Ackemann, W. J. Firth, and G.L. Oppo. Chapter 6 fundamentals and applications of spatial dissipative solitons in photonic devices. In P. R. Berman E. Arimondo and C. C. Lin, editors, [*Advances in Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics*]{}, volume 57 of [*Advances In Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics*]{}, pages 323 – 421. Academic Press, 2009.
W. J. Firth and A. J. Scroggie. Optical bullet holes: Robust controllable localized states of a nonlinear cavity. , 76:1623–1626, Mar 1996.
M. Brambilla, L. A. Lugiato, F. Prati, L. Spinelli, and W. J. Firth. Spatial soliton pixels in semiconductor devices. , 79:2042–2045, 1997.
S. Barland, J. R. Tredicce, M. Brambilla, L. A. Lugiato, S. Balle, M. Giudici, T. Maggipinto, L. Spinelli, G. Tissoni, T. Kn[ö]{}dl, M. Miller, and R. J[ä]{}ger. Cavity solitons as pixels in semiconductor microcavities. , 419(6908):699–702, Oct 2002.
F. Leo, S. Coen, P. Kockaert, S.P. Gorza, P. Emplit, and M. Haelterman. Temporal cavity solitons in one-dimensional [K]{}err media as bits in an all-optical buffer. , 4(7):471–476, Jul 2010.
T. Herr, V. Brasch, J. D. Jost, C. Y. Wang, N. M. Kondratiev, M. L. Gorodetsky, and T. J. Kippenberg. Temporal solitons in optical microresonators. , 8(2):145–152, 2014.
N. N. Rosanov and G. V. Khodova. Autosolitons in nonlinear interferometers. , 65:449–450, 1988.
N. N. Rosanov and G. V. Khodova. Diffractive autosolitons in nonlinear interferometers. , 7:1057–1065, 1990.
P. Genevet, S. Barland, M. Giudici, and J. R. Tredicce. Bistable and addressable localized vortices in semiconductor lasers. , 104:223902, Jun 2010.
Y. Tanguy, T. Ackemann, W. J. Firth, and R. Jäger. Realization of a semiconductor-based cavity soliton laser. , 100:013907, Jan 2008.
M. Marconi, J. Javaloyes, S. Balle, and M. Giudici. How lasing localized structures evolve out of passive mode locking. , 112:223901, Jun 2014.
J. Javaloyes. Cavity light bullets in passively mode-locked semiconductor lasers. , 116:043901, Jan 2016.
J. Javaloyes, P. Camelin, M. Marconi, and M. Giudici. Dynamics of localized structures in systems with broken parity symmetry. , 116:133901, Mar 2016.
P. Camelin, J. Javaloyes, M. Marconi, and M. Giudici. Electrical addressing and temporal tweezing of localized pulses in passively-mode-locked semiconductor lasers. , 94:063854, Dec 2016.
F. T. Arecchi, G. Giacomelli, A. Lapucci, and R. Meucci. Two-dimensional representation of a delayed dynamical system. , 45:R4225–R4228, Apr 1992.
G. Giacomelli and A. Politi. Relationship between delayed and spatially extended dynamical systems. , 76:2686–2689, Apr 1996.
S.A. Kashchenko. , 38(3):1, 1998.
Serhiy Yanchuk and Giovanni Giacomelli. Spatio-temporal phenomena in complex systems with time delays. , 50(10):103001, 2017.
B. Romeira, R. Av[ó]{}, Jos[é]{} M. L. Figueiredo, S. Barland, and J. Javaloyes. Regenerative memory in time-delayed neuromorphic photonic resonators. , 6:19510 EP –, Jan 2016. Article.
M. Marconi, J. Javaloyes, S. Barland, S. Balle, and M. Giudici. Vectorial dissipative solitons in vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers with delays. , 9:450–455, 2015.
B. Garbin, J. Javaloyes, G. Tissoni, and S. Barland. Topological solitons as addressable phase bits in a driven laser. , 6, 2015.
B. Garbin, J. Javaloyes, S. Barland, and G. Tissoni. Interactions and collisions of topological solitons in a semiconductor laser with optical injection and feedback. , 27(11):114308, 2017.
K. Engelborghs, T. Luzyanina, and D. Roose. Numerical bifurcation analysis of delay differential equations using dde-biftool. , 28(1):1–21, March 2002.
B. Garbin, A. Dolcemascolo, F. Prati, J. Javaloyes, G. Tissoni, and S. Barland. Refractory period of an excitable semiconductor laser with optical injection. , 95:012214, Jan 2017.
P. Coullet, D. Daboussy, and J. R. Tredicce. Optical excitable waves. , 58:5347–5350, Nov 1998.
Serhiy Yanchuk, Stefan Ruschel, Jan Sieber, and Matthias Wolfrum. Temporal dissipative solitons in time-delay feedback systems. , 123:053901, Jul 2019.
R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. G. Hare, D. J. Jeffrey, and D. E. Knuth. On the lambertw function. , 5(1):329–359, Dec 1996.
Serhiy Yanchuk, Leonhard Lücken, Matthias Wolfrum, and Alexander Mielke. Spectrum and amplitude equations for scalar delay-differential equations with large delay. , 35(1):537–553, 2015.
Steven H. Strogatz. . Westview Press, 2015.
Michel Nizette. Stability of square oscillations in a delayed-feedback system. , 70:056204, Nov 2004.
J. Javaloyes, T. Ackemann, and A. Hurtado. Arrest of domain coarsening via anti-periodic regimes in delay systems. , 115:223901, Nov 2015.
R. Lehoucq and D. Sorensen. Deflation techniques for an implicitly restarted arnoldi iteration. , 17(4):789–821, 1996.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'André H. Hoang'
- Ambar Jain
- Christopher Lepenik
- Vicent Mateu
-
- Ignazio Scimemi
- 'Iain W. Stewart'
bibliography:
- './sources.bib'
title: |
The MSR Mass\
and the Order Lambda QCD Renormalon Sum Rule
---
Introduction
============
Achieving higher precision in theoretical predictions in the framework of quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) is one of the main goals in high-energy physics and an essential ingredient in the indirect search for physics beyond the Standard Model. In this endeavor accurate determinations of the masses of the heavy charm, bottom and top quarks play an important role since they enter the description of many observables that are employed in consistency tests of the Standard Model and in the exploration of models of new physics. Because quark masses are formally-defined renormalized quantities and not physical observables, the quantities from which the heavy quark masses are extracted need to be computed in perturbative QCD to high order. Among the most precise recent high-order analyses to determine the heavy quark masses are QCD sum rules and the analysis of quarkonium energies for the charm and bottom quark masses [@Dehnadi:2011gc; @Bodenstein:2011ma; @Bodenstein:2011fv; @Hoang:2012us; @Chakraborty:2014aca; @Colquhoun:2014ica; @Beneke:2014pta; @Ayala:2014yxa; @Dehnadi:2015fra; @Erler:2016atg] and the top pair production threshold cross section at a future lepton collider for the top quark mass [@Hoang:2000yr; @Hoang:2013uda; @Beneke:2015kwa]. Over time all of these analyses have been continuously updated and improved by computations of new QCD corrections, and more are being designed and studied currently to also allow for more precise determinations of the top quark mass from available LHC data [@Czakon:2013goa; @Khachatryan:2016mqs; @Aaboud:2016pbd; @Czakon:2016ckf; @Alioli:2013mxa; @Frixione:2014ala; @Chatrchyan:2013boa; @Kharchilava:1999yj].
In all the analyses of Refs. [@Dehnadi:2011gc; @Bodenstein:2011ma; @Bodenstein:2011fv; @Hoang:2012us; @Chakraborty:2014aca; @Colquhoun:2014ica; @Beneke:2014pta; @Ayala:2014yxa; @Dehnadi:2015fra; @Erler:2016atg; @Hoang:2000yr; @Hoang:2013uda; @Beneke:2015kwa] the use of short-distance mass schemes was essential to achieve a well-converging perturbative expansion and a precision in the mass determination well below the hadronization scale $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}\sim 200\,-\,300$MeV. The heavy quark pole mass $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$, which is the perturbation theory equivalent of the rest mass of an on-shell quark, on the other hand, leads to a substantially worse perturbative behavior due to its linear infrared-sensitivity, also known as the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon problem [@Bigi:1994em; @Beneke:1994sw], and was therefore not adopted as a relevant mass scheme for analyses where a precision better than $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$ could be achieved. Nevertheless, the pole mass still served as an important intermediate mass scheme during computations because it determines the partonic (but unphysical) poles of heavy quark Green functions. Typical short-distance quark mass schemes which have been employed were the renormalization-scale dependent $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ and so-called low-scale short-distance masses such as the kinetic mass [@Czarnecki:1997sz], the potential-subtracted (PS) mass [@Beneke:1998rk], the 1S mass [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1999ye], the renormalon-subtracted (RS) mass [@Pineda:2001zq] or the jet mass [@Jain:2008gb; @Fleming:2007qr]. The basic difference between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass to the low-scale short-distance mass schemes is that the perturbative coefficients of its relation to the pole mass scale linearly with the heavy quark mass, ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)\,-\,m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}\sim m_Q(\alpha_s+\ldots)$, while for the low-scale short-distance mass schemes the corresponding series scales linearly with a scale $R\ll m_Q$. This feature enables the low-scale short-distance quark mass schemes to be used for predictions of quantities where the heavy quark dynamics is non-relativistic in nature and fluctuations at the scale of $m_Q$ are integrated out. This is because radiative corrections to the mass in such quantities involve physical scales much smaller than $m_Q$. One very prominent example in the context of top quark physics is the non-relativistic heavy quarkonium dynamics inherent to the top-antitop pair production cross section at threshold at a future lepton collider [@Hoang:2000yr; @Hoang:2013uda; @Beneke:2015kwa], where the most important dynamical scale is the inverse Bohr radius $m_t\,\alpha_s\sim 25$GeV $\ll m_t$. On the other hand, the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass is a good scheme choice for quantities that involve energies much larger than $m_Q$, such as for high-energy total cross sections, or when the massive quark causes virtual and off-shell effects. This is because in such cases the heavy quark mass yields corrections that either scale with positive or negative powers of $m_Q$ such that QCD corrections associated with the mass have a scaling that is linear in $m_Q$ as well. The difference between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass and the low-scale short-distance masses is most important for the case of the top quark because in this case the difference between $m_t$ and the dynamical low-energy scales can be very large numerically.
For the top quark mass there are excellent prospects for very precise measurements in low-scale short-distance schemes such as the PS mass or the 1S mass from the top-antitop threshold inclusive cross section at a future lepton collider [@Hoang:2000yr; @Hoang:2013uda; @Beneke:2015kwa]. Current studies indicate that a precision well below $50$MeV can be achieved accounting for theoretical as well as experimental uncertainties [@Seidel:2013sqa; @Horiguchi:2013wra; @Vos:2016til]. Currently, the most precise measurements of the top quark mass come from reconstruction analyses at the LHC [@Khachatryan:2015hba; @Aaboud:2016igd] and the Tevatron [@Tevatron:2014cka] and have uncertainties at the level of $500$MeV or larger. Moreover, the mass is obtained from multivariate fits involving multipurpose Monte Carlo (MC) event generators and thus represents a determination of the top quark mass parameter $m_t^{\rm MC}$ contained in the particular MC event generator. Recently, a first high-precision analysis on how the MC top quark mass parameter can be related to a field theoretically well-defined short-distance top quark mass was provided in Refs. [@Butenschoen:2016lpz; @Hoang:2017kmk] and general considerations on the relation were discussed in Ref. [@Hoang:2008xm; @Hoang:2014oea]. For the analysis, hadron level predictions for the 2-jettiness distribution [@Stewart:2010tn] for electron-positron collisions and ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ QCD corrections together with the resummation of large logarithms at next-to-next-to leading order [@Fleming:2007qr; @Fleming:2007tv; @Hoang:2007vb] were employed. Since the 2-jettiness distribution is closely related to the invariant mass distribution of a single reconstructed top quark, the relevant dynamical scales inherent to the problem are governed by the width of the mass distribution which amounts to only about $5$GeV in the peak region of the distribution where the sensitivity to the top mass is the highest. Interestingly, as was shown in Ref. [@Butenschoen:2016lpz], the dynamical scales increase continuously considering the 2-jettiness distribution further away from the peak. In the analysis of [@Butenschoen:2016lpz] the MSR mass scheme $m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R)$ was employed which depends on a scale $R$ and for which the dependence on $R$ is described by a renormalization group flow such that $R$ can be continuously adapted according to which part of the distribution is predicted. Other applications of the MSR mass using a flavor number dependent evolution in $R$ to account for the mass effects of lighter quarks were given in Ref. [@Hoang:2017btd; @Mateu:2017hlz]. In contrast to the $\mu$-dependent ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$, which evolves only logarithmically in $\mu$, the MSR mass has logarithmic as well as linear dependence on $R$.
The MSR mass scheme was succinctly introduced in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj] and discussed conceptually in Ref. [@Hoang:2014oea], but a detailed discussion has so far not been provided. A key purpose of this paper is to provide sufficient details such that phenomenological MSR mass analyses, such as the results of Ref. [@Butenschoen:2016lpz], can be easily related to other common short-distance mass schemes that are being used in the literature.
The definition of the MSR mass given by the perturbative series for the MSR-pole mass difference $m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$ is obtained directly from the $\overline{\rm MS}$-pole mass relation ${\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$ and is therefore the only low-scale short-distance mass suggested in the literature that is derived directly from on-shell heavy quark self-energy diagrams just like the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass.[^1] The MSR mass thus automatically inherits the clean and good infrared properties of the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass. Furthermore, by construction, the MSR mass matches to the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass for $R={\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)$ and is known to the same order as the series of ${\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)\,-\,m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$ without any further effort, which is currently ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ from the results of Refs. [@Tarrach:1980up; @Gray:1990yh; @Melnikov:2000qh; @Chetyrkin:1999ys; @Chetyrkin:1999qi; @Marquard:2007uj; @Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn]. As already argued in Refs. [@Hoang:2008yj; @Hoang:2008xm], the MSR mass can therefore be considered as the natural modification of the “running” $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass scheme concept for renormalization scales below $m_Q$, where the logarithmic evolution of the regular $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass is known to be unphysical.
Since the MSR mass is designed to be employed for scales $R< m_Q$, it can be useful – for applications where a clean treatment of virtual massive-flavor effects is important – to integrate out the virtual effects of the massive quark $Q$ from the MSR mass definition. We therefore introduce two types of MSR masses, one where the virtual effects of the massive quark $Q$ are integrated out, called the [*natural MSR mass*]{}, and one where these effects are not integrated out, called the [*practical MSR mass*]{}. The difference between these two versions of the MSR mass is quite small and very well behaved for all $R$ values in the perturbative region, and the practical definition should be perfectly fine for most phenomenological applications. But the natural definition has conceptual advantages as its evolution for scales $R<m_Q$ does not include the virtual effects of the massive quark $Q$, which is conceptually cleaner since these belong physically to the scale $m_Q$.
We note that the R-evolution concept of a running heavy quark mass scheme for scales $R<m_Q$ elaborated in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj] has already been suggested a long time ago in Refs. [@Voloshin:1992wg; @Bigi:1997fj]. The R-evolution equation we discuss for the MSR mass was already quoted explicitly for the renormalization group evolution of the kinetic mass [@Czarnecki:1997sz] at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ in these references, but the conceptual implications of R-evolution and its connection to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon problem in the perturbative relations between short-distance masses and the pole mass were first studied systematically in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj]. The second main purpose of this paper is to give further details on R-evolution and also to discuss its relation to the Borel transformation focusing mainly on the case of the MSR mass. We note that the concept of R-evolution is quite general and can in principle be applied to any short-distance mass which depends on a variable infrared cutoff scale (such as the PS and the RS masses) or to cutoff-dependent QCD matrix elements with arbitrary dimensions. In fact, R-evolution has already been examined and applied in a number of other applications which include the factorization-scale dependence in the context of the operator product expansion [@Hoang:2009yr], the scale dependence of the non-perturbative soft radiation matrix element in high-precision determinations of the strong coupling from $e^+e^-$ event-shape distributions [@Abbate:2010xh; @Abbate:2012jh; @Hoang:2014wka; @Hoang:2015hka], even accounting for the finite mass effects of light quarks [@Gritschacher:2013tza; @Pietrulewicz:2014qza] and hadrons [@Mateu:2012nk; @Hoang:2014wka].
The basic feature of the R-evolution concept is that for the difference of MSR masses at two scales, $m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R)-m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R^\prime)$, its linear dependence on the renormalization scale provides, completely within perturbation theory, a resummation of the terms in the asymptotic series associated to the pole-mass renormalon ambiguity to all orders. The R-evolution then resums the factorially growing terms in a systematic way that is ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$-renormalon free and, at the same time also sums all large logarithms that arise if $R$ and $R^\prime$ are widely separated. This cannot be achieved by more common purely logarithmic renormalization group equations, but is fully compatible with a Wilsonian renormalization group setup. We note that the summations carried out by the R-evolution was achieved prior to Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj] for the RS mass in [@Bali:2003jq] (see also Ref. [@Campanario:2005np]). Their method (and the RS mass) is based on using an approximate expression for the Borel transform function. The summation for a difference of RS masses (for scales $R$ and $R^\prime$) is obtained by computing the inverse Borel integral over the difference of the two respective Borel functions. This method and R-evolution lead to consistent results, but the R-evolution does not rely on the knowledge of the Borel functions.
The essential and probably most interesting conceptual feature of the perturbative series of the equations is that it provides a systematic reordering of the terms in the asymptotic series associated to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity in leading, subleading, subsubleading, etc. contributions. So using the analytic solution of the equations allows one to derive analytically (i.e. without any numerical procedure or modeling) the Borel-transform of a given perturbative series from the perspective that it carries an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity. As a result one can rigorously derive an analytic expression for the normalization of the non-analytic terms in the Borel transform that are characteristic for the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon. The analytic result for this normalization factor was already given and discussed in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj], but no details on the derivation were provided. We take the opportunity to show the details of the derivation here. We call the analytic result for the normalization of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity the [*${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule*]{}, because it can be quickly applied to any given perturbative series. To demonstrate the use and the high sensitivity of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon sum rule we apply it also to a number of other cases, pointing out subtleties in its application to avoid inconsistencies and misinterpretations of the results.
We note that also other methods to determine the normalization factor have been used. In Ref. [@Pineda:2001zq] it was determined from a computation of the residue of the Borel transform of the series following a proposal in Ref. [@Lee:1996yk]. This approach, which we call [*Borel method*]{} can also be carried out analytically and provides the correct result, but has been observed to converge very slowly. We can identify the reason for this analytically from the solutions for the R-evolution equations, and we also discuss the connection of this method to our ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule based on explicit analytic expressions. In Ref. [@Bali:2013pla] the normalization factor was computed taking the ratio of the $n$-th term of the series to the asymptotic behavior. This [*ratio method*]{} converges very fast and provides results very similar to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule. Recently, the ratio method was applied in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu], accounting for the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ corrections to the pole-$\overline{\rm MS}$ mass relation [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn]. We show that our ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule provides results that are in full agreement with the ones obtained in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] and also leads to very similar uncertainties.
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. \[sec:msrsetup\] we provide the definition of the natural and practical MSR masses, $m_Q^{\rm MSRn}$ and $m_Q^{\rm MSRp}$, based on the perturbative series of the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relation ${\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$, and we also analyze the difference between these two MSR masses. This section provides the conventions we use for the coefficients of perturbative series, but it can otherwise be skipped by the reader not interested in the MSR masses. In Sec. \[sec:Revolution\] we present the R-evolution equations which describe the scale dependence of the MSR masses and we also show explicitly how the solutions of the equations sum large logarithms together with the high-order asymptotic series terms related to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon. We in particular show for the top quark mass under which conditions the use of the R-evolution equations and its resummation is essential and superior to renormalon-free fixed-order perturbation theory, which does not sum any large logarithms. To our knowledge, such an analysis has not been provided in the literature before. We also point out that the solution of the R-evolution equations is intrinsically related to carrying out an inverse Borel transform over differences of functions in the Borel plane such that the singularities related to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon cancel. In Sec. \[sec:sumrule\] we present the analytic derivation of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon sum rule and demonstrate its utility by a detailed analysis concerning the normalization of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity in the series for the difference of the pole mass and the MSR masses. The derivation of the sum rule allows to derive a new alternative expression for the high-order asymptotic behavior of a series that contains an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon which we discuss as well. To demonstrate the high sensitivity of the sum rule and to explain its consistent (and inconsistent) application we discuss its strong flavor number dependence and apply it to the massive quark vacuum polarization function, the series for the PS mass-pole mass difference, the QCD $\beta$-function, and the hadronic R-ratio. This section can be bypassed by the reader not interested in applications of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule, but we note that Sec. \[sec:PSmassIR\] discusses implications for the PS mass that are relevant for Sec. \[sec:othermasses\] and may be important for high-precision top quark mass determinations. Some subtle issues in the relation of the MSR masses to the PS, 1S and ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ masses are discussed in Sec. \[sec:othermasses\]. Finally, we conclude in Sec. \[sec:conclusions\]. The paper also contains two appendices. In App. \[app:coefficients\] we specify our convention for the QCD $\beta$-function coefficients and present a number of expressions and formulae for coefficients, quantities and matching relations that arise in the discussion of R-evolution, the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon and on various mass definitions throughout this paper. In App. \[sec:N12alternative\] we provide details on the relation of the Borel method and our sum rule method to determine the normalization of the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity of the pole mass. Finally, in App. \[sec:othermasscoeff\] we quote the coefficients that define the PS and the 1S masses for the convenience of the reader and also show how the MSR masses can be obtained from a given value of the 1S mass in the non-relativistic and $\Upsilon$-expansion counting scheme [@Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1998ng].
MSR Mass Setup {#sec:msrsetup}
==============
Basic Idea of the MSR Mass
--------------------------
The $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ serves as the standard short-distance mass scheme for many high-energy applications with physical scales of the order or larger than the mass of the quark $Q$. It relies on the subtraction of the $1/\epsilon$ divergences in the common $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme in the on-shell self-energy corrections calculated in dimensional regularization. Despite the fact that it is an unphysical (i.e. theoretically designed) mass definition, it is infrared-safe and gauge invariant to all orders [@Tarrach:1980up; @Kronfeld:1998di] and its series relation to the pole mass $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$ thus serves as the cleanest way to precisely quantify the renormalon ambiguity of the pole mass. The relation of ${\overline{m}}_Q \equiv {\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)})$ to the pole mass in the approximation that the masses of all quarks lighter than $Q$ are zero reads $$\label{eqn:msbarpoleseries}
m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}} - {\overline{m}}_Q = {\overline{m}}_Q\,\sum_{n=1}^\infty\,a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}} ({n_{\ell}},n_h)\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_\ell+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n} \,,$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:coeffanmsbar}
a_1^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},n_h) &= {\textstyle \frac{16}{3}}\,,\\
a_2^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},n_h) &= 213.437 + 1.65707\, n_h - 16.6619\, {n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
a_3^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},n_h) &= 12075. + 118.986\, n_h + 4.10115\, n_h^2 - 1707.35\, {n_{\ell}}+ 1.42358\, n_h\, {n_{\ell}}+ 41.7722\, {n_{\ell}}^2\,,\nonumber\\
a_4^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},n_h) &= (911588.\pm 417.) + (1781.61\pm 30.72)\,n_h - (60.1637\pm 0.6912)\,n_h^2 \nonumber\\ &\quad- (231.201\pm 0.102)\,n_h\,{n_{\ell}}- (190683.\pm10.)\,{n_{\ell}}+ 9.25995\,n_h^2\,{n_{\ell}}\nonumber\\&\quad + 6.35819\,n_h^3 + 4.40363\,n_h\,{n_{\ell}}^2 + 11105.\,{n_{\ell}}^2 -
173.604\,{n_{\ell}}^3\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}$ stands for the strong coupling that renormalization-group (RG) evolves with $n_f$ active flavors, see Eq. . The coefficients $a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}}$ at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s,\alpha_s^2,\alpha_s^3)$ are known analytically from Refs. [@Tarrach:1980up; @Gray:1990yh; @Chetyrkin:1999ys; @Chetyrkin:1999qi; @Melnikov:2000qh; @Marquard:2007uj]. The ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient $a_4^{\overline{\rm MS}}$ was determined numerically in Refs. [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn], and the quoted numerical uncertainties have been taken from Ref. [@Marquard:2016dcn]. Using the method of Ref. [@Kataev:2015gvt] the uncertainties of the ${n_{\ell}}$-dependent terms may be further reduced. Using renormalon calculus [@Bigi:1994em; @Beneke:1994sw; @Beneke:1998ui] one can show that the high-order asymptotic behavior series of Eq. has an ambiguity of order $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{(n_\ell)}$, which depends on the number of massless quarks (indicated by the superscript) but is [*independent*]{} of the actual value of ${\overline{m}}_Q$.
A coherent treatment of the mass effects of lighter quarks is beyond the scope of this paper, and we therefore use the approximation that all flavors lighter than $Q$ are massless. These mass corrections come from the insertion of massive virtual quark loops in the self-energy Feynman diagrams and start at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$. At this order and at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ the mass corrections from the virtual massive quark loops have been calculated analytically for all mass values in Ref. [@Gray:1990yh] and [@Bekavac:2007tk], respectively. The dominant linear mass corrections at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ were determined in Ref. [@Hoang:2000fm]. At ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ and the mass corrections are not yet known, but the corrections in the limit of large virtual quark masses are encoded in the ultraheavy flavor threshold matching relations of the RG-evolution ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ at scales above $m_Q$ [@Chetyrkin:1997un].
The idea of the MSR mass is based on the fact that the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ ambiguity of the perturbative series on the RHS of Eq. does not depend on the value ${\overline{m}}_Q$, as already mentioned above. This is an exact mathematical statement within the context of the calculus for asymptotic series and means that we can replace the term ${\overline{m}}_Q$ by the arbitrary scale $R$ on the RHS of Eq. and use the resulting perturbative series as the definition of the $R$-dependent MSR mass scheme. It was pointed out in Ref. [@Hoang:2014oea] that, for a given value of $R$, one can also interpret the MSR mass field theoretically as having a mass renormalization constant that contains the on-shell self-energy corrections of the pole mass only for scales larger than $R$. In other words, the pole mass and the MSR mass at the scale $R$ differ by self-energy corrections from scales below $R$: while the pole mass absorbs all self-energy corrections for quantum fluctuations up to scales $m_Q$, the MSR mass at the scale $R$ absorbs only self-energy corrections between $R$ and $m_Q$. Since the pole mass renormalon problem is related to the self-energy corrections from the scale $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}< R$, this explains why the MSR mass is a short-distance mass. In this illustrative context the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass absorbs no self-energy corrections up to the scale $m_Q$. Since the scale $R$ is variable, the MSR mass can serve as a short-distance mass definition for applications governed by different physical scales and thus can also interpolate between them. Since the MSR mass is expected to have applications primarily for $R<m_Q$, it is further suitable to change the scheme from $n_\ell+1$ dynamical flavors, which includes the UV effects of the quark $Q$, to a scheme with $n_\ell$ dynamical flavors. This can be achieved in two ways, either by simply rewriting $\alpha_s^{(n_\ell+1)}$ in terms of $\alpha_s^{(n_\ell)}$, or by integrating out the virtual loop corrections of the quark $Q$. This results in two different ways to define the MSR mass, where we call the former the [*practical MSR mass*]{} and the latter the [*natural MSR mass*]{}, either one having advantages depending on the application.
We note that the notion of a scale-dependent short-distance mass which was first suggested in Refs. [@Voloshin:1992wg; @Bigi:1997fj] has also been adopted for the kinetic [@Czarnecki:1997sz], the PS [@Beneke:1998rk], RS [@Pineda:2001zq] and jet masses [@Jain:2008gb; @Fleming:2007tv]. However, none of these short-distance masses is defined directly from the on-shell self-energy diagrams of the massive quark $Q$ such as the MSR mass. This has a number of advantages, for example when discussing heavy flavor symmetry properties in the pole-${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass relation of different heavy quarks.
Natural MSR Mass {#sec:MSRn}
----------------
The *natural MSR mass* definition is obtained by integrating out the corrections from the heavy quark $Q$ virtual loops in the self-energy diagrams of the massive quark $Q$, such that its relation to the pole mass reads $$\label{eqn:msrpolenat}
m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}} - m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R) = R\,\sum_{n=1}^\infty\,a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}} ({n_{\ell}},0)\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n} \;,$$ where the coefficients are given in Eq. . The natural MSR mass only accounts for gluonic and massless quark corrections, and has a non-trivial matching relation to the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass. The matching between the natural MSR mass and the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass can be derived from the relation \[\] $$\label{eqn:msbmsr1}
\!\!m_Q^{\rm MSRn}({\overline{m}}_Q) - {\overline{m}}_Q
= {\overline{m}}_Q \!\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\!\bigg[ a_k^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},1)\!\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!k} \!- a_k^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},0)\!\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!k}\,\bigg],$$ and will be discussed in more detail in Sec. \[sec:MSbar\].
We note that, formally, the natural MSR mass (as well as the practical MSR mass discussed in the next subsection) agrees with the pole mass in the limit $R\to 0$. However, taking this limit is ambiguous as it involves evolving through the Landau pole of the strong coupling and dealing with its non-perturbative definition for $|R\,|<{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$. This issue is a manifestation of the renormalon problem of the pole mass.
Practical MSR Mass {#sec:MSRp}
------------------
The *practical MSR mass* definition is directly related to the $\overline{\rm MS}$-pole perturbative series of Eq. . To obtain its defining series one rewrites $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)$ as a series in $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)$ in Eq. using the matching relation given in Eq. and then replaces ${\overline{m}}_Q$ by $R$, obtaining $$\label{eqn:msrpoleprac}
m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}} - m_Q^{\rm MSRp}(R) = R\,\sum_{n=1}^\infty\,a_n^{\rm MSRp} ({n_{\ell}})\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n} , \\$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:coeffsanmsrp}
a_1^{\rm MSRp}({n_{\ell}}) & = {\textstyle \frac{16}{3}} \,,\\
a_2^{\rm MSRp}({n_{\ell}}) & = 215.094 - 16.6619\, {n_{\ell}}\,, \nonumber\\
a_3^{\rm MSRp}({n_{\ell}}) &= 12185. - 1705.93\, {n_{\ell}}+ 41.7722\, {n_{\ell}}^2 \,,\nonumber\\
a_4^{\rm MSRp}({n_{\ell}}) &= (911932.\pm 418.) - (190794.\pm 10.)\, {n_{\ell}}+ 11109.4\, {n_{\ell}}^2 - 173.604\, {n_{\ell}}^3 \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The practical MSR mass still accounts for the virtual corrections from the massive quark Q with an evolving mass $R$ and has the convenient feature that it agrees with the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass at the scale of the mass to all orders in perturbation theory \[\]: $$\label{eqn:msrpmsbarmatch}
m^{\rm MSRp}_Q(m^{\rm MSRp}_Q) = {\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q) \,.$$
The formula for the difference of the natural and practical MSR masses at the same scale $R$ up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msrdiff}
&m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}(R)-m_Q^\mathrm{MSRp}(R)\,=\,R\,\bigg[\,1.65707\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!2}
+ \big(110.050+1.4236\,{n_{\ell}}\big)\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!3}
\nonumber \\
& \qquad
+\,\big( (344.\pm 31.)
- (111.59\pm 0.10)\,{n_{\ell}}+4.40\,{n_{\ell}}^2\big)\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!4}
+ \dots\bigg] .\end{aligned}$$
![\[fig:msrnminusmsrp\] Difference of the natural and practical MSR top quark masses (${n_{\ell}}=5$) as a function of $R$ in GeV at two, three and four loop order (the one loop result vanishes). The uncertainty bands are obtained from scale variations in $\alpha_s(\mu)$ with $R/2<\mu<2R$.](figs/MSRn-MSRp){width="53.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:msrnminusmsrp\] the difference between the natural and the practical MSR top quark masses $m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}(R)-m_t^\mathrm{MSRp}(R)$ is shown for $R$ between $1$ and $170$GeV (here ${n_{\ell}}=5$).[^2] The numerical difference between these two masses is quite small. The natural MSR mass is larger than the practical MSR mass and the difference increases with $R$ reaching about $30$MeV at $R=170$GeV. The error bands reflect variations of the renormalization scale $\mu$ in $\alpha_s$ between $R/2$ and $2R$, showing very good convergence, exhibiting a perturbative error of $\pm\, 5$MeV for $R\sim 1$GeV and below $\pm\, 1$MeV for $R\gtrsim 3$GeV due to missing terms of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^5)$ and higher. This indicates that the different way how the natural and practical MSR masses treat the virtual massive quark effects does not reintroduce any infrared sensitivity, as is expected since the mass of the virtual quark provides an infrared cutoff. The numerical uncertainties in the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction are below the level of $0.1$MeV and negligible. Note that the difference between the natural and the practical MSR masses at the common scale $R$ starts at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ and that the uncertainty band from scale variation is an underestimate at this lowest order. However, the series results and error bands at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^{3,4})$ show good behavior and convergence. In Ref. [@Butenschoen:2016lpz] the practical MSR mass was employed, but the numerical difference to the natural MSR mass is subdominant to the uncertainties obtained in the analysis there.
In the rest of the paper we will simply use the notation of the MSR mass with the definition $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}-m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R)=R\sum_n a_n \big[\alpha_s(R)/(4\pi)\big]^n$ when the difference between the natural and practical definitions and the value of ${n_{\ell}}$ are insignificant but we will specify explicitly our use of the practical or the natural MSR masses (or any other mass scheme) and the massless flavor number ${n_{\ell}}$ for any numerical analysis.
R-Evolution {#sec:Revolution}
===========
The dependence of the MSR mass $m_Q^{\rm MSR}$ on the scale $R$ is described by the R-evolution equation [@Hoang:2008yj], which is derived from the logarithmic derivative of the defining equations and and using that the pole mass is $R$ independent: $$\label{eqn:revolvdef}
R\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}R}m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R)=-\,R\,\gamma^R(\alpha_s(R))=-\,R\sum_{n=0}^\infty\gamma_n^R\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1}\;,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:gammaintermsofa}
\gamma_0^R&=a_1\,,\\
\gamma^R_1&=a_2-2\,\beta_0 \,a_1\,, \nonumber\\
\gamma^R_2&=a_3-4\,\beta_0\, a_2-2\,\beta_1\, a_1\,, \nonumber\\
\gamma^R_n&=a_{n+1}-2\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\, (n-j)\,\beta_j\,a_{n-j}\,. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The overall minus sign on the RHS of Eq. indicates that the MSR mass always decreases with $R$. Note that this equation applies to all MSR schemes and we have therefore suppressed the superscript on the $a_n$’s. The crucial feature of the R-evolution equation is that it is free from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ ambiguity contained in the series that relates the MSR mass to the pole mass because the ambiguity is $R$-independent. This is directly related to the fact that for determining the R-evolution equation also the overall linear factor of $R$ on the RHS of Eqs. and has to be accounted for. Therefore the R-evolution equation does not only have a logarithmic dependence on $R$, as common to usual renormalization group equations (RGEs), but also a linear one. Both of these issues are actually tied together conceptually. The numerical expressions for the coefficients $\gamma_n$ for the natural and practical MSR masses are given explicitly in Eqs. and . We implement renormalization scale variation in the R-evolution equation by simply expanding $\alpha_s(R)$ in Eq. as a series in $\alpha_s(\lambda R)$ and by varying $\lambda$, typically in the range $0.5<\lambda<2$. In principle one may also consider varying the boundaries of integration, as it is common for usual RGEs, but only the former way of implementing scale variations in the R-evolution leads to variations of the scale solely in logarithms, which is the standard used for the usual logarithmic RGEs.
By solving the R-evolution equation one sums, at the same time and systematically, the asymptotic renormalon series as well as the large logarithmic terms in $m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_0)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_1)$ to all orders in a manner free from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon: $$\label{eqn:rrge}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)=-\sum_{n=0}^\infty\gamma_n^R
\int_{R_1}^{R_0}{\mathrm{d}}R\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1} \;.$$ It is straightforward to solve the R-evolution equation numerically and it shows very good perturbative stability even for low values of $R$ very close to the Landau pole [@Hoang:2009yr] in the perturbative strong coupling. Details of how to solve the R-evolution equations analytically have already been given in [@Hoang:2008yj] and shall not be repeated here.
It is instructive to briefly discuss what the solution of the R-evolution achieves by considering the difference of the MSR mass, $m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_0)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_1)$, in the context of fixed-order perturbation theory (FOPT), where it is well-known that the renormalon ambiguity contained in the series for $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)$ and the series for $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)$ only cancel if one expands in $\alpha_s$ with a common renormalization scale $\mu$. This is nicely illustrated in the $\beta_0$/LL (leading log) approximation where the pole-MSR mass relation has the all order form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:polemsrbeta0}
\big[m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)\big]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}&=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}R\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\bigg(\frac{\beta_0 \alpha_s(R)}{2\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1}n! \\
&=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}R\sum_{n=0}^\infty\bigg(\frac{\beta_0\alpha_s(\mu)}{2\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1}n!
\sum_{k=0}^n \frac{1}{k!}\log^k\frac{\mu}{R} \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The series by itself is divergent and not summable, but $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:diffmsrbeta0}
\big[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)&-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)\big]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}=
\\
&=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\bigg(\frac{\beta_0\alpha_s(\mu)}{2\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1}n!\,
\bigg(R_1\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{1}{k!}\log^k\frac{\mu}{R_1}-R_0\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{1}{k!}\log^k\frac{\mu}{R_0}\bigg)\nonumber\\
&=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}\sum_{n=0}^\infty\bigg(\frac{\beta_0\alpha_s(R_1)}{2\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n+1}n!\,\bigg(R_1-R_0\sum_{k=0}^n\frac{1}{k!}\log^k\frac{R_1}{R_0}\bigg),\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ is easily seen to be convergent. In the context of FOPT, when the sum over $n$ is truncated, the unavoidable appearance of large logarithms $\log(R_0/R_1)$ for let’s say $R_0\ll R_1$ may degrade the convergence and cause sizable perturbative uncertainties. Due to the additional linear dependence on $R_0$ and $R_1$, as shown in Eq. , these logarithms cannot be summed by common logarithmic renormalization group (RG) equations. The same type of logarithms also appear for example in the relation of any other low-scale short-distance mass to the $\mathrm{\overline{MS}}$ mass and their effects can be significant particularly for the top quark. By solving the R-evolution equation one sums, at the same time and systematically, the asymptotic terms in the renormalon series as well as the large logarithmic terms in $m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_0)-m_Q^{{\mathrm{MSR}}}(R_1)$ to all orders in a manner free from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon. It is again instructive to see how this is achieved in the $\beta_0$/LL approximation of Eq. , which explicitly shows the factorial growth of the perturbative series. When calculating the derivative to get the R-evolution equation, the whole series collapses exactly (i.e. without any truncation!) to $$\label{eqn:revolvbeta0dif}
\left[R\frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}R}m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)\right]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}=\,-\,a_1\, R\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\bigg) \;,$$ which is the one-loop version of Eq. . Moreover, the exact solution of the R-evolution equation at this order $$\label{eqn:rrgebeta0}
\left[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)\right]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}} =-\,a_1\!\int_{R_1}^{R_0}\!{\mathrm{d}}R\,\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\bigg) \;,$$ can be easily seen to be exactly equal to the RHS of Eq. which sums the renormalon series and the large logarithms at the same time into a convergent series.
Conceptually, the solution of the R-evolution equation is directly related to the Borel space integral over the Borel transform for the series for $m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)$. Since this has not been shown in [@Hoang:2008yj] we briefly outline this calculation here at the $\beta_0$/LL level. Starting from Eq. one can shuffle the integration over $R$ into an integral over $\alpha_s(R)$ by using the QCD $\beta$-function and the relation ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}^{\rm LL}=R\exp\,(-\,2\pi/\beta_0\alpha_s(R))$. Using the variable $t= -\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s(R))$ one can then rewrite the integral as \[$t_i= -\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s(R_i))$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:rrgebeta0t}
\left[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)\,-\,m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)\right]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}&
=-\,\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}^\mathrm{LL}\int_{t_1}^{t_0}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}t}{t}\,\mathrm{e}^{-\,t}\\
& =-\,\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}^\mathrm{LL}\left[\int_{t_1}^\infty\frac{{\mathrm{d}}t}{t}\,
\mathrm{e}^{-\,t}-\int_{t_0}^\infty\frac{{\mathrm{d}}t}{t}\,\mathrm{e}^{-\,t}\right] ,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the two integrals in the last line are just the difference of the MSR masses at $R_{0,1}$ to the pole mass, and the pole mass ambiguity is encoded in the singularity at $t=0$, which arises because $t_{0,1}<0$, $$\label{eq:priortoturelation}
\Big[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_i)\,-\,m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}\Big]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}\,=\,\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}^\mathrm{LL}\int_{t_i}^\infty\frac{{\mathrm{d}}t}{t}\,\mathrm e^{-\,t} \;.$$ Upon changing variables to the Borel plane parameter $u=-(t/t_i-1)/2$ and writing ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$ in terms of $R_i$ and $\alpha_s(R_i)$ in both integrals, this gives $$\label{eqn:rrgebeta0u}
\left[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)\right]_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}=\int_0^\infty{\mathrm{d}}u\,
\left[\,B(R_0,\mu,u)-B(R_1,\mu,u)\,\right]
\mathrm e^{-\frac{4\pi u}{\beta_0\alpha_s(\mu)}} \;.$$ Here $$B(R,\mu,u)=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}\,R\left(\frac{\mu}{R}\right)^{2u}\frac{1}{u-\frac{1}{2}} \;,$$ is the well-known Borel transform with respect to $\alpha_s(\mu)$ of the $\beta_0$/LL series in Eq. . In Eq. the singular and non-analytic contributions contained in the individual Borel functions cancel and the integral becomes ambiguity-free.
To illustrate the impact of using R-evolution compared to using FOPT we show in Fig. \[fig:msrdiff\] the difference of natural MSR masses $\Delta m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}(R_0,R_1)\equiv m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}(R_0)-m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}(R_1)$ for in fixed-order perturbation theory (FOPT) and with R-evolution. The curves in Fig. \[fig:msrdiffa\] show $\Delta m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}$ for $(R_0,R_1)=(2,161)$GeV in FOPT for the common renormalization scale $\mu$ between $R_0$ and $R_1$ at 1 loop (cyan), 2 loop (green), 3 loop (blue) and 4 loops (red). We see a good convergence for $\mu$ around $\sqrt{R_0 R_1}$, but a deterioration of the series when $\mu$ gets closer to either $R_0$ or $R_1$. For $\mu\lesssim 1/2 \sqrt{R_0 R_1}$ the series even gets out of bounds and breaks down completely. If one uses scale variation as an estimate of the remaining perturbative error, one therefore obtains a significant dependence on the choice of the lower bound of the variation, and one has no other choice than to abandon in an ad hoc manner scales closer to $R_0$ to estimate the scale variation error. The curves in Fig. \[fig:msrdiffb\] show $\Delta m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}$ for $(R_0,R_1)=(2,161)$GeV from numerically solving the equation as a function of the renormalization scale parameter $\lambda$ between $0.5$ and $2$. The color coding for the order of the equation used for the evaluation is the same as for Fig. \[fig:msrdiffa\]. As explained below Eq. , the parameter $\lambda$ is the renormalization scaling parameter in the equation which determines by how much the scale in $\alpha_s$ differs from the scale $R$. Thus a variation between $0.5$ and $2$ means that in the solution of the equations scales between $R/2$ and $2R$ are covered at each value of $R$ along the evolution, which in this case includes scales between $1$ and $322$GeV. Comparing the curves in Fig. \[fig:msrdiffa\] and \[fig:msrdiffb\] we see that the renormalization scale variation in the R-evolved results is much smaller than the one of FOPT. For the FOPT result with scale variation between $\sqrt{R_0 R_1}/2$ – which we pick by hand – and $R_1$ we obtain $\Delta m_t=(9.838\,\pm\, 2.504,\,8.981\,\pm\,0.361,\,9.465\,\pm\,0.222,\,9.427\,\pm\,0.047)$GeV at (1,2,3,4) loops. Using R-evolution with $\lambda$ variation between $0.5$ and $2$ we obtain $\Delta m_t=(8.817\,\pm\, 1.059,\,9.440\,\pm\,0.246,\,9.512\,\pm\,0.040,\,9.486\,\pm\,0.025)$GeV which is fully compatible with the FOPT result, but shows more stability and smaller errors. It is also quite instructive to see that using R-evolution the 3-loop result is significantly closer to the 4-loop result than the corresponding 3-loop FOPT result. The results show that for $R_0\ll R_1$ employing R-evolution to calculate MSR mass differences is clearly superior to FO perturbation theory.
To compare to a situation where the scales $R_0$ and $R_1$ are of similar size we have also shown in Figs. \[fig:msrdiffc\] and \[fig:msrdiffd\] the results for $\Delta m_t$ in FOPT and from R-evolution for $(R_0,R_1)=(50,161)$GeV. Here the results from both approaches are completely equivalent showing that the logarithm $\log(R_0/R_1)$ is not large and the summation of the renormalon contributions from higher orders only constitutes very small effects. Furthermore using renormalization scales close to $R_0$ or $R_1$ in FOPT is not problematic. Numerically, using FOPT with scale variations between $R_0$ and $R_1$ we obtain $\Delta m_t=(5.618\,\pm\,0.498,\,5.928\,\pm\,0.086,\,5.961\,\pm\,0.010,\,5.954\,\pm\,0.004)$GeV at $(1,2,3,4)$ loops, while using R-evolution with $\lambda$ variations between $0.5$ and $2$ we obtain $\Delta m_t=(5.555\,\pm\, 0.577,\,5.919\,\pm\, 0.114,\,5.959\,\pm\, 0.015,\,5.954\,\pm\, 0.005)$GeV. We find that FOPT and give equivalent results even for $(R_0,R_1)=(20,161)$GeV, and that the use of R-evolution is essential for $R_0/R_1< 0.1$. Overall we see that, if $R_0$ and $R_1$ are of similar size, FO perturbation theory and R-evolution lead to equivalent results, but that it is in general safer to use R-evolution. So the situation is very similar to the one we encounter when considering the relation of the strong coupling for two different renormalization scales.
We note that the possibility to sum the renormalon-type logarithms displayed in Eq. by considering the Borel integral over the difference of Borel transforms as shown in Eq. was pointed out already in Ref. [@Bali:2003jq] prior to Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj]. However, this exact equivalence \[via a transformation of variables as given below Eq. (\[eq:priortoturelation\])\] of R-evolution and the method using the integration over Borel transform differences can only be analytically shown at the $\beta_0$/LL approximation. Beyond that, both approaches sum up the same type of logarithms but differ in subleading terms. Numerically, both approaches converge to the same result and have comparable order-by-order convergence. From a practical point of view, however, the concept of R-evolution may be considered more general. This is because R-evolution can be applied directly to any series having the form of or while using the Borel integration method requires that the corresponding Borel transforms are known or constructed beforehand. For general series, such as for the difference of MSR masses as discussed above, this is not possible without making additional approximations. In practice, the approach of Ref. [@Bali:2003jq] to sum the renormalon-type logarithms has therefore only been applied for series (referred to as RS-schemes) which were explicitly derived from a given expression for the Borel transform.
Analytic Borel Transform and Renormalon Sum Rule {#sec:sumrule}
================================================
Using the solution of the R-evolution equation it is possible to derive, analytically and rigorously, an expression for the Borel transform of the MSR-pole mass relation. This Borel transform is designed to focus on the singular contributions that quantify the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon of the pole mass. This result was already quoted in the letter [@Hoang:2008yj] where, however, no details on the derivation could be given due to lack of space. In the following we provide these details on how to obtain the analytic result for the normalization of the singular terms. The analytic results for the normalization can be applied to other perturbative series as a probe of ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguities, and we therefore call it [*the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule*]{}. This sum rule was first given in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj], and is very sensitive to even subtle effects if ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ corrections are known. We apply the sum rule to obtain an updated determination of the size of the pole mass ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ ambiguity, accounting for the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ results of Refs. [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn] which became available recently but were unknown when Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj] appeared. To demonstrate the sum rule’s capabilities to probe ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguities in perturbative series and to clarify subtleties in how to use it properly, we also apply it to a few other cases. Interestingly, the analytic manipulations arising in the derivation of the sum rule lead to an alternative expression for the high-order asymptotic behavior of a series that contains an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon. This expression differs from the well known asymptotic formula which is known since a long time from [@Beneke:1994rs], and we therefore discuss it as well.
Derivation {#sec:derivation}
----------
The analytic derivation for the Borel transform of the MSR-pole mass relation starts from its expression related to the solution of the R-evolution equation given in Eq. which was already derived in Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj]. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msrpolefull}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}&=-\int_0^R{\mathrm{d}}\bar R\,\gamma^R(\alpha_s(\bar R)) \\
&=-\,{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\int_{t_R}^\infty{\mathrm{d}}t\,\gamma^R(t)\,\hat b(t)\,\mathrm e^{-G(t)}\nonumber\\
&={\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\mathrm e^{i\pi(\hat b_1+k)}S_k\int_{t_R}^\infty{\mathrm{d}}t\, t^{-1-k-\hat b_1}\mathrm e^{-t}\nonumber\\
&={\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\mathrm e^{i\pi(\hat b_1+k)}\,S_k\,\Gamma(-\,\hat b_1-k,t_R) \,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where in the second line we changed variable to $t=-\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s(\bar R))$ and used the identity to scale out ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$, and in the third line we employed the coefficients given in Eq. . The expression in Eq. gives an all-order representation of the original series that is more useful for analyzing ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon issues than Eqs. and . This is because using the R-evolution equation of Eq. (\[eqn:revolvdef\]) (which is linear in $R$) and its solution, provides, through the sum in $k$, a reordering of the original series in leading and subleading series of terms from the perspective of their numerical importance in the asymptotic high order behavior related to the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon. This allows to derive rigorously a representation of the Borel transform \[given in Eq. (\[eqn:borel2\])\] reflecting efficiently the hierarchy of leading and subleading terms with respect to the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon, which is the information that is not contained in the original series. That such a separation is possible in a systematic way may not be obvious, but it is achieved by the R-evolution equation. We stress that the result of Eq. (\[eqn:borel2\]) should not be considered as the exact expression for the Borel transform because it does not encode information on possible poles (or non-analytic cuts) other than at $u=1/2$. We note that these poles and the associated renormalons can be studied by considering solutions of R-evolution equations involving powers of $R$ different from the linear dependence shown in Eq. (\[eqn:revolvdef\]), see [@Ambar:thesis].
We note that the expression in the last line of Eq. , which involves the incomplete gamma function $\Gamma(c,t)=\int_t^\infty {\mathrm{d}}x\,x^{c-1} e^{-x}$, also arises in the analytic solution of the mass difference , $$\label{eqn:rrge2}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_0)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R_1)=
{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\mathrm e^{i\pi(\hat b_1+k)}\,S_k\,\big[\, \Gamma(-\,\hat b_1-k,t_0)-\Gamma(-\,\hat b_1-k,t_1)\, \big].$$ Here the cut in the gamma functions $\Gamma(c,t)$ for $t<0$ cancels in the difference for each $k$ in the sum, and the result on the RHS is real. We mention that the first term ($k=0$) in the sum over $k$ provides the summation of the leading terms in the $\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}$ approximation shown in Eqs. and . In Eq. the cut still remains and arises from the integration of the Landau pole in the strong coupling located at $t=0$ in the integral in the next-to-last line. The resulting imaginary part in the numerical expression corresponds to the imaginary part that arises in the inverse Borel integral for $m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)\,-\,m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}$, see Eq. , and simply reflects the ambiguity of the pole mass. From the point of view of the analytic solution of Eq. based on a perturbative expansion, the imaginary part is well-defined and analytically unique.
To proceed we asymptotically expand the incomplete gamma function in inverse powers of $t$ (i.e. powers of $\alpha_s$) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:gammaexpand}
{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\mathrm e^{i\pi(\hat b_1+k)}\Gamma(-\hat b_1-k,t)&=-R\left[\mathrm e^{G(t)}\mathrm e^{-t}(-t)^{-\hat b_1}\right]\sum_{m=0}^\infty\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k+m)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)}\,(-t)^{-1-k-m}\nonumber\\
&=-R\sum_{\ell=0}^\infty g_\ell\sum_{m=0}^\infty\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k+m)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)}\,(-t)^{-1-\ell-k-m} \,,\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficients $g_\ell$ are given in Eq. , and coincide with the $s_k$ coefficients defined in Ref. [@Beneke:1994rs]. We stress that the equality in Eq. is the asymptotic expansion and is not an identity, so that the imaginary part due to the cut in the incomplete gamma function does not arise on the RHS. Inserting Eq. in Eq. gives $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msrpolefull2}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}&=-R\,\sum_{k=0}^\infty
S_k \sum_{\ell=0}^\infty g_\ell\sum_{m=0}^\infty\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k+m)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)}\,(-t)^{-1-\ell-k-m} \,.\end{aligned}$$ We then perform the Borel transform with respect to powers of $\alpha_s(R)$ according to the rule giving $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:borel1}
B_{\alpha_s(R)}\Big[ & m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}\Big](u)= \\
& =
-\,2R\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}g_\ell\sum_{k=0}^\infty S_k\sum_{m=0}^\infty\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k+m)}{\Gamma(1+\hat
b_1+k)\Gamma(1+k+\ell+m)}\,(2u)^{\ell+k+m}\nonumber\\
&=-\,2R\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}g_\ell\sum_{k=0}^\infty S_k\frac{(2u)^{\ell+k}}{\Gamma(1+k+\ell)}\,
{}_2F_1(1,1+\hat b_1+k,1+k+\ell,2u) \;.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Using identities for the hypergeometric function we can rewrite $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{(2u)^{\ell+k}}{\Gamma(1+k+\ell)}\,&{}_2F_1(1,1+\hat b_1+k,1+k+\ell,2u)=\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)}(1-2u)^{-1-\hat b_1+\ell}\\
&-\frac{1}{(1+\hat b_1-\ell)\Gamma(k+\ell)}\,{}_2F_1(1+\hat b_1-\ell,1-k-\ell,2+\hat b_1-\ell,1-2u) \,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and the Borel transform can then be cast into the form [@Hoang:2008yj] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:borel2}
B_{\alpha_s(R)}\left[m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}\right]\!(u)\,=\, &- N_{1/2}\!\left[R\,\frac{4\pi}{\beta_0}
\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}g_\ell\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}(1-2u)^{-1-\hat b_1+\ell}\right]\nonumber\\
&+\,2R\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}g_\ell \,Q_\ell(u) \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:P12def}
N_{1/2}\,=\,& \frac{\beta_0\,\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}{2 \pi}\,P_{1/2} \;, \\
P_{1/2}\,=\,& \sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{S_k}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)} \;,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and $N_{1/2}$ and $P_{1/2}$ are two conventions for the normalization. Here $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:Qldef}
Q_\ell(u)&=\sum_{k=0}^\infty\frac{S_k\,(2u)^{k+\ell}}{(1+\hat b_1-\ell)\,\Gamma(k+\ell)}
\,{}_2F_1(1,1+\hat b_1+k,2+\hat b_1-\ell,1-2u)\\
&=\sum_{k=0}^\infty S_k\!\sum_{i=0}^{k+\ell-1}
\frac{2^i\,\Gamma(1+ \hat b_1 +i - \ell)}{\Gamma(1+ \hat b_1 + k)\,\Gamma(i+1)}\,u^i \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Setting $u=1/2$ in Eq. one gets $Q_\ell(1/2) = 1/(1+\hat b_1-\ell)\sum_{k=0}^\infty S_k/\Gamma(k+\ell)$. Since the $S_k$ coefficients are renormalon-free and further damped by the factorial in the denominator, this sum is finite. Furthermore, the sum on the second line of Eq. is also finite for $u=1/2$. Therefore one concludes that the sum of $Q_\ell$ coefficients is regular at $u=1/2$, implying that the first line of Eq. fully contains the leading-renormalon singular behavior. In Ref. [@Hoang:2008yj] the expression for the Borel transform in Eq. was given using $P_{1/2}$, but here we have shown an alternate convention with $N_{1/2}$ which agrees with the terms $N_m$ and $N$ discussed in Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa; @Beneke:2016cbu], and hence eases comparison of our numerical results with theirs. For the phenomenological relevant values ${n_{\ell}}=(3,4,5)$ we have $N_{1/2}/P_{1/2}=(1.27,1.18,1.09)$. The analytic difference between these normalizations is that $P_{1/2}$ vanishes in the limit ${n_{\ell}}\to-\infty$ while $N_{1/2}$ is finite in this limit. We will predominantly use $N_{1/2}$ for the numerical examinations in the following subsections.
The manipulations that lead to the expressions for $P_{1/2}$ and $N_{1/2}$ involve the rearrangement of the infinite sums over $\ell$ and $k$ in Eq. . These can be seen to be identities if one assumes that the QCD $\beta$-function and its inverse have some region of convergence. In practice, because only the first few terms in perturbation theory are known and one truncates the sums over $\ell$ and $k$, no formal convergence issue arises. We note that the analytic manipulations involving the R-evolution equation and the derivation of Eq. are also valid in schemes for the strong coupling other than ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$, and to apply them to such schemes one simply needs to account for the perturbative rearrangement for the coefficients $a_n$ and the QCD $\beta$-function due to the scheme change. As an example, all manipulations and the results simplify considerably in a strong coupling scheme $\bar{\alpha}$ where the coefficients $\hat b_n$ vanish for $n>1$ and which also implies $g_{\ell}=0$ for $\ell>0$ and that the coefficients of the QCD $\beta$-function have the exact form $\beta_{n}=\beta_0(\beta_1/\beta_0)^n$. Since such a scheme change can be achieved via a relation of the form $\alpha_s(\mu) =\bar\alpha(\mu) + [\,\beta_2/\beta_0-(\beta_1/\beta_0)^2\,]\,\bar\alpha^3(\mu)+\ldots$, which does not contain any ${\cal O}(\bar\alpha_s^2)$ term, the overall normalization of $N_{1/2}$ (or $P_{1/2}$) remains unchanged [@Beneke:1998ui]. In this scheme we have $S_{k>0}=\tilde\gamma_k^R\,-\,\hat b_1\tilde\gamma_{k-1}^R$, and Eq. can be rewritten in the equivalent form $N_{1/2}=(\beta_0/2\pi) \Gamma(1+\hat b_1) \sum_{k=0}^\infty\,\tilde\gamma_k^R (1+k)/\Gamma(2+\hat b_1+k)$ and was derived recently in Ref. [@Komijani:2017vep]. There is, however, no advantage in using this form, because the coefficients $\tilde\gamma_k^R$ in the $\bar{\alpha}$ scheme still have to account for the reordering of the series due to the scheme change from $\alpha_s$ to $\bar\alpha$. Other schemes, such as the ’ t Hooft scheme, where all coefficients of the QCD $\beta$-function beyond $\beta_0$ and $\beta_1$ vanish, have been studied in Ref. [@Ambar:thesis].
We discuss the structure of the non-analytic terms multiplied by $N_{1/2}$ in Eq. in Sec. \[sec:asymtotic\] below. The second term in Eq. is purely polynomial and represents contributions in the Borel transform $B(u)$ that account for the portions in the original series of Eqs. and that go beyond the pure ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon corrections that numerically dominate the series. These terms may include renormalon contributions of a different kind \[such as ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})^{k>1}$\], which are however not probed by an R-evolution equation that is linear in $R$ [@Hoang:2009yr]. Moreover, they account for the difference of the pure ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon asymptotic form of the series (encoded in the value of $N_{1/2}$) and the actual coefficients of the original series given in Eqs. and . The latter are recovered in the asymptotic limit were the sums over $k$ and $\ell$ are carried out up to infinity. Note that in practice, for a finite order determination of the Borel transform for a given value of $N_{1/2}$ or $P_{1/2}$, one truncates the sum over $k$ and $\ell$ in Eq. , and in this case the terms coming from the $Q_\ell$ represent finite polynomials. For the construction of a Borel transform that reproduces the known coefficients exactly, it may then be more suitable to simply fit the coefficients of the remaining polynomial terms such that the known coefficients in the original series are reproduced exactly.
Renormalon Sum Rule {#sec:renormalonsumrule}
-------------------
The analytic expression for $N_{1/2}$ is quite useful as it can be applied to any perturbative series as a probe for ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalons, given the information on the available coefficients of a perturbative series. We therefore call the formula for $N_{1/2}$ (or equivalently $P_{1/2}$) in Eq. (\[eqn:P12def\]) *the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule* [@Hoang:2008yj]. Formally to any given order in $k$, $N_{1/2}$ is a linear functional acting on perturbative series in powers of $\alpha_s$ since the coefficients $S_k$ in Eq. are linear in the coefficients $a_n$ of the perturbative series, see Eq. . So given two series defined by the sequence $\{c_n\}=(c_1,c_2,\dots)$ and $\{d_n\}=(d_1,d_2,\dots)$, where $c_n/d_n$ are the coefficients of order $[\,\alpha_s/(4\pi)\,]^{n}$ in the series, one has $$\label{eqn:N12linear}
N_{1/2}[\{\alpha \,c_n+\beta\, d_n\}]\,=\,\alpha\, N_{1/2}[\{c_n\}]+\beta\, N_{1/2}[\{d_n\}] \;.$$
As a word of caution, we emphasize that applying the $N_{1/2}$ sum rule to a truncated series does (like any other type of renormalon calculus in the context of perturbative QCD) not rigorously and mathematically prove or disprove the existence of an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon, since the existence of renormalons is by definition related to the asymptotic high-order behavior and mathematically strict proofs, if they exist, are related to elaborate all-order studies of Feynman diagrams. So using the sum rule should be better thought of as an analytic projection of the known terms of a perturbative series onto the known pattern of a pure ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon series, which is generated from the singular terms in the Borel transform in Eq. that are multiplied by $N_{1/2}$ or $P_{1/2}$ and known to all orders. This projection becomes more accurate the more terms of a series are known and mathematically converges (only) if the yet unknown high order terms keep following the renormalon pattern expected from the low order terms.[^3]
Although the series in $k$ for $N_{1/2}$ in Eq. is not ordered in powers of the strong coupling, it is possible to implement renormalization scale variation by rescaling $R\to \lambda R$ in the original series of Eqs. and and subsequently expanding again in $\alpha_s(R)$. This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:skcoefflambda}
S'_0\,=&\,\lambda\, S_0 \,,\nonumber\\
S'_1\,=&\,\lambda\big[S_1-S_0\log\lambda\big] ,\nonumber\\
S'_2\,=&\,\lambda\big[S_2-2\,S_1\log\lambda+
S_0\big(\log^2\lambda- (\hat b_2+2\,\hat b_1)\log\lambda\big)\big] ,\nonumber\\
S'_3\,=&\,\lambda\Big[S_3-3\,S_2\log\lambda+S_1\big(3\log^2\lambda-(\hat b_2+3\,\hat b_1)\log\lambda\big)\nonumber\\
&+S_0\Big(\!-\log^3\lambda+\Big(2\,\hat b_2+\frac{9}{2}\,\hat b_1\Big)\log^2\lambda+
\big(3\,\hat b_2+\hat b_3-\hat b_1(\hat b_2+3\,\hat b_1)\big)\log\lambda\Big)\Big] ,\end{aligned}$$ and one can show that in the asymptotic limit, i.e. to all orders in $k$, the sum rule expression for $N_{1/2}$ or $P_{1/2}$ is invariant under variations of $\lambda$. Thus for a finite order determination of $N_{1/2}$ the $\lambda$-dependence decreases with order, and the remaining variation with $\lambda$ can be taken as an estimate for the uncertainty due to the missing higher order terms in the same way as renormalization scale variation in RG-invariant power series in $\alpha_s$ is commonly used to estimate perturbative uncertainties. The invariance under changes of $\lambda$ is directly related to the facts that the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguity of the series in Eqs. and is $R$-independent and that carrying out the Borel transform of Eq. in the previous section with respect to $\alpha_s(\mu)$ instead of $\alpha_s(R)$ leads to the simple rescaling factor $\mu/R$ of all the non-analytic terms proportional to $N_{1/2}$.
Sum Rule for the Pole Mass Renormalon
-------------------------------------
We now apply the sum rule to the series of the MSR-pole mass relations to quantify the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon of the pole mass. Note, that to fully determine the order $k$ result, the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{k+1})$ ($k+1$)-loop corrections from Eq. and Eq. and the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{k+3})$ ($k+2$)-loop correction to the QCD $\beta$-function, $\beta_{k+1}$ need to be known. So at $k=3$, both the recently determined ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ 4-loop correction from Eqs. and [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn] and the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^6)$ 5-loop correction to the QCD $\beta$-function [@Baikov:2016tgj] are required. To simplify terminology we call the result that truncates the series for $N_{1/2}$ after the $k$-th term the “($k+1$)-loop” or “${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{k+1})$ result”, referring to the order to which the series is being probed with the sum rule.
In Fig. \[fig:N12msr\]a the numerical results for $N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=5)$ are shown for the natural (solid lines) and practical (dashed lines) MSR masses for $0.5<\lambda<2$ using terms in the series for $N_{1/2}$ up to $k=0$ (cyan), $k=1$ (blue), $k=2$ (green) and $k=3$ (red). The thickness of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{4})$ curves correspond to the numerical error of the coefficients quoted in [@Marquard:2016dcn] and shown in Eqs. and and indicates that this error is more than an order of magnitude smaller than the uncertainty due to missing higher order terms and therefore negligible. We therefore do not account for this uncertainty any further and adopt the central values given in Eqs. and . Using the $\lambda$ dependence in the range $0.5<\lambda<2$ as an error estimate due to the missing higher orders we obtain for $N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=5)$ at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^k)$, $k=(1,2,3,4)$ the numerical results $N_{1/2}^\mathrm{nat}({n_{\ell}}=5)=(0.531\pm 0.318,0.468\pm 0.104,0.483\pm 0.029,0.446\pm 0.024)$ for the natural MSR mass and $N_{1/2}^\mathrm{prac}({n_{\ell}}=5)=(0.531\pm 0.318,0.475\pm 0.109,0.494\pm 0.032,0.441\pm 0.033)$ for the practical MSR mass. The central values are the mean of the respective maximal and minimal value obtained in the range $0.5<\lambda<2$. Both results are fully compatible, as is expected since the difference of the natural and practical MSR masses is free from an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon as already discussed in Sec. \[sec:MSRp\]. We see that the $\lambda$-dependence of $N_{1/2}$ nicely decreases when including more higher-order terms and that there is excellent convergence. The convergence and the reducing $\lambda$-dependence both indicate that the numerical size of the recently calculated 4-loop correction in the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relation [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Marquard:2016dcn] is fully compatible with the expectations based on the knowledge of the corrections up to 3 loops and the proposition that the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass is dominated by an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon behavior already at the known low orders.
It is quite instructive that one can invert this line of arguments and use the sum rule as a tool to determine a prediction for higher order terms in the perturbative series under the assumption that the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon-type behavior observed at lower orders persists also at higher orders. Indeed, using for example the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ result for the practical MSR mass $N_{1/2}^{\rm prac}({n_{\ell}}=5)=0.494\pm 0.032$ and the coefficients $a^{\rm MSRp}_{1,2,3}$ of the relation between practical MSR and pole masses \[see Eqs. \] and the $\beta$-function coefficients up to $\beta_4$ as an input, one can fit for the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient giving $a^{\rm MSRp}_4(n_\ell=5)=224620\pm 18656$. Converting to the $({n_{\ell}}+1)$ flavor scheme we obtain for the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient in the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relation $a_4^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}({n_{\ell}}=5,1)=230192\pm 14747$ compared to the result $a_4^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}({n_{\ell}}=5,1)=211807\pm5504$ from [@Marquard:2015qpa] and $a_4^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}({n_{\ell}}=5,1)=214828\pm422$ from Ref. [@Marquard:2016dcn]. The prediction for the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient based on the sum rules has a larger error but is fully compatible with the results from the explicit loop calculations. This is remarkable given that the sum rule result is obtained with essentially no additional computational effort. We note that estimates for the coefficient $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_4$ were given before for example in Refs. [@Beneke:1994qe; @Chetyrkin:1997wm; @Kataev:2010zh; @Sumino:2013qqa; @Ayala:2014yxa]. These were not based on the renormalon sum rule but used available information on the high-order asymptotics of the perturbative series (see Sec. \[sec:asymtotic\]). The analyses of Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa] and [@Sumino:2013qqa] were quoting an uncertainty for the estimate using the known corrections up to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ and obtained the results $a_4^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}({n_{\ell}}=5,1)=241920\pm 23552$ and $a_4^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}({n_{\ell}}=5,1)=229632\,{}^{+~\,7936}_{-\,44800}$, respectively, which are fully compatible with the sum rule estimate we showed above at the same order.
The results for $N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=5)$ represent the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguity for the top quark pole mass assuming that the other quark flavors including [*the charm and bottom quarks are massless*]{}. The other cases of phenomenological interest are ${n_{\ell}}=3$ and ${n_{\ell}}=4$ and the corresponding results for the natural and practical MSR masses are given in Tab. \[tab:N12msr\]. As our final results for the $N_{1/2}$ values for the [*number of massless flavors*]{} ${n_{\ell}}=3,4,5$ we quote the 4-loop results for the natural MSR mass $$\begin{aligned}
N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=3)&=0.526\pm0.016\label{eqn:N12msrfinal3} \,,\\
N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=4)&=0.492\pm0.020\label{eqn:N12msrfinal4} \,,\\
N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=5)&=0.446\pm0.026\label{eqn:N12msrfinal5} \,.\end{aligned}$$ Note that the uncertainties are slightly larger than the ones quoted in Tab. \[tab:N12msr\]. Following Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] we have also included an additional uncertainty coming from varying the defining coefficients $a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}}=a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},0)$ of the natural MSR mass based on the idea that using the association of $R$ with the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass at the scale of the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass is in principle not mandatory. Since one may as well consider different renormalization scales for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass and the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity is not affected by this choice, we have determined modified coefficients $a_n$ from Eq. (\[eqn:msrpolenat\]) by setting $R={\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell)})$ and completely reexpanding the series in terms of $R^\prime={\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell)}(\eta\, {\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell)})$ using the RG equation for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass for $n_\ell$ dynamic flavors. Using the resulting series coefficients we have reevaluated the sum rule using variations in $\eta$ between $0.5$ and $2$ and added the resulting uncertainty (while keeping $\lambda=1$) quadratically to the ones shown in Tab. \[tab:N12msr\] (which relate to the choice $\eta=1$). The results including the $\eta$ variation are shown in Fig. \[fig:N12ord\] exemplarily for $n_\ell=5$.
The results of Eqs. (\[eqn:N12msrfinal3\])-(\[eqn:N12msrfinal5\]) are compatible with those given in Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa; @Beneke:2016cbu]. For example for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ [@Beneke:2016cbu] obtained $0.4616^{+0.027}_{-0.070} \pm 0.002$, where the first uncertainty is from a double scale variation similar to ours and the second uncertainty is from the numerical determination of the four loop coefficient. In Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa; @Beneke:2016cbu] the determination of the normalization $N_{1/2}$ was based on the ratio method, which arises from a comparison of the perturbative coefficients $a_n$ from explicit QCD loop calculations to the coefficients $a_n^\mathrm{asy}$ of the series generated by a pure ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon in Eq. based on the relation that $\lim_{n\to\infty}a_n/a_n^\mathrm{asy}=1$. In Ref. [@Ayala:2014yxa] the static QCD potential and the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relation were studied, and in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass was examined. (In Ref. [@Ayala:2014yxa] the static potential based numbers are roughly $1.4\sigma$ higher than those in Eqs. (\[eqn:N12msrfinal3\])-(\[eqn:N12msrfinal5\]), which may be related to the points discussed below in Sec. \[sec:PSmass\] for the PS mass.) The agreement of our sum rule results and those obtained from the ratio method in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] underlines the capabilities of R-evolution and the renormalon sum rule concept.
[|r|rrrr|]{} $n_\ell$ & ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ & ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ & ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ & ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ \
\
$-1000000$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 1.022 \pm 0.378$ & $0.817 \pm 0.121$ & $ 1.009 \pm 0.068$ \
$-10$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.654 \pm 0.220$ & $ 0.640 \pm 0.062$ & $ 0.684 \pm 0.030$ \
$0$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.558 \pm 0.169$ & $ 0.567 \pm 0.058$ & $ 0.582 \pm 0.017$ \
$3$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.514 \pm 0.140$ & $ 0.527 \pm 0.046$ & $ 0.526 \pm 0.012$ \
$4$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.494 \pm 0.124$ & $ 0.508 \pm 0.039$ & $ 0.492 \pm 0.016$ \
$5$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.468 \pm 0.104$ & $ 0.483 \pm 0.029$ & $ 0.446 \pm 0.024$ \
$6$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.434 \pm 0.079$ & $ 0.437 \pm 0.027$ & $ 0.381 \pm 0.038$ \
$7$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.387 \pm 0.047$ & $ 0.340 \pm 0.059$ & $ 0.271 \pm 0.063$ \
$8$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.184 \pm 0.141$ & $ 0.165 \pm 0.142$ & $ 0.053 \pm 0.097$ \
$10$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $-\,3.381 \pm 2.714$ & $-\,1.811 \pm 0.492$ & $-\,2.434 \pm 1.041$ \
\
$-1000000$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 1.022 \pm 0.378$ & $0.817 \pm 0.121$ & $ 1.009 \pm 0.068$ \
$-10$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.658 \pm 0.222$ & $ 0.641 \pm 0.062$ & $ 0.684 \pm 0.028$ \
$0$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.563 \pm 0.172$ & $ 0.572 \pm 0.059$ & $ 0.583 \pm 0.016$ \
$3$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.520 \pm 0.144$ & $ 0.535 \pm 0.048$ & $ 0.522 \pm 0.017$ \
$4$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.501 \pm 0.129$ & $ 0.517 \pm 0.041$ & $ 0.487 \pm 0.023$ \
$5$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.475 \pm 0.109$ & $ 0.494 \pm 0.032$ & $ 0.441 \pm 0.033$ \
$6$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.442 \pm 0.083$ & $ 0.457 \pm 0.023$ & $ 0.373 \pm 0.052$ \
$7$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.394 \pm 0.050$ & $ 0.366 \pm 0.051$ & $ 0.259 \pm 0.083$ \
$8$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $ 0.200 \pm 0.134$ & $ 0.201 \pm 0.127$ & $ 0.027 \pm 0.132$ \
$10$ & $ 0.531 \pm 0.318$ & $-\,3.325 \pm 2.681$ & $-\,1.638 \pm 0.439$ & $-\,3.057 \pm 0.649$ \
In Tab. \[tab:N12msr\] we have also shown the results for a number of other ${n_{\ell}}$ values as these results are also of theoretical interest. Our results are in full agreement with and have compatible uncertainties to the results given in Tab. 1 of Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] and in particular confirm that $N_{1/2}\to 1$ for ${n_{\ell}}\to-\infty$, which is the classic large-${n_{\ell}}$ limit where the perturbative series are fully dominated by the massless quark bubble chain and the non-Abelian QCD effects are diluted away. Our result for $n_\ell=0$ is also in agreement with Ref. [@Ayala:2014yxa] and the lattice determinations of Refs. [@Bali:2013pla; @Bali:2013qla], which found $N_{1/2}(n_\ell=0)=0.600\pm 0.029$, $N_{1/2}(n_\ell=0)=0.660\pm 0.056$ and $N_{1/2}(n_\ell=0)=0.620\pm 0.035$, respectively. We note that our analytic expression for $N_{1/2}$ gets unstable and non-conclusive for $10\lesssim{n_{\ell}}\lesssim 30$ which is the so-called conformal region where the coefficient $\beta_0$ of the QCD $\beta$-function becomes small and in particular $\hat b_1=\beta_1/(2\beta_0^2) $ becomes large. In this region the analytic formula for $N_{1/2}$ has singularities and does not approach any stable value. This is connected to the fact that in this region no definite statement on the asymptotic large order behavior of the perturbative series and in particular on the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon can be made because the infrared and ultraviolet structure of the QCD $\beta$-function strongly depend on a complicated numerical interplay of the coefficients $\beta_{i>0}$, which can become quite large and have different signs. The unstable behavior of our analytical formula for $10\lesssim{n_{\ell}}\lesssim 30$ differs from the results obtained in Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa; @Beneke:2016cbu], where the normalization $N_{1/2}$ was observed being tiny. However, as emphasized in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu], this feature was an artifact of the ratio method used in Refs. [@Ayala:2014yxa; @Beneke:2016cbu], and again indicates that in this $n_\ell$ region the canonical renormalon calculus cannot be applied.
In Ref. [@Pineda:2001zq] the Borel method to compute $N_{1/2}$ was suggested based on the idea that the Borel function $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}B_{\alpha_s}(u)$ eliminates all non-analytic contributions in the first term on the RHS of Eq. and thus isolates the term $N_{1/2}$ in the limit $u\to 1/2$ [@Lee:1996yk]. This approach entails that after the low-order terms in the expansion of the Borel transform $B_{\alpha_s}(u)$ around $u=0$ are determined from the original series, one expands $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}B_{\alpha_s}(u)$ in powers of $u$ and subsequently evaluates the resulting series for $u=1/2$. The results of Refs. [@Pineda:2001zq; @Lee:1996yk] were based on the assumption that the analytic contributions \[involving the functions $Q_\ell(u)$\] on the RHS of Eq. quickly tend to zero when multiplied by $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}$ and are unimportant. This is not the case, as the Taylor expansion $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}$ around $u=0$ converges very slowly to zero if one sets $u=1/2$. This can be traced to the fact that $\hat b_1$ is non-integer and in general the convergence radius of the binomial series is $1$. Here $u=1/2$ corresponds exactly to the border of this radius. These terms are therefore numerically sizable at any truncation order. As we show in App. \[sec:N12alternative\], neglecting them leads to a much larger dependence on the renormalization parameter $\lambda$ at a given truncation order. This is because the $\lambda$ dependence of these terms is multiplied by a factor converging to zero, but the convergence is rather slow. When many orders are included, as shown in Ref. [@Bali:2013pla] which accounted for terms up to $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s^{20})$, the dependence vanishes and the method converges to $N_{1/2}$, which we have confirmed through a reanalysis. This observation is consistent with the large scale uncertainties found in the detailed numerical analysis of Ref. [@Ayala:2014yxa]. The Borel method to determine $N_{1/2}$ is therefore not very precise if only the first few terms of the series are known. Interestingly, accounting for the analytic terms on the RHS of Eq. , which are contained in the polynomials $Q_\ell$ and are computed systematically from R-evolution as shown in Sec. \[sec:derivation\], one can derive an improved version of the Borel approach which agrees exactly with our sum rule formula of Eq. . The corresponding analytic calculation and a brief numerical analysis are given in App. \[sec:N12alternative\].
Asymptotic Higher Order Behavior {#sec:asymtotic}
--------------------------------
In this section we use the analytic manipulations that arise in the derivation of the sum rule to derive an alternative expression for the high-order asymptotic form of a series containing an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon that differs from the well known formula derived in [@Beneke:1994rs]. The latter formula is related to the sum of the non-analytic terms, which are multiplied by $N_{1/2}$ or $P_{1/2}$ in the Borel function of Eq. , and reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:N12asymptotic}
\Big[ m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}& - m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)\Big]_{\rm asy} =
N_{\rm 1/2}\, R\,\sum_{n=0}^\infty\,a_{n+1}^{\rm asy} \left(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\right)^{\!\!n+1}\\
&=
N_{\rm 1/2}\, R\,\sum_{n=0}^\infty
4\pi\,(2\beta_0)^{n}
\left(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\right)^{\!\!n+1}
\sum_{\ell=0}^\infty
g_\ell\,\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+n-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}\nonumber\\
&=
P_{\rm 1/2}\, R\,\sum_{n=0}^\infty
\,(2\beta_0)^{n+1}
\left(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\right)^{\!\!n+1}
\sum_{\ell=0}^\infty
g_\ell\,\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+n-\ell)\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ giving the asymptotic form of the coefficients $$\label{eqn:anasy}
a_n^{\rm asy} = 4\pi\,N_{1/2} (2\beta_0)^{n-1}\, \sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty} g_\ell\,
(1+\hat b_1)_{n-1-\ell}\,,$$ where $(b)_n=b\, (b+1)\cdots(b+n-1)=\Gamma(b+n)/\Gamma(b)$ is the Pochhammer symbol. Given the value for $P_{1/2}$ or $N_{\rm 1/2}$ the structure of the perturbative coefficients of Eq. is completely fixed by the properties of the QCD $\beta$-function and does not depend any more on the coefficients of the original series of Eqs. and . Thus Eq. has been frequently used as the standard form for the asymptotic high-order behavior of perturbative series dominated by an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon. This is also reflected by the fact that the imaginary part of the inverse Borel integration over the non-analytic terms in Eq. is exactly proportional to ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:borelambiguity}
\mathrm{Im}&\int_{0}^{\infty}{\mathrm{d}}u\bigg[-N_{1/2}\,R\,\frac{4\pi}{\beta_0}\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}\,g_\ell\,
\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}\,(1-2u)^{-1-\hat b_1+\ell}\,\bigg]
\mathrm e^{-\frac{4\pi u}{\beta_0\alpha_s(R)}}\\
&=P_{1/2}\,\pi\,{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}=N_{1/2}\,\frac{2\pi^2}{\beta_0\,\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}\,{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ with ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$ given in Eq. . As a side remark, we note that inserting the series in Eq. , with a given value for $N_{1/2}$, into the sum rule expression of Eq. one recovers $N_{1/2}$ in the limit of carrying out the sums over $k$, $n$ and $\ell$ to infinity.
Interestingly, Eq. provides a remarkable alternative expression for the high-order asymptotic of the MSR-pole mass series as it can be rewritten in the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:fullasymptotic}
m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R) &=
R\,\sum_{n=0}^\infty \left(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\right)^{\!\! n+1}\sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{\ell=0}^{n-k} (2\beta_0)^{n+1} S_k \,g_\ell\, \frac{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+n-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)
} \,.\end{aligned}$$ In contrast to Eq. this expression still depends on the $S_k$ coefficients non-trivially and thus carries all the information contained in the original series due to the identity $$\label{eqn:anintermsofsk}
a_n = (2\beta_0)^n\, \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \, S_k\! \sum_{\ell=0}^{n - 1-k} g_\ell\, (1+\hat b_1 + k)_{n - 1 -\ell- k}\,.$$ This relation is interesting because it provides a separation of the coefficients of the original series into leading and subleading terms with respect to the asymptotic high-order behavior. So truncating the sums over $k$ and $\ell$ in Eq. (e.g. accounting for the coefficients $S_k$ and $g_\ell$ up to the order they are known) provides the correct high-order asymptotic behavior for $n$ beyond the truncation order and, at the same time, reproduces exactly the coefficients of the original series up to the truncation order.
Currently the coefficients $a_n$ for the MSR-pole and the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relations are known to order ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ and the QCD $\beta$-function is known to order ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^6)$ so that the coefficients $S_k$ and $g_\ell$ are known up to $k_{\rm max}=\ell_{\rm max}=3$. We may therefore write down estimates for the still uncalculated coefficients $a_{n>4}$ using the expression $$\label{eqn:anestimated}
a_{n>4}^{\rm asy} =
4 \pi \,N_{\rm 1/2}\,(2\beta_0)^{n-1}
\sum_{\ell=0}^3
g_\ell\,
(1+\hat b_1)_{n-1-\ell}\,,$$ which is the established formula from [@Beneke:1994rs] shown in Eq. , and $$\label{eqn:anestimatedprime}
a_{n>4}^{\rm asy\,\prime} = (2\beta_0)^n
\sum_{k=0}^{3}
S_k \!\!\!\!
\sum_{\ell=0}^{\min(n-k-1,3)}
\!\!\!\!\!\!g_\ell\, (1+\hat b_1 + k)_{n - 1 -\ell- k}\,,$$ based on Eq. , which encodes information on both the regular and asymptotic behavior of the series.[^4] In Tab. \[tab:anestimates\] we show estimates for the yet uncalculated coefficients $a_{5\le n\le 9}$ for the relations of the natural MSR mass and the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q \equiv {\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)})$ to the pole mass using Eqs. and for ${n_{\ell}}=3,4,5$ and the results of Eqs. – for $N_{1/2}$. The uncertainties for the coefficients $a_{n}^{\rm asy}$ are based on the uncertainties shown in Eqs. – and those for the coefficients $a_{n}^{\rm asy\,\prime}$ are determined from $\lambda$ variations $1/2<\lambda<2$, as explained in Sec. \[sec:renormalonsumrule\] and $\eta$ variations $1/2<\eta<2$, as explained below Eq. (\[eqn:N12msrfinal5\]). The coefficient estimates for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass have been obtained by using the second equality of and Eq. to the order shown. We see that both estimates are completely equivalent and have the same uncertainties. Our estimates for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass coefficients for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ also agree perfectly with those given in Ref. [@Beneke:2016cbu] which used the approach of Eq. . We note that the relation can also be inverted to provide closed iterative expressions for the $S_k$ coefficients to all orders, which are given in App. \[app:coefficients\] and in particular in Eq. .
We note that the asymptotic series coefficients $a_n^{\rm asy}$ in Eq. and the expression for the coefficients $a_n$ in Eq. allow for an alternative derivation of the renormalon sum rule formula since the ratio $a_n/a_n^{\rm asy}$ approaches unity for $n\to\infty$. Taking that ratio one arrives at $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:anratio}
N_{1/2}\frac{a_n}{a_n^{\rm asy}}& \,=\,\frac{ (2\beta_0)^n\, \sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-1} \, S_k\! \sum\limits_{\ell=0}^{n - 1-k} g_\ell\, (1+\hat b_1 + k)_{n - 1 -\ell- k}}{4\pi\,(2\beta_0)^{n-1}\, \sum\limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} g_\ell\,
(1+\hat b_1)_{n-1-\ell}} \\
&\,=\,
\frac{\beta_0\,\Gamma(1+\hat b_1)}{2 \pi\,}\,
\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{S_k}{\Gamma(1+\hat b_1+k)}\,
\frac{\sum\limits_{\ell=0}^{n-1-k} \, g_\ell\, \Gamma(\hat b_1+n-\ell)}{\sum\limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} \ g_\ell \,\Gamma(\hat b_1+n-\ell)}\,. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ To the extent that the sums over $k$ in the sum rule formula of Eq. and in Eq. for $n\to\infty$ are convergent, one can use the Cauchy convergence criterion to show that the expression of Eq. is equivalent to Eq. for $n\to\infty$. This shows analytically the equivalence of the ratio method and the sum rule.
${n_{\ell}}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_5\times 10^{-7}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_6\times 10^{-9}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_7\times 10^{-11}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_8\times 10^{-13}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_9\times 10^{-15}$
-------------- -------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------
$3$ $ 3.394\pm 0.105$ $ 3.309 \pm 0.102$ $3.819 \pm 0.118$ $ 5.093 \pm 0.157$ $7.706 \pm 0.238$
$4$ $ 2.249\pm 0.090$ $ 2.019 \pm 0.081$ $2.147 \pm 0.086$ $ 2.641 \pm 0.106$ $3.687 \pm 0.148$
$5$ $ 1.379\pm 0.080$ $ 1.128 \pm 0.066$ $1.095 \pm 0.064$ $1.231 \pm 0.072$ $1.572 \pm 0.091$
$a^\mathrm{MSRn\,\prime}_5\times 10^{-7}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn\,\prime}_6\times 10^{-9}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn\,\prime}_7\times 10^{-11}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn\,\prime}_8\times 10^{-13}$ $a^\mathrm{MSRn\,\prime}_9\times 10^{-15}$
$3$ $ 3.393\pm 0.105$ $ 3.309 \pm 0.102$ $3.819 \pm 0.118$ $ 5.093 \pm 0.157$ $7.706 \pm 0.238$
$4$ $ 2.248\pm 0.090$ $ 2.019 \pm 0.081$ $2.147 \pm 0.086$ $ 2.641 \pm 0.106$ $3.687 \pm 0.148$
$5$ $ 1.378\pm 0.080$ $ 1.128 \pm 0.066$ $1.095 \pm 0.063$ $1.231 \pm 0.072$ $1.572 \pm 0.091$
$a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_5\times 10^{-7}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_6\times 10^{-9}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_7\times 10^{-11}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_8\times 10^{-13}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_9\times 10^{-15}$
$3$ $ 3.401\pm 0.105$ $ 3.315 \pm 0.102$ $3.824 \pm 0.118$ $ 5.099 \pm 0.158$ $7.714 \pm 0.239$
$4$ $ 2.255\pm 0.090$ $ 2.023 \pm 0.081$ $2.151 \pm 0.086$ $ 2.644 \pm 0.106$ $3.692 \pm 0.148$
$5$ $ 1.383\pm 0.080$ $ 1.130 \pm 0.066$ $1.097 \pm 0.064$ $1.233 \pm 0.072$ $1.575 \pm 0.091$
$a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}\,\prime}_5\times 10^{-7}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}\,\prime}_6\times 10^{-9}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}\,\prime}_7\times 10^{-11}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}\,\prime}_8\times 10^{-13}$ $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}\,\prime}_9\times 10^{-15}$
$3$ $ 3.400\pm 0.106$ $ 3.315 \pm 0.103$ $3.824 \pm 0.118$ $ 5.099 \pm 0.158$ $7.714 \pm 0.239$
$4$ $ 2.254\pm 0.091$ $ 2.023 \pm 0.081$ $2.151 \pm 0.086$ $ 2.644 \pm 0.106$ $3.692 \pm 0.148$
$5$ $ 1.382\pm 0.081$ $ 1.130 \pm 0.066$ $1.097 \pm 0.064$ $1.233 \pm 0.072$ $1.575 \pm 0.091$
: \[tab:anestimates\] Numerical estimates for the perturbative coefficients $a^\mathrm{MSRn}_n$ (MSRn-pole mass relation in Eq. ) and $a^{{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}_n$ \[${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole mass relation in Eq. \] for $5\le n \le 9$ and ${n_{\ell}}=3,4,5$ using formulae and for their asymptotic high-order behavior. The quoted errors arise from $\lambda$ and $\eta$ variations in the interval $[0.5,2]$ and the central values are the mean of the maximum and minimum values in that interval.
Other Applications of the Sum Rule {#sec:sumruleapplication}
----------------------------------
To conclude our considerations concerning the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule we discuss in this section a number of subtleties in its proper use and a few interesting applications. As it is sufficient for the purpose of the examinations, we use for simplicity only $\lambda$ variations, as explained in Sec. \[sec:renormalonsumrule\], when quoting uncertainties of the sum rule evaluated here.
### Number of Massless Flavors
An important feature of the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule is that it probes the infrared sensitivity of the perturbative series, which physically depends on the number of massless quarks, ${n_{\ell}}$, one employs in the computation of the series. In a computation in QCD, however, ${n_{\ell}}$ might not be equal to the number of active flavors, $n_f$, which governs the ultraviolet behavior and the renormalization group evolution of the strong coupling $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}$ and other renormalized quantities, and a naive application of the sum rule may lead to inconsistent results. In such a case, the series in $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}$ should be better converted to the ${n_{\ell}}$-flavor scheme for the strong coupling, $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}$, before its coefficients are inserted in the sum rule expression. This can be either realized by simply rewriting $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}$ as a series in $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}$, as it is done in the definition of the practical MSR mass, or by integrating out the effects of the $n_f-{n_{\ell}}$ massive quarks, as it is done in the definition of the natural MSR mass. The latter approach is the physically cleaner way (which was the reason for using the name ‘natural’), but both approaches are consistent as far as the application of the sum rule is concerned.
In the following we discuss the pitfalls of using the sum in an inconsistent way. To discuss the issue we recall that, since the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule is a functional on the perturbative series, it can also be seen as a function $N_{1/2}[\,n_\ell,\{a_n\}]$ acting on the coefficients $a_n$ of the $[\,\alpha_s/(4\pi)\,]^n$ terms in the series. As indicated, $N_{1/2}$ is a function of the number of massless flavors ${n_{\ell}}$ through its dependence on $\beta_0$ and the coefficients $\hat b_k$, which appear in Eq. and a function of the coefficients $a_n$ contained in the expressions for the $S_k$ as shown in Eq. . The function $N_{1/2}[\,n_\ell,\{a_n\}]$ is therefore probing the series defined by the set of coefficients $\{a_n\}$ with respect to an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon for $n_\ell$ massless flavors, and it is essential for the sum rule to work properly that the value of $n_\ell$ agrees with the number of massless flavors used for the computation of the coefficients $a_n$. Let us now apply the sum rule to the coefficients $\{a_n^{\overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}}\}$ of the series for in Eq. , which is a series in $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}$, but contains the effects of $n_\ell$ massless flavors. Here we use the shorthand notation $$\begin{aligned}
a_n^{\overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}} \equiv a_n^{\overline{\rm MS}}({n_{\ell}},n_h=1) \,.\end{aligned}$$ To be specific we take $n_\ell=5$. Probing the series with respect to an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon for ${n_{\ell}}+1=6$ massless flavors, in accordance with the scheme for $\alpha_s$, one obtains $N_{1/2}[\,6,\{a_n^{\rm \overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}=5}\}]=(0.531\pm 0.318,0.526\pm 0.1298,0.623\pm0.070,0.6360\pm0.016)$ at order $n=(0,1,2,3)$, where the errors are obtained from varying $\lambda$ in the range $0.5<\lambda<2$ and the central values are the mean value of the respective maximal and minimal values obtained in the $\lambda$ variation. We see that the sum rule appears to approach a value that is much larger than the correct result of Eq. , but this is a consequence of an inconsistent application of the sum rule. Indeed, one can show by simple algebra in the $\beta_0$/LL approximation \[where $\hat b_{i\geq 1}=\beta_{i\geq 1}=0$, $a_{n+1}^{{\rm asy},n_\ell}=a_1(2\beta_{0,{n_{\ell}}})^{n} n!$ and $\beta_{0,n_\ell}= 11-2/3\,n_\ell$\] that the order $n$ expression for $N_{1/2}$ that is obtained – when probing with respect to an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon for $n_f$ massless flavors – has the form $$\label{eqn:N12inconsistent}
{\left[N_{1/2}^{(n)}[\,n_f,\{a_n^{{\rm asy},n_\ell}\}]\right]}_{\beta_0\mathrm{/LL}}=\frac{\beta_0}{2\pi}\sum_{k=0}^{n}\frac{S_k}{k!}=\frac{a_1}{4\pi}{\left(\frac{\beta_{0,{n_{\ell}}}}{\beta_{0,n_f}}\right)}^{\!\!n} \,.$$ As long as $\beta_{0,n}$ is a positive number this expression diverges for $n_f>{n_{\ell}}$ in the limit $n\to\infty$, which explains the behavior of the sum rule results shown above. On the other hand, the expression of Eq. converges to zero for $n_f<{n_{\ell}}$. So when probing the coefficients $\{a_n^{\overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}}\}$ of the series for $m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-{\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}$ with respect to an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon for ${n_{\ell}}-1=4$ massless flavors we obtain $N_{1/2}[\,4,\{a_n^{\rm \overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}=5}\}]=(0.531\pm0.318,0.433\pm0.089,0.405\pm0.027,0.327\pm0.051)$ at order $n=(0,1,2,3)$ which is a sequence of decreasing terms, as expected from Eq. , which in addition does not behave in a stable way. But, again, the behavior is a consequence of an inconsistent application of the sum rule. On the other hand, if we probe the coefficients $\{a_n^{\overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}}\}$ of the series for $m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-{\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}$ with respect to an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ massless flavors we obtain $N_{1/2}[\,5,\{a_n^{\rm \overline{\rm MS},{n_{\ell}}=5}\}]=(0.531\pm0.318,0.475\pm 0.109,0.494\pm 0.032,0.442\pm 0.033)$ at order $n=(0,1,2,3)$, which converges to the correct result of Eq. . We also learn that adopting for the strong coupling $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}$ a flavor number scheme where $n_f$ agrees with the number of massless flavors is clean conceptually, but not crucial numerically such that the sum rule works reliably. This is related to the fact that the matching relation of the strong coupling in different flavor number schemes does not suffer from an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon behavior.
This brief examination above underlines the importance that the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ sum rule, which probes the infrared sensitivity of the perturbative series, is applied consistently with respect to the number of massless quarks, which may not agree with the number of active flavors in the normalization group equation that is governed by ultraviolet effects. Of course this feature may as well be used as a tool, as studying the convergence of the sum rule may be employed to determine the number of massless flavors used, let’s say, in a numerical computation of a perturbative series.
### Moments of the Vacuum Polarization Function
The zero-momentum moments $M_i$, $i=1,2,3,\ldots$, of the massive quark $Q$ vector current correlator $\Pi(q^2)$, defined by \[$j^\mu(x)\equiv\overline\psi_Q(x)\gamma^\mu\psi_Q(x)$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:Mm1}
M_i &=\left.\frac{12\pi^2 Q_Q^2}{m!}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}^i}{{\mathrm{d}}q^{2i}}\Pi(q^2)\right|_{q^2=0} \,,\\
{\left(g_{\mu\nu}q^2-q_\mu q_\nu\right)}\Pi(q^2)&=-\,i\!\int{\mathrm{d}}x\,\mathrm e^{iqx}
\left\langle 0\middle|\mathrm T j_\mu(x)j_\nu(0)\middle| 0\right\rangle \,, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ provide one of the most precise methods to determine the charm and bottom quark ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ masses [@Dehnadi:2011gc; @Bodenstein:2011ma; @Bodenstein:2011fv; @Hoang:2012us; @Chakraborty:2014aca; @Colquhoun:2014ica; @Beneke:2014pta; @Ayala:2014yxa; @Dehnadi:2015fra; @Erler:2016atg] and are known to utterly fail in precision when expressed in terms of the charm and bottom pole masses. This mass sensitivity comes from the fact that the perturbative series for the moments $M_i$ is due to dimensional reasons proportional to $m_Q^{-2i}$ in the form $M_i=m_Q^{-2i}\sum_{n=0}^\infty c_{i,n}(m_Q)[\,\alpha_s^{(n_\ell)}(m_Q)/(4\pi)\,]^n$, where ${n_{\ell}}$ is the number of massless flavors and we use the ${n_{\ell}}$-flavor scheme for the strong coupling.[^5] The moments $M_i$ are related to weighted integrals over the hadronic R-ratio of $Q\overline Q$ production and thus free from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon. They can be rewritten in the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:Mm2}
& m_Q-{\left(\frac{M_i}{c_{i,0} }\right)}^{-\frac{1}{2i}}=m'_Q\sum_{n=1}^\infty
a_{i,n}[\,m_Q, m'_Q\,]\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_\ell)}(m'_Q)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n}\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $m_Q$ and $m'_Q$ may be in general different quark mass schemes.
The moments $M_i$ are suitable quantities to discuss the parametric aspect of renormalon ambiguities and how they affect the proper application of the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ sum rule. The first three moments $M_{1,2,3}$ are known to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ [@Kallen:1955fb; @Chetyrkin:1995ii; @Chetyrkin:1996cf; @Boughezal:2006uu; @Czakon:2007qi; @Maier:2007yn; @Chetyrkin:2006xg; @Boughezal:2006px; @Sturm:2008eb; @Maier:2008he; @Maier:2009fz] and the corresponding series coefficients $a_{i,n}$ for ${n_{\ell}}=4$ in the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass scheme $m_Q=m'_Q={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$ and the pole mass scheme $m_Q=m'_Q=m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}$ using the ${n_{\ell}}$-flavor scheme $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}$ for the coupling are quoted in Tab. \[tab:moments\]. Applying the sum rule to the series for the $M_{1,2,3}$ on the RHS of Eq. in the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ scheme we obtain for ${n_{\ell}}=4$, relevant for the bottom quark, the results $$\begin{aligned}
N_{1/2}^{i=1}&=(0.477\pm 0.286,-\,0.178\pm 0.261,~~\,\,0.013\pm 0.036) \,,\\
N_{1/2}^{i=2}&=(0.241\pm 0.145,-\,0.007\pm 0.083,-\,0.029\pm 0.058)\,,\nonumber\\
N_{1/2}^{i=3}&=(0.127\pm 0.076,~~\,\,0.031\pm 0.026,-\,0.029\pm 0.048) \,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ at order $n=(0,1,2)$, where the errors are obtained by $\lambda$ variations in the range $0.5<\lambda<2$ and the central values are obtained from the mean of the respective maximal and minimal values in the $\lambda$ variation.
$i$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$
------- ------------------------------- --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ------------------------------- --------------------------------- -----------------------------------
1 $10.1235$ $83.7296$ $4669.92$ $4.79012$ $-\,10.7255$ $-\,310.275$
2 $7.76049$ $120.609$ $4589.81$ $2.42716$ $13.5516$ $-\,334.42$
3 $6.61153$ $127.821$ $4754.39$ $1.2782$ $14.6354$ $-\,199.81$
1 $10.1235$ $137.721$ $5719.41$ $10.1235$ $186.214$ $ 5831.25$
2 $7.76049$ $161.998$ $5695.26$ $7.76049$ $ 180.834$ $ 6005.71$
3 $6.61153$ $163.082$ $5829.87$ $6.61153$ $ 171.533$ $ 6063.32$
: \[tab:moments\] $a_{i,n}(m_Q,m'_Q)$ coefficients of the perturbative expansion for the mass-subtracted linearized moments, as displayed in Eq. , at one (left column of each block), two (middle column of each block), and three (right column of each block) loops. The numerical values correspond to the case ${n_{\ell}}= 4$, studied in this section. The table is split into four blocks: the upper left one corresponds to the pole mass expansion in terms of the pole mass, the upper right one shows the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass expansion in terms of the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass, the lower left block displays the pole mass expansion in terms of the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass, and the lower right displays the linearized iterative expansion for the pole mass.
We see that the results for $N_{1/2}$ are compatible with zero beyond ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ and have uncertainties that decrease with order, illustrating the known fact that the series are free from an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon in the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass scheme.
Applying the sum rule to the series for the $M_{1,2,3}$ in the pole mass scheme $m_Q=m'_Q=m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}$ the corresponding results for ${n_{\ell}}=4$ read $$\begin{aligned}
N_{1/2}^{i=1}&=(1.007\pm 0.604,\,0.092\pm 0.278,\,0.510\pm 0.113) \,,\\
N_{1/2}^{i=2}&=(0.772\pm 0.463,\,0.345\pm0.094,\,0.420\pm 0.012) \,,\nonumber\\
N_{1/2}^{i=3}&=(0.658\pm 0.395,\,0.416\pm 0.053,\,0.424\pm 0.013) \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Apart from the outcome for $M_1$, which still happens to have a rather large error at order $n=2$ the results converge to the result $0.42\pm 0.01$ which is incompatible with the correct result $0.49\,\pm\, 0.02$ from Eq. . So the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguity inherent to the coefficients in the series of Eq. in the pole mass scheme appears to be about $15\%$ smaller than for the coefficients of the MSR-pole mass series analyzed before. The discrepancy is resolved by the fact that in the pole scheme with both $m_Q=m'_Q=m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}$ the RHS of Eq. is expressed using the ambiguous pole mass as a parameter. As a consequence, the perturbative coefficients of the series and factors of $m_Q^{{\mathrm{pole}}}$ on the RHS share the full ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ pole mass renormalon ambiguity contained in the LHS of Eq. .
To recover the full ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ pole mass renormalon ambiguity in the coefficients on the RHS one has to rewrite the series on the RHS in terms of parameters that are free from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon ambiguity. This can be achieved by re-expanding the series for $m^{\mathrm{pole}}_Q-(M_m/c_{i,0})^{-1/(2i)}$ completely in terms of the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass using $m'_Q={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$. The resulting coefficients in powers of $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m'_Q)$ are given in the lower left column of Tab. \[tab:moments\]. Using these coefficients, the renormalon sum rule applied to the series for the $M_{1,2,3}$ and ${n_{\ell}}=4$ gives $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:pole1}
N_{1/2}^{i=1}&=(1.007\pm 0.604,\,0.350\pm 0.159,\,0.547\pm 0.047) \,,\\
N_{1/2}^{i=2}&=(0.772\pm 0.463,\,0.525\pm 0.078,\,0.495\pm 0.032) \,,\nonumber\\
N_{1/2}^{i=3}&=(0.658\pm 0.395,\,0.535\pm 0.110,\,0.501\pm 0.034) \,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ at order $n=(0,1,2)$. This is in full agreement with the result $0.49\,\pm\, 0.02$ given in Eq. , and also shows a substantially better behavior for the moment $M_1$.
As an alternative to using the series for $m_Q=m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}$ and $m'_Q={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$, one can also define $\widetilde M_i\equiv (M_i/c_{i,0})^{-1/2i}$ and re-express the RHS of Eq. perturbatively in terms of $m_Q^\prime=\widetilde M_i$ for the different moments. (We refer to Ref. [@Dehnadi:2011gc] for details on this iterative procedure.) The resulting coefficients in powers of $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\widetilde M_i)$ are given in the lower right column of Tab. \[tab:moments\]. Using these coefficients, the renormalon sum rule applied to the series for the $M_{1,2,3}$ and ${n_{\ell}}=4$ gives $$\begin{aligned}
N_{1/2}^{i=1}&=(1.007\pm 0.604,\,0.604 \pm 0.075,\,0.493 \pm 0.071) \,,\\
N_{1/2}^{i=2}&=(0.772\pm 0.463,\,0.589 \pm 0.109,\,0.501 \pm 0.056) \,,\nonumber\\
N_{1/2}^{i=3}&=(0.658\pm 0.395,\,0.568 \pm 0.129,\,0.516 \pm 0.040) \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ These results behave similarly to those of Eq. and are again in full agreement with the result $0.49\,\pm\, 0.02$ given in Eq. .
This analysis underlines the importance of using renormalon-free parameters for series coefficients that are being probed with the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule, but also illustrates the high sensitivity of the sum rule to even subtle high order effects.
### Infrared Sensitivity of the PS Mass Definition {#sec:PSmassIR}
The PS (potential subtracted) mass [@Beneke:1998rk] is based on the concept that the total static potential energy of a color singlet massive quark-antiquark pair with separation $r$, $2m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}+V(r)$, is ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon free. It is defined from the integral $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:PSmassdef}
m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f)=-\,\frac12 \int_{|\vec q\,|<\mu_f} \frac{{\mathrm{d}}^3\vec q}{(2\pi)^3}\,\tilde V(\vec q^{\,2}) \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\tilde V(\vec q^{\,2})$ is the momentum-space static potential calculated in perturbation theory. To the extent that the total static potential is a well-defined and unambiguous quantity, the PS mass is free from an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon. The coefficients of the series for $m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f)$, expressed as a series in powers of $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu_f)/(4\pi)$, are given in Eq. .
We now apply the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule to the relation of the pole mass to the potential PS mass. The examination is of interest because the static potential has infrared divergences starting at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ arising from higher Fock $Q\overline Q$-gluon states which lead to retardation effects that invalidate the frame-independent static limit [@Appelquist:1977tw; @Appelquist:1977es]. The definition of the PS mass at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ and beyond is therefore known to depend on the scheme used for the subtraction prescription for these infrared divergences. In Refs. [@Beneke:2005hg] the authors defined the following convention: the infrared divergence in the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ corrections to the momentum-space static potential [@Anzai:2009tm; @Smirnov:2009fh] is regularized dimensionally (with the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ convention for the definition of $\mu$), and the $1/\epsilon$ divergence together with the corresponding logarithm $\log(\mu/\mu_f)$ that arises from the integral over the momentum-space static potential in Eq. are subtracted. We call this the standard convention, and it leads to the coefficient $a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}$ shown in Eq. , where the term with the logarithm $\log(\mu/\mu_f)$ is dropped. In a minimal subtraction convention, only the $1/\epsilon$ divergence is subtracted and the logarithmic term displayed in $a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}$ remains. So the convention of Ref. [@Beneke:2005hg] is equivalent to the choice $\mu/\mu_f=1$ for the dimensional scale in the minimal subtraction convention.
Using the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule we can now track quantitatively if and how much the convention for the infrared subtraction may affect the higher-order behavior in the PS-pole mass relation. Applying the sum rule to the PS mass in the standard convention of Ref. [@Beneke:2005hg] we obtain for ${n_{\ell}}=5$, relevant for the top quark, $$N_{1/2}^{\mu/\mu_f=1}=(0.531\pm 0.318,0.376\pm 0.057,0.503\pm 0.078,0.545\pm 0.045) \,,$$ at order $n=(0,1,2,3)$, where the errors come from $\lambda$ variations in the interval $[\,0.5,\,2\,]$. The order $n=3$ result that involves the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient $a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}$ is $22\%$ higher and within errors only marginally compatible with the result $N_{1/2}({n_{\ell}}=5)=0.446\pm0.026$ of Eq. . This indicates that $a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}$ in the standard convention is somewhat larger than expected assuming that the pole-PS mass series is dominated by the pole mass renormalon. The same observation has also been made in Refs. [@Marquard:2015qpa; @Kiyo:2015ooa] in the context of relating the PS mass to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass.
It is interesting to consider other minimal subtraction scheme choices that differ from the standard scheme by reasonable variations of the subtraction scale $\mu$. For example, for the choice $\mu/\mu_f=1/5$ we obtain $N_{1/2}^{\mu/\mu_f=1/5}=0.455\,\pm\, 0.021$ at order $n=3$ for ${n_{\ell}}=5$, which is fully compatible with Eq. . That the sum rule result for the PS mass agrees with the correct result of Eq. much better for a smaller infrared subtraction scale is quite suggestive because the infrared divergence in the static potential is known to be physically regulated by the massive quark kinetic energy, which is of order $\vec{q}^{\,2}/m_Q\sim \mu_f v$ where $v$ is the relative velocity, and hence is parametrically smaller than $|\vec q\,|\sim \mu_f$. We stress that our analysis does neither validate nor invalidate the concept of the standard PS mass as a suitable mass scheme to carry out ongoing high-precision threshold studies [@Hoang:2000yr; @Beneke:2015kwa], as the sum rule only probes the calculated orders and the effect of the retardation singularity on the perturbative coefficients in the static potential beyond ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ on the PS mass scheme is unknown. However, the analysis demonstrates that the scheme dependence in the PS mass coming from the infrared divergences in the static potential at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ is not a numerically irrelevant issue and may become even more serious beyond ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$. As far as the known ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ results are concerned the issue already seems to affect the relation of the standard PS mass to the MSR and ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ masses as discussed in Sec. \[sec:PSmass\].
### QCD beta-Function and Massless Quark R-ratio
As the concluding part of the discussion in this section we now apply the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule to series that are known not to be plagued by any ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon. As examples we take the series for the QCD $\beta$-function with $$a_n^{\beta} = \beta_{n-1} \;,$$ as defined in Eq. and the hadronic R-ratio for ${n_{\ell}}$ massless quarks $$\label{eq:Rratioseries}
R(s) = 3\sum_{f=1}^{{n_{\ell}}} Q_f^2\!\left[1 + \sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n^R\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\sqrt{s})}{4\pi}\right)^{\!\!n}\,\right] \;,$$ where $\sqrt{s}$ stands for the center-of-mass energy, with [@Chetyrkin:1979bj; @Gorishnii:1990vf; @Surguladze:1990tg; @Surguladze:1990tgE; @Baikov:2008jh] $$\begin{aligned}
a_1^R &= 4\;,\\
a_2^R &= 31.7712 - 1.8432\,{n_{\ell}}\;,\nonumber\\
a_3^R &= -\,424.764 - 76.8083\,{n_{\ell}}- 0.33152\,{n_{\ell}}^2\;,\nonumber\\
a_4^R &= -\,40092.2 + 4805.12\,{n_{\ell}}- 204.134\,{n_{\ell}}^2 + 5.504\,{n_{\ell}}^3\;,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and $Q_f$ stands for the quark electric charges. Applying the sum rule for ${n_{\ell}}=4$ to the series for the QCD $\beta$-function we obtain $$\label{eqn:N12beta}
N_{1/2}^{\beta}=(0.829\pm0.497,-\,0.004\pm0.272,0.065\pm0.092,0.038\pm0.032) \;,$$ and applying it to the hadronic R-ratio we obtain $$\label{eq:N12Rratio}
N_{1/2}^{R}=(0.398\pm0.239,-\,0.003\pm0.1311,-\,0.071\pm0.105,-\,0.009\pm0.029) \;,$$ at order $n=(0,1,2,3)$. The errors are obtained from the variation $0.5<\lambda<2$. In both cases all results for $N_{1/2}$ beyond ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ are compatible with zero as expected. We note that at least for the hadronic R-ratio it is known that its perturbative series given in Eq. has a renormalon ambiguity that is suppressed and scales with the fourth power of the hadronic scale $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$. This leads to an ambiguity in the R-ratio of ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^4/s^2)$, which is associated to the gluon condensate, and adding the effects of the gluon condensate in the context of an operator product expansion in terms of low-energy QCD matrix elements [@Shifman:1978bx; @Shifman:1978by] this ambiguity is compensated in a physical prediction. For the QCD $\beta$-function no conclusive statements on a higher-order renormalon ambiguity exist. The results in Eqs. and show that the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon sum rule is only probing for an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon and not sensitive to any higher order renormalon ambiguity.
It is straightforward to generalize the sum rule discussed here to higher order renormalons, which has already been studied in Ref. [@Ambar:thesis].
Relation to Other Short-Distance Masses {#sec:othermasses}
=======================================
From the perturbative series that relate other short-distance masses to the pole mass it is straightforward to determine the perturbative series for the difference of these short-distance masses to the MSR masses by eliminating the pole mass systematically such that the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon is canceled exactly. If regular fixed-order perturbation theory can be applied this is achieved by simply using a common renormalization scale $\mu$ and a consistent scheme for the strong coupling throughout the calculation when the pole mass is eliminated order by order. The corresponding formulae and codes for the relation of frequently used short-distance mass schemes (such as the kinetic mass [@Czarnecki:1997sz], the PS mass [@Beneke:1998rk], the 1S mass [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1999ye], the RS mass [@Pineda:2001zq] and the jet mass [@Jain:2008gb; @Fleming:2007tv]) to the MSR masses can be obtained on request, and we therefore do not intend to cover all possible cases in this paper. However, we will cover several of them explicitly since there are a number of non-trivial practical and conceptual aspects that arise in the relation of the MSR masses to a number of other short-distance mass schemes we would like to point out in the following.
Potential Subtracted Mass {#sec:PSmass}
-------------------------
The relations of the PS mass [@Beneke:1998rk] and the natural and practical MSR masses at the common scale $R$ up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ have the form \[$a_s\equiv\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)/(4\pi)$\] $$\begin{aligned}
m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f=R)-m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}(R)=&\,R\,\Big\{[\,40.9928-3.6248\,{n_{\ell}}]\,a_s^2+[\,963.44-184.87\,{n_{\ell}}\\
&+0.422\,{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,a_s^3+\Big[-(1749.\pm417.)-(11168.\pm10.)\,{n_{\ell}}\nonumber\\
&+569.34\,{n_{\ell}}^2-0.89\,{n_{\ell}}^3-22739.57\,\log{\left(\frac{\mu}{R}\right)}\Big]a_s^4+\ldots\Big\} ,\nonumber\\[0.3cm]
m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f=R)-m_Q^\mathrm{MSRp}(R)=& \,R\,\Big\{[\,42.6499-3.6248\,{n_{\ell}}]\,a_s^2+[\,1073.49-183.45\,{n_{\ell}}\\
&+0.422\,{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,a_s^3+\Big[-(1405.\pm 418.)-(11279.\pm 10.)\,{n_{\ell}}\nonumber\\
&+573.74\,{n_{\ell}}^2-0.89\,{n_{\ell}}^3-22739.57\,
\log{\left(\frac{\mu}{R}\right)}\Big]a_s^4+\ldots\Big\}\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ For a conversion at the common scale $\mu_f=R$ the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ corrections vanish identically indicating that this is the natural way to carry out the conversion. As pointed out already in Sec. \[sec:PSmassIR\], the standard convention for the PS mass [@Beneke:2005hg] corresponds to $\mu/\mu_f=1$, such that the logarithmic term in the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction is eliminated. In Tab. \[tab:mPSmsr\] we show numerical results for the PS-MSR mass difference for representative $R$ values for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ (relevant to the top quark) and ${n_{\ell}}=4$ (relevant for the bottom quark) at different orders in $\alpha_s$. The errors come from the variation of the renormalization scale $\mu$ of the strong coupling in the interval $[R/2,2R\,]$, and the central values are the mean of the respective maximal and minimal values obtained in that interval. In Fig. \[fig:mPSmsra\] $m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f=R)-m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}(R)$ is shown at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ (green), ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ (blue) and ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ (red) for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ as a function of $R$ between $20$ and $160$GeV. The error bands are again obtained from variations of $\mu$ in the interval $[R/2,2R\,]$. For the top quark case (${n_{\ell}}=5$) the PS and the MSR masses differ by about $20$ to $300$MeV for $R$ values between $2$ and $160$GeV and for the bottom quark case (${n_{\ell}}=4$) they differ by about $30$ to $40$MeV for $R$ values below $5$GeV. So the PS and the MSR masses are quite close numerically.
$R$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)^{\mu/\mu_f = 1}$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)^{\mu/\mu_f = 1/5}$
------- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
$2$ $ 0.031 \pm 0.016$ $ 0.022 \pm 0.004$ $-\,0.027 \pm 0.042$ $ 0.017 \pm 0.006$
$5$ $ 0.037 \pm 0.014$ $ 0.032 \pm 0.002$ $0.007 \pm 0.017$ $ 0.030 \pm 0.002$
$10$ $ 0.050 \pm 0.016$ $ 0.046 \pm 0.002$ $ 0.024 \pm 0.013$ $ 0.044 \pm 0.002$
$40$ $ 0.110 \pm 0.026$ $ 0.105 \pm 0.003$ $ 0.081 \pm 0.011$ $ 0.103 \pm 0.001$
$80$ $ 0.174 \pm 0.037$ $ 0.168 \pm 0.003$ $ 0.138 \pm 0.013$ $ 0.166 \pm 0.002$
$160$ $ 0.282 \pm 0.054$ $ 0.275 \pm 0.005$ $ 0.236 \pm 0.015$ $ 0.272 \pm 0.002$
$2$ $ 0.034 \pm 0.018$ $ 0.028 \pm 0.004$ $-\,0.024 \pm 0.043$ $ 0.020 \pm 0.007$
$5$ $ 0.040 \pm 0.015$ $ 0.037 \pm 0.003$ $ 0.012 \pm 0.017$ $ 0.034 \pm 0.003$
$10$ $ 0.054 \pm 0.017$ $ 0.052 \pm 0.003$ $ 0.030 \pm 0.013$ $ 0.050 \pm 0.002$
$40$ $ 0.118 \pm 0.028$ $ 0.118 \pm 0.004$ $ 0.094 \pm 0.011$ $ 0.116 \pm 0.002$
$80$ $ 0.186 \pm 0.039$ $ 0.188 \pm 0.005$ $ 0.158 \pm 0.013$ $ 0.186 \pm 0.002$
$160$ $ 0.302 \pm 0.058$ $ 0.306 \pm 0.007$ $ 0.267 \pm 0.015$ $ 0.303 \pm 0.002$
$2$ $ 0.044 \pm 0.027$ $ 0.034 \pm 0.007$ $-\,0.041 \pm 0.065$ $ 0.032 \pm 0.005$
$3$ $ 0.041 \pm 0.021$ $ 0.036 \pm 0.005$ $-\,0.003 \pm 0.030$ $ 0.036 \pm 0.002$
$4$ $ 0.042 \pm 0.019$ $ 0.038 \pm 0.004$ $ 0.010 \pm 0.021$ $ 0.039 \pm 0.001$
$2$ $ 0.047 \pm 0.029$ $ 0.040 \pm 0.009$ $-\,0.039 \pm 0.068$ $ 0.034 \pm 0.008$
$3$ $ 0.044 \pm 0.022$ $ 0.041 \pm 0.007$ $ 0.001 \pm 0.031$ $ 0.039 \pm 0.003$
$4$ $ 0.045 \pm 0.020$ $ 0.043 \pm 0.006$ $ 0.014 \pm 0.022$ $ 0.043 \pm 0.002$
: Differences between the top mass in the PS and MSR schemes, showing both the natural and practical MSR mass definitions. Results are given for various scales $\mu_f=R$ and orders in $\alpha_s$. At ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ results are shown for two choices of the infrared subtraction scale, $\mu/\mu_f=1$ and $\mu/\mu_f=1/5$. \[tab:mPSmsr\]
The conspicuous property of the relation of the standard PS mass to the MSR masses at the common scale $R$ is that the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction is very large and far away from the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ uncertainty band such that the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ error band from scale variation is three to four times larger than the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ one. For the top quark (${n_{\ell}}=5$) for $R$ around $40$ to $80$GeV, the typical range employed in studies of top pair production at threshold [@Hoang:2000yr], the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ central values differ by $23$MeV compared to scale variations of $\pm \,4$MeV at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and $\pm\,12$MeV at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$. For $R=160$ GeV, the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ central values even differ by $40$MeV compared to scale variations of about $\pm \,4$MeV at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and $\pm\,15$MeV at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$. A similar observation was made earlier in Ref. [@Marquard:2015qpa]. Given this situation it is reasonable to use the difference of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ central values as the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ uncertainty due to the missing higher order terms rather than the scale variation, leading to uncertainties of about $(20,25,30,40)$MeV at $R=(10,40,80,160)$GeV. In Ref. [@Marquard:2015qpa] the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ uncertainty in the relation between the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q \equiv {\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{(n_\ell+1)})$ and the PS mass for $\mu_f=20$ GeV was quoted as $23$ MeV, defined as half the size of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction. This issue is directly related to our observation made in Sec. \[sec:PSmassIR\] that the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction in the relation of the pole mass and the PS mass in the standard scheme [@Beneke:2005hg] (with infrared subtraction scale $\mu/\mu_f=1$) is much larger than expected from the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon of the pole mass.
In Sec. \[sec:PSmassIR\] we also found that for the PS top mass in the infrared subtraction scheme with $\mu/\mu_f=1/5$ there is much better consistency concerning the ${\mathcal{O}}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ sum rule. Using the PS mass in this modified scheme the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ corrections in this relation to the MSR masses reduce substantially, as can be easily spotted from the corresponding results in Tab. \[tab:mPSmsr\] and in Fig. \[fig:mPSmsrb\]: for the modified PS mass the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ result for the PS-MSR mass difference is fully compatible with the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ result and leads to scale variations that are about half the ones at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$. In this scheme it is therefore reasonable to quote the scale variations as the remaining perturbative error at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$. For all $R$ values above $2$GeV and ${n_{\ell}}=4$ and $5$, the error in the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ relation of the natural and the practical MSR masses and the PS mass in the modified scheme with $\mu/\mu_f=1/5$ for the infrared scale is only about $\pm \,2-3$MeV.
One may alternatively make the conversion between the PS mass $m_Q^{\rm PS}(\mu_f)$ and the MSR masses $m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R)$ for $\mu_f\neq R$, where we expand consistently in $\alpha_s(\mu)$ with a common scale $\mu$. For the case $\mu_f<R$ we observe in general that the scale dependence of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ conversion formula for the standard convention for the PS scheme, $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSR}(R)$, decreases compared to the choice $\mu_f=R$, but the size of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction is still many times larger than the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ scale variation. This can be seen for example for the case $(\mu_f,R)=(50,100)$GeV were we obtain for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ the numerical results $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R) =(2.612\pm 0.143,2.925\pm 0.042,2.946\pm 0.005,2.922\pm 0.005) \,{\rm GeV}$ at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{1,2,3,4})$ for the standard PS mass scheme with renormalization scale variation $\mu_f<\mu<R$. This may be compared to the corresponding results for the modified PS mass scheme, which read $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1/5}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R)=(2.612\pm 0.143,2.925\pm 0.042,2.946\pm 0.005,2.939\pm 0.002)$GeV and show again a fully consistent behavior between the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ and ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ results and their scale variations. On the other hand, for the case $\mu_f>R$ we observe in general that, at each given order, the size of the scale dependence of $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R)$ is much smaller than the next correction. This can be seen for example for the case $(\mu_f,R)=(50,25)$GeV were we obtain for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ the numerical results $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R)=(-\,1.468\pm 0.091,-\,1.456\pm 0.005,-\,1.478\pm 0.004,-\,1.504\pm 0.007)$GeV at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^{1,2,3,4})$ for the standard PS mass scheme with the renormalization scale variation $R<\mu<\mu_f$. This may be compared to the corresponding results for the modified PS mass scheme which read $m_Q^{{\rm PS},\mu/\mu_f=1/5}(\mu_f)-m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R)=(-\,1.468\pm 0.091,-\,1.456\pm 0.005,-\,1.478\pm 0.004,-\,1.4767\pm 0.0003)$GeV, and yet again show a better behavior. So, also when the conversion between the standard PS mass and the MSR masses is carried out for $\mu_f\neq R$, the size of the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction and not the usual renormalization scale variation must be taken as an estimate for the remaining perturbative error. Since the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ corrections are typically in the range $20$–$40$MeV, making the conversion $\mu_f\neq R$ does not lead to any improvement in the perturbative relation between the standard PS mass and the MSR masses.
We conclude that the conversion of the MSR masses to the PS mass in the standard scheme of Ref. [@Beneke:2005hg] has, even at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$, perturbative uncertainties due to unknown higher-order terms of about $20$–$40$MeV and that this behavior is related to the fact that the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficient in the relation of the PS mass to the pole mass in the standard scheme appears to be unnaturally large in the context of its expected size with respect to the pole mass ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity. On the other hand, using an infrared subtraction scheme for the PS mass, where the subtraction scale is much lower, leads to a much better perturbative behavior and to much smaller uncertainties in its relation to the MSR masses. This observation is fully consistent with the conclusions from the renormalon sum rule analysis we carried out for the PS mass in Sec. \[sec:PSmassIR\]. Since the MSR masses for $R={\overline{m}}_Q$ are very close or identical to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q({\overline{m}}_Q)$ the conclusions we draw on the perturbative relation of the standard PS mass to the MSR masses also applies to the perturbative relation of the standard PS mass to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass. For $R={\overline{m}}_Q$ the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ correction is typically at the level of $40$MeV. We note that this issue of the standard PS mass scheme becomes problematic once a precision in top quarks mass determinations below $30$–$40$MeV can be reached. Given the projections of top mass determinations of a future lepton collider, see e.g. [@Simon:2016pwp; @dEnterria:2016sca], this may become a pressing issue, but for current studies of high-precision top quark mass determinations the standard PS mass scheme is adequate for most applications.
1S Mass
-------
The 1S mass [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1999ye] is defined as half of the mass of the heavy quarkonium spin triplet ground state. In terms of the pole mass the 1S mass is defined as $$\label{eqn:1Smass}
m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}=m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}+ \big[C_F\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu)m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}\big] \sum_{n=1}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}c_{n,k}
\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n}\log^k\! \Bigg(\frac{\mu}{C_F\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu)m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}}\Bigg) ,$$ where the coefficients $c_{n,k}$ are known up to $n=4$ and given for convenience in Eq. . Because the 1S mass originates from a calculation in the non-relativistic context, there are a few subtleties when calculating its relation to the MSR masses so that the ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon cancels properly.
For the case $R\sim m_Q$ it is essential that terms of order $[C_F\alpha_s m_Q] \alpha_s^n$ are formally counted as ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^n)$ in the conversion. This is because $[C_F\alpha_s m_Q]$ is the inverse Bohr radius, which is the relevant physical mass scale and should not be counted as an ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ correction. This counting is called the $\Upsilon$-expansion [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm] or the relativistic order counting, and must also be used when relating the 1S mass to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ masses in fixed-order perturbation theory. The resulting formula for the 1S mass as a function of the MSR mass for $\mu=R$ up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ reads \[defining parameters $M_B=C_F\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)\,m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)$, $R_B=C_F\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)\,R$, $a_s=\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)/(4\pi)$, $L=\log(R/M_B)$ which are all functions of $R$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:1SinMSRupsilon}
& m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}- m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)\,=\,[\,R \,a_1+M_B\, c_{1,0}\,]\,a_s\\
&+[\,R\, a_2+R_B\, a_1 \,c_{1,0}+M_B(c_{2,0}+c_{2,1}L)\,]\,a_s^2\nonumber\\
&+{\left[R \,a_3+R_B\Big(a_2\, c_{1,0}+a_1\,(c_{2,0}-c_{2,1}(1-L))\Big)+M_B{\left(c_{3,0}+c_{3,1}L+c_{3,2}L^2\right)}\right]}\!a_s^3\nonumber\\
&+\bigg[R\,\bigg(\!a_4-\frac{R_B}{2m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)}\,a_1^2\, c_{2,1}\!\bigg)+R_B\Big(a_3\, c_{1,0}+a_2\,(c_{2,0}-(1-L)\,c_{2,1})\nonumber\\
&\quad+a_1\,(c_{3,0}-c_{3,1}+(c_{3,1}-2\,c_{3,2})L+c_{3,2}L^2)\Big)+
M_B{\left(c_{4,0}+c_{4,1}L+c_{4,2}L^2+c_{4,3}L^3\right)}\!\bigg]a_s^4 \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Here $a_n$ are the coefficients in the MSR scheme. The inverse of Eq. is given in Eq. .
For the case $R\sim m_Q\alpha_s$, which is relevant for non-relativistic applications where $\alpha_s$ may scale with the quark velocity $\alpha_s\sim v\ll1$, the non-relativistic counting $R\sim M_B\sim m_Q\alpha_s$ should be used, such that the leading correction in the 1S-MSR mass difference is of order $\alpha_s^2$. In this case the formula for the 1S mass as a function of the MSR mass for $\mu=R$ up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^5)$ reads \[$M_B=C_F\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)\,m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)$, $a_s=\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)/(4\pi)$, $L=\log(R/M_B)$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:1SinMSRnonrel}
m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)={}&\big[R\,a_1+M_B\, c_{1,0}\big]\,a_s\\
+\,&\big[R\, a_2+M_B\,(c_{2,0}+c_{2,1}L)\,\big]\,a_s^2\nonumber\\
+\,&\big[R\,(a_3+4\pi\, C_F\, a_1\, c_{1,0})+M_B(c_{3,0}+c_{3,1}L+c_{3,2}L^2)\,\big]\,a_s^3\nonumber\\
+\,&\Big[R\Big(a_4+4\pi\, C_F \,a_2\, c_{1,0}+4\pi\, C_F\, a_1\,\big[\,c_{2,0}-c_{2,1}(1-L)\big]\Big)\nonumber\\
&+M_B\,\big(c_{4,0}+c_{4,1}L+c_{4,2}L^2+c_{4,3}L^3\big)\Big] a_s^4 \,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The inverse of Eq. is given in Eq. . We note that in order to implement a general renormalization scale $\mu$ in Eqs. as well as , also the dependence of $M_B$ on $\alpha_s$ needs to be accounted for consistently, which leads to quite involved expressions for the relativistic counting of the $\Upsilon$-expansion. For the top quark and $R\sim m_t\alpha_s\sim 30$GeV the numerical difference between using the relativistic or the non-relativistic counting is below $10$MeV at the highest order and may be not significant. However, for all other cases the difference can be more sizable such that a consistent use of the order counting is mandatory in general.
$R$
---------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------
${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$
$160$ $ 167.934\pm 0.968$ $ 168.315 \pm 0.151$ $\,168.397 \pm 0.019$ $ 168.368 \pm 0.021$
${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^3)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^5)$
$40$ $ 168.156\pm 0.113 $ $ 168.409 \pm 0.054$ $168.373 \pm 0.019 $ $ 168.372 \pm 0.007$
\[-5pt\] $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.113)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.054)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.021)$ $\phantom{000.000}\hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.011)$
$35$ $ 168.197\pm 0.077$ $ 168.421 \pm 0.048$ $ 168.365 \pm 0.026$ $ 168.371 \pm 0.006$
\[-5pt\] $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.078)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.049)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.028)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.011)$
$30$ $ 168.232 \pm 0.037$ $ 168.434 \pm 0.046$ $ 168.353 \pm 0.036$ $ 168.372 \pm 0.008$
\[-5pt\] $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.038)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.047)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.038)$ $\phantom{000.000} \hspace{.22em}(\pm\hspace{.22em} 0.012)$
: Results for the top mass in the 1S mass scheme at different orders using as input the practical MSR mass $m_t^\mathrm{MSRp}(m_t^\mathrm{MSRp})=160\,{\rm GeV}$. The results at the top of the table show the 1S mass using FOPT conversion in the relativistic order counting of Eq. with $R=160$ GeV. The conversion still contains large logarithms $\ln(m_Q/M_B)$. The lower three lines show the 1S mass using R-evolution from $160$ GeV to $R=(30,35,40)$ GeV and then FOPT in the non-relativistic order counting of Eq. with the scale $R$. The logarithms $\ln(m_Q/M_B)$ are then summed to all orders, and the uncertainties are about a factor two smaller at the highest order. The uncertainties shown are explained in detail in the text. \[tab:m1Sinmsr\]
In the top line of Tab. \[tab:m1Sinmsr\] the top quark 1S mass is shown for the practical MSR top mass $m_t^\mathrm{MSRp}(m_t^\mathrm{MSRp})={\overline{m}}_t({\overline{m}}_t)=R_0=160$GeV using directly the relativistic conversion of Eq. at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s)$ to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$, where the quoted uncertainties have been obtained by renormalization scale variations $\sqrt{R_0\,M_B}/2<\mu<R_0$ with $M_B=23.2$GeV and the central values are the mean of the respective maximal and minimal values obtained in the scale variation. In the lower three lines the conversion to the 1S mass is achieved by first using ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ R-evolution of $m_t^\mathrm{MSRp}(160\,\mathrm{GeV})$ to $R=(30,35,40)$GeV, which gives $m_t^\mathrm{MSRp}(R)=(167.181\pm 0.010,166.854\pm 0.009,166.535\pm 0.008)$GeV, where the uncertainties are obtained by variations of $\lambda$ in the interval $[\,0.5,2\,]$ and central values are the mean of the respective maximal and minimal values. Then the non-relativistic formula of Eq. is used to determine the 1S mass at ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^2)$ to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^5)$. The quoted uncertainties are from renormalization scale variations $R/2<\mu<2R$. To these uncertainties the errors from the R-evolution calculation just shown above still have to be added quadratically to obtain the complete conversion uncertainty, which is shown in the parentheses. We see that the direct relativistic conversion, which does not account for the resummation of logarithms and renormalon corrections, leads to uncertainties of $\pm\, 20$MeV at highest order, compared to $\pm$($10$–$13$) MeV for the conversion that uses R-evolution from $160$GeV down to non-relativistic scales $\sim M_B$. Given the projections of high precision top mass determinations at future lepton colliders [@Simon:2016pwp; @dEnterria:2016sca; @dEnterria:2015kmd], the increased precision obtained by using the resummation of higher order terms provided by R-evolution could be relevant, but for the conversion of the MSR mass (and also the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass) to the 1S mass the fixed-order expansion is adequate for most current applications in top quark physics.
MS-bar Mass {#sec:MSbar}
-----------
The relation of the MSR masses to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass is conceptually special since the MSR masses are directly derived from the perturbative series of the pole-${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass relation. The concept of the MSR mass addresses the conceptual question of how the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass evolves for scales much smaller than the quark mass. This question simply expresses the situation that the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ for $\mu\ll m_Q$ can be readily computed solving its renormalization group equation, but does not have any physical significance, because it breaks the power counting of heavy quark problems involving (non-relativistic) physical scales much smaller than the mass. This power counting breaking comes from the perturbative series of the pole-${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass relation that scales with $m_Q$ even for $\mu\ll m_Q$ and which spoils the perturbative series for non-relativistic problems where smaller dynamical scales govern the size of the perturbative corrections and the scale $m_Q$ is integrated out and hence not a dynamical scale any more.
Since the perturbative series for the pole-MSR mass relations scale with $R$, which is adjustable, but also match to the pole-${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass series for $R=m_Q$, one can consider the concept of the MSR mass $m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(\mu)$ as the most reasonable answer of how the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass concept should be extended to scales $\mu\lesssim m_Q$. Thus for $\mu\lesssim m_Q$ R-evolution is the proper concept of the renormalization group running of a heavy quark mass for scales below $m_Q$. Both the natural and the practical MSR masses differ by the way how the virtual massive quark $Q$ effects are treated in their matching relation to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass at the scale $\mu\sim m_Q$, and this matching may be considered in analogy to the flavor-number matching of the strong coupling schemes $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu)$ and $\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(\mu)$ when the scale $\mu$ crosses $m_Q$. In this context, the natural MSR mass is conceptually cleaner than the practical MSR mass, since in the natural MSR mass the virtual massive quark loops are integrated out at the scale $\mu=m_Q$, but this issue is irrelevant for practical applications, where the practical MSR mass has an advantage due to its simpler matching relation to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass.
The most efficient way to relate the MSR masses $m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}(R)$ and $m_Q^\mathrm{MSRp}(R)$ to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ is to (i) evolve the MSR masses from $R$ to $m_Q$ using the R-evolution equations Eq. with ${n_{\ell}}$ active flavors, (ii) employing the regular renormalization group equation for ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$ to evolve it from $\mu$ to $m_Q$ with $({n_{\ell}}+1)$ active flavors, $$\label{eqn:msbarRGE}
{\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}( m_Q) = {\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(\mu)\,
\exp\!\Bigg[\!-\sum_{k=0}^\infty\gamma_{m,k}^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}\!\int_{\log\mu^2}^{\log m_Q^2}
{\mathrm{d}}\log\bar\mu^2{\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(\bar\mu)}{4\pi}\right)}^{\!\!k+1}\Bigg] ,$$ and then (iii) to apply the simple matching relations based on Eq. or Eq. .
The solution of the R-evolution equation is [@Hoang:2008yj] \[$t_m=-\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q))$, $t_R=-\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R))$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msrsolution}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(m_Q)-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)&=-\sum_{n=0}^\infty\gamma_n^R\int_{R}^{m_Q}{\mathrm{d}}R{\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)}{4\pi}\right)}^{\!\!n+1}\\
&={\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\mathrm e^{i\pi(\hat b_1+k)}S_k\,
\big[\,\Gamma(-\,\hat b_1-k,t_m)-\Gamma(-\,\hat b_1-k,t_R)\,\big], \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}$ and the coefficients $\gamma_n^R$, $S_k$ and $\hat b_1$ are given in Eqs. , , and and the series may be truncated at the desired order. The R-evolution equation can be solved numerically or by using the analytic expression in the second line of Eq. .
The matching relations for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ and the natural MSR mass can be derived from Eq. and written in various ways quoted in the following. From ${\overline{m}}_Q\equiv{\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$ one can determine $m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn}}({\overline{m}}_Q)$ using the matching relations \[$A_s\equiv\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)/(4\pi)$, $a_s\equiv\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)/(4\pi)$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msbmsr2}
&m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})-{\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})\\
&={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})
\Bigl\{\,1.65707\, A_s^2+[\,110.05+1.424\,{n_{\ell}}\,]\,A_s^3+[\,(352.\pm31.)
\nonumber \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad
-(111.59\pm0.10) \,{n_{\ell}}+4.40{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,A_s^4\,\Bigr\}\nonumber\\
&={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})\Bigl\{\,1.65707\, a_s^2\,+[\,110.05+1.424\,{n_{\ell}}\,]\,a_s^3\,+[\,(344.\pm31.)
\nonumber \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad
- (111.59\pm 0.10) \,{n_{\ell}}+4.40\,{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,a_s^4\,\,\Bigr\} \,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the superscript $({n_{\ell}}+1)$ is a reminder of the active flavors used to run the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass. Given $m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}\equiv m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})})$ one can determine ${\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$ by the relations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:msbmsr3}
&{\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})
-m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})})\\
&=m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})})
\Bigl\{\,- 1.65707\,\bar A_s^2-[\,101.21+1.424\,{n_{\ell}}\,]\,\bar A_s^3
\nonumber \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad
+[\,(349.\pm31.)+ (103.35\pm0.10) \,{n_{\ell}}-4.40\,{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,\bar A_s^4\,\Bigr\}\nonumber\\
&=m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})})
\Bigl\{\,-1.65707\,\bar a_s^2\,-[\,101.21+1.424\,{n_{\ell}}\,]\,\bar a_s^3\,
\nonumber \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad
+\,[\,(357.\pm31.)+
(103.35\pm0.10)\,{n_{\ell}}-4.40\,{n_{\ell}}^2\,]\,\,\bar a_s^4\,\,\Bigr\},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the superscript $({n_{\ell}})$ is a reminder of the active flavors used to run the MSR mass. We have displayed the matching relations both for the ${n_{\ell}}$ and the $({n_{\ell}}+1)$-flavor scheme for the strong coupling. The corresponding matching relations for the strong coupling at the scales ${\overline{m}}_Q$ and $m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}$ are shown for convenience in Eqs. and , respectively.
Numerically, $m_t^\mathrm{MSRn}(m_t)-{\overline{m}}_t({\overline{m}}_t)$ is about $30$MeV for ${\overline{m}}_t({\overline{m}}_t)$ around $160$GeV. The perturbative uncertainties in this matching relations from missing higher orders are $1$MeV or lower for all massive quarks. The numerical uncertainties in the ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ coefficients given in Eqs. and are quoted from Ref. [@Marquard:2016dcn] and smaller than $0.01$MeV. Thus the matching relations can be taken as exact for all foreseeable applications.
The matching relations for the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ and the practical MSR mass simply reads $$\label{eqn:msrpmsbarmatchv2}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRp},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRp},({n_{\ell}})})
={\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)} ({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}) \,,$$ to all orders of perturbation theory, where in comparison to Eq. we have also explicitly indicated the flavor number of the evolution of the MSR mass and the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass.
![\[fig:msbarmsr\] Comparison of the scale dependence for the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and the MSR top quark masses (${n_{\ell}}=5$) as a function of $\mu$ and $R$ in GeV.](figs/MSR-MSbar){width="53.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:msbarmsr\] we show the scale dependence of the MSR masses $m_t^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)$ (red line) and the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_t(\mu)$ (blue line) for ${\overline{m}}_t^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_t^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})=160$GeV. The difference between the natural and practical MSR masses is not visible on the scale of this figure. The solid curves represent the evolution of the masses in regions where they should be used for physical applications in close analogy to the flavor-number-dependent scale dependence of the strong coupling, while the dashed lines show their evolution beyond these regions. At the scale $160$GeV the two mass schemes are matched via Eq. , Eq. and Eq. . For $R<m_t$ the MSR mass $m_t^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)$ is substantially smaller than the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_t(R)$ and approaches the pole mass for $R\to 0$. The MSR mass remains well defined for all $R\gtrsim \Lambda_{\rm QCD}$, whereas the exact value for the limit $m_t^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R\to0)$ is ambiguous due to the Landau pole in the evolution of the strong coupling in the R-evolution equation . This illustrates the ambiguity of the pole mass concept.
Conclusions {#sec:conclusions}
===========
This paper had two main aims. The first aim was to give a detailed presentation of the MSR mass, which is an $R$-dependent short-distance mass designed for high-precision determinations of heavy quark masses from quantities where the physical scales are smaller than the quark mass, $R<m_Q$. Since such scale hierarchies can only be really large for the top quark, the MSR mass concept is most useful in the context of top quark physics, but it may be useful for bottom and charm quark analyses as well. The MSR mass is obtained from the results of heavy quark on-shell self-energy diagrams which is not the case for any earlier low-scale short-distance mass given in the literature. The MSR mass has therefore a very close relation to the well-known ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass ${\overline{m}}_Q(\mu)$, and should be viewed as the generalization of the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass concept for renormalization scales below $m_Q$, where the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass is known to be impractical and does not capture the proper physics. The main feature of the MSR mass is that its renormalization group evolution is linear and logarithmic in the scale $R$, compared to the purely logarithmic evolution of the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass. This linear scale dependence in the renormalization group flow of the MSR mass is called R-evolution and the MSR mass is well defined for any $R\gtrsim\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$. Formally, in the limit $R\to 0$, the MSR mass can be evolved to the pole mass. However, taking this limit is ambiguous as it involves evolving the strong coupling through the Landau pole, which illustrates the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ ambiguity of the pole mass scheme. Since there are two options to treat the corrections coming from virtual heavy quark loops in the heavy quark self-energy diagrams, we defined two variants of the MSR mass, the [*natural MSR mass*]{} $m_Q^{\rm MSRn}(R)$, where these effects are integrated out, and the [*practical MSR mass*]{} $m_Q^{\rm MSRp}(R)$, where they are still included in the mass definition. Both MSR masses can be easily related to all other short-distance mass schemes available in the literature. We have provided all necessary formulae such that conversions can be carried out to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ and we have discussed in detail the cases where there are subtleties in the conversion.
The second aim of the paper was to give a detailed presentation of how R-evolution can be used to derive an analytic expression for the normalization of the high-order asymptotic behavior of the MSR-pole (or ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole) mass perturbative series related to the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity contained in the pole mass. This analytic result can be applied to any perturbative series and be used to probe the known coefficients for the series pattern related to an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon ambiguity. Since using the result does not involve any numerical comparison of the series coefficients, but is a very simple analytic function of the coefficients, we call it the [*${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon sum rule*]{}. Using the sum rule we reanalyzed the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon in the MSR-pole (and ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$-pole) perturbative series and showed that the sum rule results are fully compatible with previous available methods. We examined the relation between these methods to our sum rule analytically and explained the reason why one of them has very slow convergence. We also applied the sum rule to a number of other quantities known to high order and demonstrated its high sensitivity. These examples included the PS-pole mass relation, the moments of the massive quark vacuum polarization, the hadronic R-ratio and the QCD $\beta$-function.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We acknowledge partial support by the FWF Austrian Science Fund under the Doctoral Program No. W1252-N27 and the Project No. P28535-N27, the U.S. Department of Energy under the Grant No. DE-SC0011090, the Simons Foundation through the Grant 327942, the Spanish MINECO “Ramón y Cajal” program (RYC-2014-16022), MECD grants FPA2016-78645-P, FPA2014-53375-C2-2-P and FPA2016-75654-C2-2-P, the group UPARCOS, the IFT “Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa” Program under Grant SEV-2012-0249 and by the Ramanujan Fellowship of SERB, DST. We also thank the Erwin-Schrödinger International Institute for Mathematics and Physics, the University of Vienna and Cultural Section of the City of Vienna (MA7) for partial support.
[*Note Added*]{}: After this paper was originally posted the comments in Ref. [@Pineda:2017uby] appeared. We have added Appendix \[sec:N12alternative\] to make a comparison of our sum rule with the method and formulas discussed there.
QCD beta-Function and Coefficients {#app:coefficients}
==================================
For the QCD $\beta$-function in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme we use the convention $$\label{eqn:betafct}
\frac{{\mathrm{d}}\alpha_s(R)}{{\mathrm{d}}\log R}=\beta(\alpha_s(R))\,=\,-\,2\,\alpha_s(R)\sum_{n=0}^\infty\beta_n{\left(\frac{\alpha_s(R)}{4\pi}\right)}^{\!\!n+1} ,$$ where $\beta_0=11-2/3\,{n_{\ell}}$ with ${n_{\ell}}$ being the number of dynamical flavors. The coefficients are known up to $\beta_4$ from Refs. [@Tarasov:1980au; @Larin:1993tp; @vanRitbergen:1997va; @Korchemsky:1987wg; @Moch:2004pa; @Czakon:2004bu; @Baikov:2016tgj]. The equation can be used to write \[$\alpha_i\equiv\alpha_s(R_i)$, $t=-\,2\pi/(\beta_0\alpha_s(R))$\] $$\label{eqn:lnRt}
\log\frac{R_1}{R_0}=\int_{\alpha_0}^{\alpha_1}\frac{{\mathrm{d}}\alpha}{\beta(\alpha)}=\int_{t_1}^{t_0}{\mathrm{d}}t\,\hat b(t)=G(t_0)-G(t_1) \;,$$ where $$\label{eqn:bhatG}
\hat b(t)=1+\sum_{k=1}^\infty\frac{\hat b_k}{t^k},\qquad G(t)=t+\hat b_1\log(-\,t)-\sum_{k=2}^\infty\frac{\hat b_k}{(k-1)\,t^{k-1}} \;,$$ and the first four coefficients relevant for renormalon sum rule applications up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ are $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:bhatcoeff}
\hat b_1&=\frac{\beta_1}{2\beta_0^2} \;, & \hat b_3&=\frac{1}{8\beta_0^6}(\beta_1^3-2\,\beta_0\,\beta_1\beta_2+\beta_0^2\,\beta_3),\\
\hat b_2&=\frac{1}{4\beta_0^4}(\beta_1^2-\beta_0\,\beta_2)\,, & \hat b_4&=\frac{1}{16\beta_0^8}(\beta_1^4-3\,\beta_0\,\beta_1^2\,\beta_2 +\beta_0^2\,\beta_2^2 +2\,\beta_0^2\,\beta_1\,\beta_3-\beta_0^3\,\beta_4) \nonumber\,.
\end{aligned}$$ One can show the following recursion relation for the $\hat b_k$ coefficients ($\hat b_0 \equiv 1$): $$\label{eqn:recursiveB}
\hat b_{n+1} = 2\sum_{i\,=\,0}^n\, \frac{\hat b_{n-i}\,\beta_{i+1}}{(-2\beta_0)^{i+2}}\,,$$ which can be used for an automated computation. From Eq. one can also derive the known relation $$\label{eqn:lambda}
{\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}=R_i\,\mathrm e^{G(t_i)} \;,$$ that gives ${\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}}^{\mathrm{N}^k\mathrm{LL}}$ if the series in $G(t_i)$ is truncated after the $k$-th term.
The matching relations for the strong coupling in the ${n_{\ell}}$ and the $({n_{\ell}}+1)$-flavor schemes at the scale ${\overline{m}}_Q\equiv{\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q^{({n_{\ell}}+1)})$ read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:asmatchingmsbar}
\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q) =\, &\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)\bigg[1+0.152778\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!2}\\
&\qquad +\,(0.972057-0.08465\,{n_{\ell}})\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!3}+\ldots\bigg]\,,\nonumber\\
\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}({\overline{m}}_Q) = \,& \alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)\bigg[1-0.152778\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!2}\\
&\qquad-\,(0.972057-0.08465\,{n_{\ell}})\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}({\overline{m}}_Q)}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!3}+\ldots\bigg].\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The matching relations for the strong coupling in the ${n_{\ell}}$ and the $({n_{\ell}}+1)$ flavor schemes at the scale $m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}\equiv m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^{\mathrm{MSRn},({n_{\ell}})})$ read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:asmatchingmsr}
\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}) =\,& \alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})\bigg[1+0.152778
\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!2}\\
&\qquad +\,(0.93753-0.08465\,{n_{\ell}})\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!3}+\ldots\bigg]\,,\nonumber\\
\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}}+1)}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn}) = \,& \alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})\bigg[1-0.152778
\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!2}\\
&\qquad -\,(0.93753-0.08465\,{n_{\ell}})\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(m_Q^\mathrm{MSRn})}{\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!3}+\ldots\bigg].\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The R-anomalous dimension coefficients $\gamma_n^R$ take the following numerical values for the natural MSR mass: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:gammaRn}
\gamma_0^{Rn} & = {\textstyle \frac{16}{3}}\,,\\
\gamma_1^{Rn} & = 96.1039 - 9.55076\, {n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
\gamma_2^{Rn} & = 1595.75 - 269.953\, {n_{\ell}}- 2.65945\, {n_{\ell}}^2\,,\nonumber\\
\gamma_3^{Rn} & = (12319.\pm417.) - (9103.\pm10.)\, {n_{\ell}}+ 610.264\, {n_{\ell}}^2 - 6.515\, {n_{\ell}}^3\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ whereas for the practical MSR mass the coefficients are: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:gammaRp}
\gamma_0^{Rp} & = {\textstyle \frac{16}{3}}\,,\\
\gamma_1^{Rp} & = 97.761 - 9.55076\, {n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
\gamma_2^{Rp} & = 1632.89 - 264.11\, {n_{\ell}}- 2.65945\, {n_{\ell}}^2\,,\nonumber\\
\gamma_3^{Rp} & = (4724.\pm418.) - (8784.\pm10.)\, {n_{\ell}}+ 620.362\, {n_{\ell}}^2 - 6.515\, {n_{\ell}}^3\,.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The uncertainties appearing in the coefficients $\gamma_3^{Rn,Rp}$ are from numerical errors in the results of Ref. [@Marquard:2016dcn]. They amount to an uncertainty in the solutions of the R-evolution equation of $1$MeV or less for all relevant cases and are smaller than the uncertainty due to missing higher orders. Therefore they can be neglected for all practical purposes.
The coefficients $g_\ell$ defined by the series $\sum_{\ell=0}^\infty g_\ell\,(-t)^{-\ell}\equiv\mathrm e^{G(t)}\,\mathrm e^{-t}\, (-t)^{-\hat b_1}$ relevant for the renormalon sum rule up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ read $$\label{eqn:glcoeff}
g_0\,=\,1 \;, \qquad g_1\,=\,\hat b_2 \;, \qquad g_2\,=\,\frac{1}{2}(\hat b_2^2\,-\,\hat b_3) \;, \qquad g_3\,=\,\frac{1}{6}(\hat b_2^3\,-\,3\,\hat b_2\,\hat b_3\,+\,2\,\hat b_4) \;.$$ One can proof the following recursion relation for $g_\ell$: $$\label{eqn:recursiveG}
g_{n+1} = \frac{1}{1+n}\sum_{i=0}^n\,(-1)^i\,\hat b_{i+2}\,g_{n-i}\,,$$ suitable for automated computation. The coefficients $g_\ell$ agree with the coefficients $s_\ell$ given in Refs. [@Beneke:1994rs; @Beneke:1998ui].
The coefficients $S_k$ defined from the series $\sum_{k=0}^\infty S_k\,(-t)^{-k}\equiv -\,t\,\gamma^R(t)\,\hat b(t)\,\mathrm e^{-G(t)}\,\mathrm e^t\,(-t)^{\hat b_1}$ relevant up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ read \[$\tilde\gamma_k^R=\gamma_k^R/(2\beta_0)^{k+1}$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:skcoeff}
S_0=\,&\tilde\gamma_0^R=\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0} \,,\\
S_1=\,&\tilde\gamma_1^R-(\hat b_1+\hat b_2)\,\tilde\gamma_0^R=\frac{a_2}{4\beta_0^2}-\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}(1+\hat b_1+\hat b_2)\, ,\nonumber\\
S_2=\,&\tilde\gamma_2^R-(\hat b_1+\hat b_2)\,\tilde\gamma_1^R+\bigg[(1+\hat b_1)\,\hat b_2+\frac{1}{2}(\hat b_2^2+\hat b_3)\bigg]\tilde\gamma_0^R\nonumber\\
=\,&\frac{a_3}{8\beta_0^3}-\frac{a_2}{4\beta_0^2}(2+\hat b_1+\hat b_2)+\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}{\left[(2+\hat b_1)\,\hat b_2+\frac{1}{2}(\hat b_2^2+\hat b_3)\right]} ,\nonumber\\
S_3=\,&\tilde\gamma_3^R-(\hat b_1+\hat b_2)\,\tilde\gamma_2^R+\bigg[(1+\hat b_1)\,\hat b_2+\frac{1}{2}(\hat b_2^2+\hat b_3)\bigg]\tilde\gamma_1^R\nonumber\\
&-{\left[{\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\hat b_1+\frac{1}{6}\hat b_2\right)}\hat b_2^2+{\left(1+\frac{1}{2}\hat b_1+\frac{1}{2}\hat b_2\right)}\hat b_3+\frac{1}{3}\,\hat b_4\right]}\tilde\gamma_0^R\nonumber\\
=\,&\frac{a_4}{16\beta_0^4}-\frac{a_3}{8\beta_0^3}(3+\hat b_1+\hat b_2)+\frac{a_2}{4\beta_0^2}{\left[(3+\hat b_1)\,\hat b_2+\frac{1}{2}(\hat b_2^2+\hat b_3)\right]}\nonumber\\
&-\frac{1}{2}\frac{a_1}{2\beta_0}{\left[{\left(3+\hat b_1+\frac{1}{3}\hat b_2\right)}\hat b_2^2+{\left(3+\hat b_1+\hat b_2\right)}\hat b_3+\frac{2}{3}\,\hat b_4\right]} .\nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ The relation between the $S_k$ coefficients and the R-anomalous dimension can be compactly written as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:skcoeff2}
S_k \,=\, & \tilde\gamma_k^R - (1-\delta_{k,0})\,(\hat b_1+\hat b_2)\,\tilde\gamma_{k-1}^R + \sum_{n=0}^{k-2}
\tilde\gamma_{n}^R\,\bigg[\tilde g_{k-n} + (-1)^{k-n} \hat b_{k-n} \\
& + \sum_{\ell = 1}^{k-n-1}(-1)^{k-n-\ell}\, \tilde g_\ell\,\hat b_{k-n-\ell}\bigg],\nonumber\\
\tilde g_{n+1} \,=\,& -\frac{1}{1+n} \sum_{i=0}^n\,(-1)^i\,\hat b_{i+2} \,\tilde g_{n-i}\,, \qquad \tilde g_0 = 1\,.\end{aligned}$$ In addition one can use Eq. to write a recursion relation for the $S_k$ coefficients, which are then expressed in terms of $a_i$: $$\label{eqn:skcoeff3}
S_k = \frac{a_{k+1}}{(2\beta_0)^{k+1}} - \sum_{n=0}^{k-1}S_n\sum_{\ell=0}^{k-n} g_\ell\,(1+\hat b_1 + n)_{k-\ell-n}\,,$$ where $(b)_n=b\,(b+1)\cdots(b+n-1)=\Gamma(b+n)/\Gamma(b)$ is the Pochhammer symbol. This formula can be used for an automated implementation of $S_k$ once the $g_\ell$ coefficients have been computed. We note that in order to determine the coefficients $S_k$, one needs all terms up to $k$ loops in the R-evolution equation, and the $(k+1)$-loop QCD $\beta$-function.
Alternative Derivation of the Order Lambda QCD Renormalon Sum Rule {#sec:N12alternative}
==================================================================
In Sec. \[sec:derivation\] we have shown how to directly derive the sum rule formula for $N_{1/2}$ displayed in Eq. from the computation of the Borel transform of Eq. starting from the solution of the R-evolution equation given in Eq. . There is an interesting alternative way to determine the sum rule formula which starts from the Borel function $B_{\alpha_s(R)}(u)$ given in Eq. without knowing the expression for $N_{1/2}$. This expression is equivalent to the Borel transform of the original series $-R\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} a_i \,[\,\alpha_s(R)/(4\pi)\,]^i$ which has the form: $$\label{eqn:originalB}
B_{\alpha_s(R)}(u) = -R \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} a_i\, \frac{u^{i-1}}{\Gamma(i)}\, \beta_0^{-i} \;,$$ in the fixed-order expansion in powers of the Borel variable $u$.
Consider now the modified Borel function $(\beta_0/4\pi R)(1-2u)^{1+\hat{b}_1} B_{\alpha_s(R)}(u)$. Inserting Eq. for $B_{\alpha_s(R)}(u)$ one obtains: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:modBv1}
\frac{\beta_0}{4\pi R}(1-2u)^{1+\hat{b}_1} B_{\alpha_s(R)}(u) = &-N_{1/2}\sum_{\ell=0}^{\infty}\,g_\ell\;\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1 - \ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1)}\,(1-2u)^\ell \\ &+ \frac{\beta_0}{2\pi}(1-2u)^{1+\hat{b}_1}\sum_{\ell=0}^\infty\,g_\ell\;Q_\ell(u)\;,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the role of analytic and non-analytic terms is just reversed compared to Eq. . Truncating the series in $\ell$ at order $n$ (which corresponds to including the coefficients $a_i$, $S_k$, $g_\ell$ up to $i=n+1$, $k=n$ and $\ell=n$, respectively), one can see that expanding Eq. in powers of $u$ up to order $n$ and taking the limit $u\rightarrow 1/2$ one singles out $N_{1/2}$ on the RHS: $$\begin{aligned}
-\,N_{1/2}^{(n)} \;&+\; \frac{\beta_0}{2\pi} \sum_{k=0}^n\; \sum_{m=0}^k \sum_{i=k-m+1}^n \sum_{\ell=0}^i (-1)^m\,g_\ell\, S_{i-\ell}\\
& \hspace{3cm}\times\frac{\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1)}{\Gamma(m+1)\,\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1-m)}\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1+k-m-\ell)}
{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1+i-\ell) \Gamma(k-m+1)} \;,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$ refers to the $(n+1)$-loop approximation for $N_{1/2}$. Applying the same procedure to the Borel transform of Eq. and solving for $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$ one obtains: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:N12ordern}
N_{1/2}^{(n)} ={}& \frac{1}{4\pi}\sum_{k=0}^n\,\sum_{m=0}^k\,\frac{(-1)^m}{(2\beta_0)^{k-m}}\frac{\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1) a_{k-m+1}}{\Gamma(k-m+1)\Gamma(m+1)\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1-m)}\\
&+ \frac{\beta_0}{2\pi} \sum_{k=0}^n\; \sum_{m=0}^k \sum_{i=k-m+1}^{n} \sum_{\ell=0}^i (-1)^m\,g_\ell\, S_{i-\ell}\nonumber\\
& \hspace{3cm}\times\frac{\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1)}{\Gamma(m+1)\Gamma(2+\hat{b}_1-m)}\frac{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1+k-m-\ell)}{\Gamma(1+\hat{b}_1+i-\ell)\Gamma(k-m+1)} \;.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Although lengthier, it can be checked that this formula agrees exactly with the sum rule of Eq. at $(n+1)$-loop order (i.e. when truncated with $k\le n$ as shown).
In Ref. [@Pineda:2001zq] (see also Ref. [@Lee:1996yk]), a version of the above considerations to determine the normalization of the non-analytic terms in Eq. , which we refer to as the Borel method, was proposed. They made the additional assumption that the analytic terms on the RHS of Eq. can be neglected because they quickly tend to zero when multiplied by $(1-2u)^{1+\hat{b}_1}$ in the limit $u\to1/2$. Therefore they did not include the terms related to the polynomials $Q_\ell$. This leads to a formula for the normalization that only contains the first term on the RHS of Eq. , which they called $N_m$. After a bit of algebra, the double sum of this term can be recast into a single summation, yielding: [^6] $$\label{eqn:Nmv1}
N_m^{(n)} = \frac{1}{4\pi}\sum_{m=0}^n \frac{(-\hat b_1)_{n-m}\,a_{m+1}}
{(2\beta_0)^m\,m!\,(n-m)!}\;.$$ However, the contribution from the second term on the RHS of Eq. is actually not negligible because it involves the expansion of the $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}$ and setting $u=1/2$ afterwards. In particular, the coefficients $\beta_{n>1}$ contained in the $g_\ell$ are essential for the cancellation of the with $n$ beyond 2-loop order, i.e. for $n>1$.
![\[fig:N12vsNm\] Comparison of $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$ and $N_m^{(n)}$ for ${n_{\ell}}=5$. Results are shown as a function of $\lambda$ including contributions from one to four loops.](figs/N12-vs-Nm){width="53.00000%"}
This is shown in Fig. \[fig:N12vsNm\] where we plot $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$ (solid lines) and $N_{m}^{(n)}$ (dashed lines) obtained from the natural MSR mass for $n=0$ (cyan), $n=1$ (green), $n=2$ (blue) and $n=3$ (red) for ${n_{\ell}}=5$ as a function of $\lambda$ in the interval $[\,0.5,\,2\,]$. We see that the results for $N_m^{(n)}$ differ substantially from $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$ showing that the terms neglected in the approach of Ref. [@Pineda:2001zq] are numerically sizable and, in particular, do not decrease with the order $n$. Moreover, the results for $N_m^{(n)}$ do not appear to show any reduced $\lambda$-dependence beyond 2-loop order, in contrast to the results for $N_{1/2}^{(n)}$. Interestingly, in Ref. [@Bali:2013pla] it has been shown that when many more terms of the expansion are known \[they accounted for terms up to $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s^{20})$ for the quark and gluino QCD static potential\], Eq. does eventually converge to the right value and shows reduced scale variation. We have numerically confirmed that using series generated from the Borel function of Eq. (\[eqn:borel2\]) setting (by hand) explicit expressions for the functions $Q_\ell(u)$, such as $Q_\ell(u)=\delta_{\ell,0}$. The eventual convergence at very high orders $n$ can be understood from the fact that the contributions in the asymptotic behavior of the perturbative coefficients $a_n$ that arise from the coefficients $\beta_{n>1}$ become $1/n$ suppressed and eventually become also numerically small, see Eqs. (\[eqn:anasy\]) and (\[eqn:anintermsofsk\]). But in any case, its very slow convergence renders the Borel method less practical and less precise for most phenomenological applications, for which only a few terms of the perturbative expansion are known.
Other Short Distance Masses {#sec:othermasscoeff}
===========================
The PS mass [@Beneke:1998rk] is defined by the integral of the momentum space color singlet static potential between a quark-antiquark pair, each having infinite mass. The relation of the PS mass to the pole mass has the form $$\label{eqn:PSmass}
m_Q^{\mathrm{pole}}-m_Q^{\mathrm{PS}}(\mu_f)=\mu_f\sum_{n=1}^\infty a_n^{\mathrm{PS}}\bigg(\frac{\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu_f)}{4\pi}\bigg)^{\!\!n} ,$$ where the coefficients are known up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ based on Refs. [@Fischler:1977yf; @Billoire:1979ih; @Peter:1996ig; @Schroder:1998vy; @Anzai:2009tm; @Smirnov:2009fh; @Lee:2016cgz], and have the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:PSmasscoeff}
a_1^{\mathrm{PS}}&={\textstyle \frac{16}{3}}\,,\\
a_2^{\mathrm{PS}}&=172.4444 - 13.03704\,{n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
a_3^{\mathrm{PS}}&=11111.55-1522.482\,{n_{\ell}}+41.350\,{n_{\ell}}^2 \,,\nonumber\\
a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}&=913336.84-179514.95\,{n_{\ell}}+10535.70\,{n_{\ell}}^2-172.72\,{n_{\ell}}^3 + 22739.57\log\!\bigg(\frac{\mu}{\mu_f}\bigg) \,.\nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ In the standard convention for the PS mass defined in Ref. [@Beneke:2005hg] the term $\log(\mu/\mu_f)$ appearing in $a_4^{\mathrm{PS}}$ is set to zero.
The definition of the 1S mass [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1999ye] in terms of the pole mass is given in Eq. and the coefficients $c_{n,k}$ up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^5)$ read [@Hoang:1998ng; @Hoang:1998hm; @Hoang:1999ye; @Penin:2002zv; @Kiyo:2014uca; @Lee:2016cgz] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:1Smasscoeff}
c_{1,0}&=-\,2.09440 \,,\\
c_{2,0}&=-\,135.438+10.2393\,{n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
c_{2,1}&=-\,92.1534+5.5851\,{n_{\ell}}\,,\nonumber\\
c_{3,0}&=-\,11324.72+1372.745\,{n_{\ell}}-38.9677\,{n_{\ell}}^2 \,,\nonumber\\
c_{3,1}&=-\,7766.02+1077.92\,{n_{\ell}}-33.5103\,{n_{\ell}}^2 \,,\nonumber\\
c_{3,2}&=-\,3041.06+368.61\,{n_{\ell}}-11.1701\,{n_{\ell}}^2 \,,\nonumber\\
c_{4,0}&=-\,1005116.33+176714.27\,{n_{\ell}}-10088.35\,{n_{\ell}}^2+168.57\,{n_{\ell}}^3-63574.35\,\log(\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(\mu)) \,,\nonumber\\
c_{4,1}&=-\,901778.56+162559.51\,{n_{\ell}}-9263.14\,{n_{\ell}}^2+163.15\,{n_{\ell}}^3 \,,\nonumber\\
c_{4,2}&=-\,303000.33+61184.26\,{n_{\ell}}-3823.90\,{n_{\ell}}^2+74.47\,{n_{\ell}}^3 \,,\nonumber\\
c_{4,3}&=-\,89204.48+16219.00\,{n_{\ell}}-982.97\,{n_{\ell}}^2+19.86\,{n_{\ell}}^3 \,.\nonumber
\end{aligned}$$
Employing the $\Upsilon$-expansion (relativistic order counting) the formula for the MSR masses as a function of the 1S mass up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^4)$ reads \[$M_{B}^{\rm 1S}=C_F\,\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)\,m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}$, $A_R=C_F\,\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)$, $a_s=\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)/(4\pi)$, $L=\log(R/M_{B}^{\rm 1S})$\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:MSRin1Supsilon}
&m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}=\,-\left[\,R \,a_1+M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\, c_{1,0}\,\right]a_s\\
&-\Big[R\, a_2-M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(A_R\, c_{1,0}^2- c_{2,0} - c_{2,1}L\Big)\Big]\,a_s^2\nonumber\\
&-\Big[R \,a_3+M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(A_R^2 \,c_{1,0}^3-A_R\, c_{1,0}\Big( 2\,c_{2,0}-c_{2,1}+2\,c_{2,1} L\Big) +
c_{3,0}+ c_{3,1}L + c_{3,2}L^2\Big) \Big]a_s^3\nonumber\\
&-\Big[R \,a_4-M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(A_R^3 \,c_{1,0}^4-A_R^2\, c_{1,0}^2\Big(3\,c_{2,0}-\big({\textstyle\frac{5}{2}}-3\,L\big)\,c_{2,1}\Big) \nonumber\\
&\qquad +A_R \Big( c_{2,0}\, \big(c_{2,0}-(1-2\,L)\,c_{2,1} \big)-(1-L)\, c_{2,1}^2 L + c_{1,0} \big(\,2\,c_{3,0}\nonumber\\
&\qquad\; -(1-2\,L)\,c_{3,1}-2\,(1-L)\, c_{3,2}\,L \big) \Big)
- c_{4,0} - c_{4,1} L - c_{4,2} L^2- c_{4,3} L^3\Big) \Big]a_s^4\,.\nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ Employing the non-relativistic order counting the formula for the MSR masses as a function of the 1S mass up to ${\mathcal{O}}(\alpha_s^5)$ reads \[$M_B^{1S}=C_F\,\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)\,m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}$, $a_s=\alpha_s^{({n_{\ell}})}(R)/(4\pi)$, \] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn:MSRin1Snonrel}
m_Q^{\mathrm{MSR}}(R)-m_Q^{\mathrm{1S}}= \,& -\left[\,R \,a_1+M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\, c_{1,0}\,\right]a_s\\
&-\Big[R\, a_2+M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(c_{2,0} + c_{2,1}L\Big)\Big]\,a_s^2\nonumber\\
&-\Big[R \,a_3-M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(4\pi\,C_F\,c_{1,0}^2 - c_{3,0} - c_{3,1} L - c_{3,2} L^2\Big) \Big]a_s^3\nonumber\\
&-\Big[R \,a_4-M_{B}^{\rm 1S}\Big(4\pi\,C_F\,c_{1,0}\big(2\,c_{2,0}-\,(1-2\,L)\,c_{2,1}\big)\nonumber\\
&\qquad - c_{4,0} - c_{4,1} L - c_{4,2} L^2 - c_{4,3}L^3\Big) \Big]a_s^4\,.\nonumber
\end{aligned}$$
[^1]: The name ‘MSR mass’ arises from a combination of the letters ‘MS’ standing for the close relation to the ${\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}$ mass and the letter ‘R’ standing for R-evolution.
[^2]: Throughout this article we use $\alpha_s^{(n_f=5)}(m_Z)=0.118$ and $m_Z=91.187\,$GeV.
[^3]: For example, applying the sum rule to a series that follows an ${\mathcal{O}}({\Lambda_\mathrm{QCD}})$ renormalon pattern up to order $m$, but then changes to a convergent series beyond, the value of $N_{1/2}$ approaches a finite value up to order $m$, but then decreases and approaches zero when more terms beyond order $m$ are included. Note however that there is no reason to expect a perturbative series in QCD to behave in such a manner.
[^4]: One can easily write Eq. as the sum of Eq. and a term build from the inverse Borel transform of the $Q_\ell$ polynomials defined in Eq. .
[^5]: In the recent sum-rule analyses [@Dehnadi:2011gc; @Bodenstein:2011ma; @Bodenstein:2011fv; @Hoang:2012us; @Chakraborty:2014aca; @Colquhoun:2014ica; @Beneke:2014pta; @Ayala:2014yxa; @Dehnadi:2015fra; @Erler:2016atg] for the bottom quark mass ${n_{\ell}}=4$ was used, while for charm mass determinations ${n_{\ell}}=3$ was employed, and the $({n_{\ell}}+1)$ flavor scheme was employed for the renormalization group evolution.
[^6]: We note that no analytic formula for $N_m^{(n)}$ was provided in Ref. [@Pineda:2001zq], and that Eq. correctly encodes the prescription given there. In formula (7) of Ref. [@Pineda:2017uby] the following analytic double series formula was given: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Nmpineda}
N_m
&= \frac{1}{\nu} \sum_{m,n'=0}^\infty \frac{ \Gamma(2+ b) (-1)^m r_{n'}(\nu)}{\Gamma(m+1)\Gamma(n'+1)\Gamma(2+ b -m)}
\bigg(\frac{2\pi}{\beta_0}\bigg)^{n'} \\
&= \frac{1}{4\pi}\sum_{m,n'=0}^\infty\frac{ \Gamma(2+\hat b_1) (-1)^m a_{n'+1}}{\Gamma(m+1)\Gamma(n'+1)
\Gamma(2+\hat b_1 -m)} \frac{1}{(2\beta_0)^{n'}} \,, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where in the second line we have converted to our conventions for ease of comparison. Eq. (\[eq:Nmpineda\]) is not fully specified because it does not provide a prescription how to systematically truncate the two series in order to compute $N_m$ at $(n+1)$-loop order. The sum for $(1-2u)^{1+\hat b_1}=\sum_{m=0}^\infty (2u)^m \Gamma(2+\hat b_1)/[\,\Gamma(m+1) \Gamma(2+\hat b_1-m)\,]$ converges to zero at $u=1/2$, while the other, which is Eq. , is divergent for $u=1/2$. To obtain Eq. (\[eqn:Nmv1\]) from Eq. (\[eq:Nmpineda\]) one switches variable from $(m,n')$ to $(k,m)$ with $k=m+n'$, and then finally truncates with respect to the variable $k$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this work, the transition between diffusion-limited and ballistic aggregation models was revisited using a model in which biased random walks simulate the particle trajectories. The bias is controlled by a parameter $\lambda$, which assumes the value $\lambda=0$ ($1$) for ballistic (diffusion-limited) aggregation model. Patterns growing from a single seed were considered. In order to simulate large clusters, a new efficient algorithm was developed. For $\lambda \ne 0$, the patterns are fractal on the small length scales, but homogeneous on the large ones. We evaluated the mean density of particles $\overline{\rho}$ in the region defined by a circle of radius $r$ centered at the initial seed. As a function of $r$, $\overline{\rho}$ reaches the asymptotic value $\rho_0(\lambda)$ following a power law $\overline{\rho}=\rho_0+Ar^{-\gamma}$ with a universal exponent $\gamma=0.46(2)$, independent of $\lambda$. The asymptotic value has the behavior $\rho_0\sim|1-\lambda|^\beta$, where $\beta= 0.26(1)$. The characteristic crossover length that determines the transition from DLA- to BA-like scaling regimes is given by $\xi\sim|1-\lambda|^{-\nu}$, where $\nu=0.61(1)$, while the cluster mass at the crossover follows a power law $M_\xi\sim|1-\lambda|^{-\alpha}$, where $\alpha=0.97(2)$. We deduce the scaling relations $\beta=\nu\gamma$ and $\beta=2\nu-\alpha$ between these exponents.'
author:
- 'S. C. Ferreira Jr.'
- 'S. G. Alves'
- 'A. Faissal Brito'
- 'J. G. Moreira'
title: 'Morphological transition between diffusion-limited and ballistic aggregation growth patterns'
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
The pattern formation in nonequilibrium processes is a longstanding problem in Statistical Physics [@Meakinbook; @Vicsekbook; @BarabasiBook]. In special, the diffusion-limited aggregation model (DLA) [@Witten] is a noteworthy example in which a very simple algorithm generates disorderly fractal clusters. This model was related to several physical and biological applications, such as electrodeposition [@Matsushita], viscous fingering [@Maloy], bacterial colonies [@Matsushita2], and neurite formation [@Caserta]. In DLA model, particles released at a point distant from the cluster execute random walks until they find a neighbor site of the cluster and irreversible stick in this site. If the random walks are replaced by ballistic trajectories at random directions, we have the ballistic aggregation (BA) model [@Vold]. In contrast to DLA, the BA model generates disordered nonfractal clusters with nontrivial scaling properties [@Vicsekbook; @Liang].
Due to its importance as a fundamental model, several generalizations of DLA model were proposed [@Meakinbook; @Vicsekbook]. In particular, those models in which the particle trajectories are biased random walks were investigated [@MeakinPRB; @KimPRA; @KimPRE; @NagataniPRA; @CastroPRE; @Kim]. In these models, on the short length scales the particle trajectories are common random walks with fractal dimension 2.0, whereas on the longer length scales the bias becomes dominant and the dimensionality of the walk is 1.0. Clusters grown using this type of walk must behave like DLA model on the short length scales, while nonfractal patterns are observed on the longer ones. Consequently, the mass of a cluster of size $l$ is given by $$M(l)= l^{d_f}f(l/\xi),
\label{eqM}$$ in which $$f(x)\sim\left\{ \begin{array}{l}
const. \mbox{~if~} x\ll 1\\
x^{d-d_f} \mbox{~if~} x\gg 1.
\end{array}\right.
\label{eqf}$$ Here, $d$ is the space dimension, $d_f$ is the DLA fractal dimension, and $\xi$ is the crossover radius from DLA- to BA-like scaling regimes. This idea was firstly considered by Meakin [@MeakinPRB]. In his model, the simulations start with a single seed at the center of a square lattice and the drift of all trajectories is in a fixed lattice direction. Along the walk, the particle is moved one lattice unity in the drift direction with probability $P$, or moves to one of its four next-neighbor sites with probability $1-P$. The model generates patterns with a growth tendency in the opposite direction of the drift. The author argues that the crossover from the DLA-like structure on the short length scales to a compact structure on the longer ones is characterized by a length $\xi\sim P^{-1}$. However, using a renormalization group approach, Nagatani found $\xi\sim P^{-1/(d-d_f)}$ [@NagataniPRA88]. Kim *et. al.* [@KimPRA; @KimPRE] studied lattice models with a global drift to the seed, in which the particles have a higher probability to move to the nearest neighbor representing the shortest distance away from the seed. The pattern morphologies are ruled by the lattice anisotropy and their fractal dimension is 1. Nagatani [@NagataniPRA] considered the effects of positive and negative radial drifts in DLA model. In the positive case the cluster fractal dimension is asymptotically 2, while eccentric patterns with dimension 1 were found for the negative case. Other models [@CastroPRE; @Kim] consist of the deposition processes on a $d$-dimensional substrate in which the walk drift is the substrate direction.
In the present paper, we are interested in the transition from DLA to BA models when the random or ballistic trajectories of DLA and BA models, respectively, are replaced by biased random walks with a random drift direction. The central concern of this work is the fact that all real fractals exhibit scaling only on limited ranges and, consequently, a quantitative analysis of both experiments and simulations demands a deep understanding of these crossovers. The outline of the paper is the following. In Sec. \[models\], the model and the respective computational algorithm are described. In Sec. \[results\], the simulational results are presented and discussed. Finally, some conclusions are drawn in Sec. \[conclusions\].
Models and Methods {#models}
==================
As in the original DLA and BA models, at the beginning of the simulations a unique seed localized in the center of the lattice constitutes the cluster. Then, particles are sequentially released at a circle distant from the cluster and execute biased random walks. The distance between the center of the lattice and the launching circle is denoted by $R_l$. The biased walks are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
x_{n+1}=x_n+\cos(\varphi + \lambda \theta_n) \nonumber \\
y_{n+1}=y_n+\sin(\varphi + \lambda \theta_n),
\label{bias_walk}\end{aligned}$$ where $x_n$ and $y_n$ are the particle coordinates at the n$th$ step of the walk, $\varphi$ is a random angle that defines the bias direction, $\lambda
\in [0,1]$ is the parameter that controls the random component of the trajectories, and $\theta_n$ is a random direction. The variables $\varphi$ and $\theta_n$ are in the range $[-\pi,\pi]$. Notice that $\varphi$ is defined at the beginning of the walks, whereas $\theta_n$ assumes random values for each walk step. One can see that the particular cases $\lambda=0$ and $\lambda=1$ recover the BA and DLA models, respectively. If the particle visits a site neighboring the cluster it irreversibly joins to this site. However, if the distance between the particle and the cluster is too large, i. e., larger than a killing radius $R_k$, the particle is excluded and a new one is released at the launching circle. In order to determine when a walker is neighboring a cluster site, its lattice position was defined as the next integer value of its real coordinates defined by Eq. (\[bias\_walk\]). The majority of the results presented in this work refer to the square lattice version of the model.
The previously introduced variables ($R_l$ and $R_k$) must be as large as possible. However, computational limitations restrict the use of $R_l$ and $R_k$ values. We defined $R_l=R_{max}+R_0$, where $R_{max}$ is the maximum distance from the center of the lattice of a particle belonging to the cluster. For DLA and BA models $R_0$ can be of the order of some lattice units [@Meakinbook; @Vicsekbook]. However, for the model with biased random walks the patterns morphologies are strongly dependent on this value. Our tests suggest that the patterns become insensitive to $R_0$ variations when $R_0>300$, in agreement with the values adopted by Kim [@Kim] for a model of deposition of biased random walks on a substrate. Thus, $R_0=400$ were used in all simulations. The killing radius $R_k$ must be $10$ to $100$ times $R_{max}$ for very large DLA clusters [@Meakinbook] whereas a $R_k$ only some lattice units larger than $R_{max}$ is necessary for the BA model. Due to the bias present in the random walks, we used the same strategy adopted by Kim [@Kim], i. e., $R_k=2R_{max}+R_0$. Fig. \[modeldba\] illustrates two tentatives, one successful and the other frustrated, to add a new particle to the cluster.
To analyze the transition between BA and DLA it is necessary to simulate large clusters using lattices containing up to $10^4\times 10^4$ sites, specially when $\lambda \lesssim 1$. Consequently, the computational time becomes prohibitive and an efficient algorithm is necessary. A technique commonly used to simulate large DLA and related models is to allow the particles execute long steps at random directions if they are far from the cluster [@Ball; @Meakin; @Tolman; @Ferreira]. This procedure is correct because the probability of a random walker crosses the circle centered on its initial position in a given angle $\phi$ is uniformly distributed in the interval $[-\pi,\pi]$. However, for the biased random walkers this is not true. Indeed, the probability density distributions are concentrated around the direction $\varphi$. For $\lambda$ not very close to the unity or for large steps, the probability distributions are very well fitted by Gaussian curves centered at $\varphi$, as illustrated in Fig. \[gaussfit\]. Using this fact, the following procedure was adopted. If the distance between the random walker and the cluster is larger than a value $R_s+\delta$, it executes a jump of length $R_s$. Thus, a long jump can not lead the walker to a distance smaller than $\delta$. The jump direction is $\phi=\varphi+\phi_g$, where $\phi_g$ is a random number between $-\pi$ and $\pi$ selected from a Gaussian distribution $$P(\phi_g)= \frac{1}{\sigma\sqrt{\pi/2}} \exp\left(-2\frac{\phi_g^2}{\sigma^2}\right).$$ In order to obtain the Gaussian width $\sigma$ for each couple $\lambda$ and $R_s$, a large number of biased random walks ($10^6-10^7$) were simulated and a histogram of the probabilities built (Fig. \[gaussfit\]). Then, the $\sigma$ value can be determined using least square Gaussian fits. The quality of fits is improved as larger $R_s$ values and smaller $\lambda$ values are used. Therefore, the $R_s$ values should be sufficiently large for reproduce good fits, in special for $\lambda\lesssim 1$. Furthermore, several $R_s$ values can be used in a same simulation improving the algorithm efficacy. We used two values: $R_s=200$ and $R_s=1000$. The $\sigma$ values used in the simulations are shown in table \[sigmas\]. Also, $\delta=20$ were used. All tests show that the growth patterns are not sensible to the $\delta$ value. It is worth to note that the Gaussian distribution is not normalized in the interval $[-\pi,\pi]$ and, obviously, this is not the actual angle distribution for the present problem. However, the very good fits to the angle distributions justify the use of the Gaussian functions.
$\lambda$ $~~\sigma (R_s=200)~~$ $~~\sigma (R_s=1000)~~$
----------- ------------------------ -------------------------
0.100 0.02585 0.01202
0.300 0.07591 0.03413
0.500 0.12535 0.05613
0.700 0.18206 0.08139
0.900 0.31933 0.14216
0.950 0.45109 0.20057
0.990 1.03575 0.45130
0.995 1.53278 0.63451
: $\sigma$ values determined with the Gaussian least square fits.[]{data-label="sigmas"}
Results and Discussions {#results}
=======================
The first stage of the present work was to confirm the validity of the previous defined algorithm. We simulate relatively small lattices containing $10^3 \times 10^3$ sites with and without the optimization for $\lambda =
0.99$. In Fig. \[fig:otim\], comparisons between clusters generated with (top) and without (bottom) the optimization are shown. Comparing the patterns, one can see that they are statistically indistinguishable. Using the mass-ratio method, the fractal dimensions of the patterns generated with and without the algorithm were $d_f=1.70\pm 0.02$ and $d_f=1.72 \pm 0.02$, respectively, and the exponents of the radius of gyration, defined by $r_g\sim
n^\zeta$ ($n$ is the number of cluster particles) [@Vicsekbook], were $\zeta=0.560\pm0.003$ and $\zeta=0.561\pm0.002$, respectively. These exponents reinforce the algorithm validity. Concerning the computational time, a single run to generate one of the clusters shown in Fig. \[fig:otim\] without the optimization takes about 1 hour in a 3 GHz Pentium IV, but the same simulation is done in 10 minutes using the optimization. Therefore, even for small lattices the simulation performance is greatly improved when our optimized algorithm is used.
Figure \[padroes\] shows growth patterns for distinct $\lambda$ values. These patterns were generated with the optimization at lattices containing $10^3\times 10^3$ sites. The simulations stopped when the aggregate reaches the lattice edge. A continuous transition from disordered and dense to ramified clusters is observed. For small $\lambda$ values the patterns are essentially BA-like but, the patterns become very similar to the DLA clusters as $\lambda\rightarrow 1$. Indeed, the cluster generated with $\lambda=0.995$ is characterized by the square lattice anisotropy, a signature of the DLA model [@Meakinbook; @Vicsekbook]. However, one expects that all patterns become asymptotically homogeneous with a finite characteristic size for the empty regions.
In order to quantify the DLA to BA morphology transition, the mean particle density in the inner regions of the cluster was evaluated. This mean density $\overline{\rho}(r)$ is defined as the ratio between the number of occupied sites and the total number of sites in a region delimited by a circle of radius $r$ centered at the initial seed. Since one expects asymptotically nonfractal clusters, the density must reach a finite value $\rho_0$ as $r\rightarrow \infty$. Nevertheless, the approach to the constant density is very slow and takes a scale invariant form $$\overline{\rho}(r)=\rho_0+Ar^{-\gamma}.
\label{eq:rho}$$ Here, $\gamma$ is a correction to the fractal dimension and $A$ a constant. This scaling hypothesis was also used by Liang and Kadanoff [@Liang] to study the driven ballistic aggregation, in which the particles trajectories are in a single direction. They conclude that the $\gamma$ exponent is nonuniversal, i.e., depends on the lattice structure.
In Fig. \[fig:rho\], the double-logarithm plots of $\overline{\rho}-\rho_0$ as a function of $r$ for distinct $\lambda$ values are shown. The density $\rho_0$ was obtained by searching for the best linear fit in the larger linear region. To avoid the active region, we limited the fits to those data corresponding to a half of the cluster sizes. Depending on the $\lambda$ value, lattices with linear size $L=5\times10^3$ or $L=10^4$, and 10 to 20 independent runs were used. One can observe a power law regime for $r>10$ showing that the approach to the stationary value obeys Eq. \[eq:rho\]. In Fig. \[fig:beta\], the asymptotic density $\rho_0$ and the $\gamma$ exponent are shown as a function of $1-\lambda$, the distance from the transition point. $\rho_0$ acts as an order parameter, which vanishes at the critical point following a relation $\rho_0\sim|1-\lambda|^\beta$. The exponent obtained from the data of Fig. \[fig:beta\](a) was $\beta = 0.27(1)$, whereas the exponents obtained for $L=2\times 10^3$ and $L=10^4$ were $\beta = 0.28(2)$ and $\beta = 0.26(1)$, respectively. The numbers in parenthesis represent the uncertainties. In Fig. \[fig:beta\](b), the $\gamma$ exponents for distinct $\lambda$ values are shown. One can observe that $\gamma$ fluctuates around the value $0.46$. The smaller value found was $\gamma\approx 0.43$ and the larger one $\gamma\approx
0.48$. Our simulations suggests that the $\gamma$ exponent is independent of $\lambda$ and its value is $\gamma=0.46 \pm 0.02$. The error indicated in the $\gamma$ value was evaluated through an average over the data of Fig. \[fig:beta\](b).
In order to test the universality of the $\gamma$ and $\beta$ exponents we studied two versions of the present model. In the first one, we used square lattices, but the walkers stick to the cluster if they reach a nearest or a next-nearest empty neighbor of an occupied site. In the second one, we used a hexagonal lattice. Lattices with size $L=2000$ were used. The exponents for the first modified version were $\beta=0.27\pm 0.02$ and $\gamma=0.49\pm0.03$, and the exponents for hexagonal lattice were $\beta=0.28\pm0.02$ and $\gamma=0.49\pm0.03$. These results lead us to conclude that these exponents are universal.
The morphological transition between BA and DLA models was also characterized by the crossover radius $\xi$ defined in Eqs. (\[eqM\]) and (\[eqf\]). The number of particles $M(r)$ inside a region delimited by a circle of radius $r$ centered at origin was evaluated. The $M~vs.~r$ curves exhibit tenuous crossovers determining the transition between DLA- and BA-like scaling regimes. In Fig. \[fig:massa\](a), an example of this crossover is shown. Since the growth patterns scale as DLA (BA) for small (large) length scales, in order to evaluate the crossover $\xi$ we fitted the curves by power laws $M(r)\sim r^{d_f}$, where $d_f=1.71$ and $d_f=2$ were used for the initial and the final curve regions, respectively. The crossover lengths obtained through this method are drawn as a function of the distance from the transition point in Fig. \[fig:massa\](b). The length $\xi$ diverges at $\lambda=1$ following a power law $\xi\sim |1-\lambda|^{-\nu}$, where $\nu=0.61(1)$. Moreover, the mass at the critical point diverges as $M_\xi\sim |1-\lambda|^{-\alpha}$, where $\alpha=0.97(2)$.
As discussed in section \[intro\], these crossovers between fractal and homogeneous patterns occur due the crossover in the particle trajectories. However, the crossover length of the walker trajectories is given by (see appendix) $$\xi_w=\frac{\pi\lambda}{\sin(\pi\lambda)}-\frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}{\pi\lambda},
\label{eq:xi}$$ which diverges as $\xi_w\sim|1-\lambda|^{-1}$ for $\lambda\lesssim1$. Thus, although the transition between DLA and BA models is due to the transition in the walk dimensionality, the respective crossover lengths are not proportional.
Notice that Eq. (\[eq:rho\]) describes the mean density behavior when $r \gtrapprox \xi$. Moreover, $\overline{\rho}\sim r^{d_f-2}$ when $r\ll\xi$ due to the cluster fractality in this length scale. Thus, using Eq. (\[eq:rho\]), we found that the mean density at the crossover can be written as $$\overline{\rho}_\xi=A_1|1-\lambda|^\beta+A_2|1-\lambda|^{\nu\gamma},
\label{eq:rhoxi}$$ where $A_1$ and $A_2$ are constants. But, the mean density at the crossover is given by $$\overline{\rho}_\xi\sim \frac{M_\xi}{\xi^2}\sim|1-\lambda|^{2\nu-\alpha}.
\label{eq:rhoxi2}$$ Comparing Eqs. (\[eq:rhoxi\]) and (\[eq:rhoxi2\]), we have that they are consistent only if $$\beta=\nu\gamma{\rm~and~} \beta=2\nu-\alpha.
\label{eq:scal}$$ In agreement with the scaling relation (\[eq:scal\]), the number of independent exponents are reduced from 4 to 2. Using the exponents measured for systems with size $L=5000$, we found $\nu\gamma=0.28(2)$ and $2\nu-\alpha=0.25(3)$, beside $\beta=0.27(1)$. The difference between these values is inside of the error margins indicated in the parenthesis. The large uncertainities obtained in the exponents (5%-10%) are originated in the difficulty in the determination of the exact crossover points.
Conclusions
===========
In the present work, we studied the transition between diffusion-limited aggregation (DLA) and ballistic aggregation (BA) models. We used a model in which the random walks in the DLA model are replaced by biased random walks with a drift in a random direction. The drift is controlled by a parameter $\lambda\in[0,1]$ that leads the model from BA ($\lambda=0$) to DLA ($\lambda=1$) (see Eq. (\[bias\_walk\])). Also, an efficient algorithm, which allows large scaling analysis of the growth patterns, was introduced.
For any bias, the clusters are fractal (DLA-like) on the short length scales whereas nonfractal patterns are obtained on the large ones. The transition between DLA- and BA-like scaling regimes is determined by a characteristic length $\xi$ that diverges as $\lambda\rightarrow 1$ following a power law $\xi\sim |1-\lambda|^{-\nu}$, where $\nu= 0.61(1)$,(r) while the cluster mass at the crossover follows the relation $M_\xi\sim |1-\lambda|^{-\alpha}$, where $\alpha=0.97(2)$. This crossover was not numerically determined in similar previous works. The density in the inner regions of the cluster reaches an asymptotic value $\rho_0\sim|1-\lambda|^\beta$, where $\beta = 0.26(1)$. However, this approach is slow and follows a power law decay with a universal exponent $\gamma=0.46(2)$ independent on the drift. These exponents obey the scaling relations $\beta=\nu\gamma {\rm~and~} \beta=2\nu-\alpha$.
It is worth to stress two main contributions of the present work. The first one is the development of an algorithm that can be used to study other models with biased random walks as for example those related to deposition processes [@CastroPRE; @Kim], for which the determination of universality classes is a hard work. The second one is the careful quantitative characterization of the transition between DLA and BA growth models that, in our knowledge, was not previously done. The understanding of these crossovers can be an essential tool in the analysis of real fractals, which always exhibit scaling on limited ranges.
We would like to thank M. L. Martins and A. P. F. Atman for the critical reading of the manuscript. This work was partially supported by the CNPq Brazilian agency.
Demonstration of Eq. (\[eq:xi\])
=================================
For sake of simplicity, we consider Eq. (\[bias\_walk\]) with a drift direction $\varphi=0$ and $x_0=y_0=0$. Iterating Eq. (\[bias\_walk\]) for $n$ steps, we found $$\langle x_n \rangle = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \langle \cos(\lambda\theta_i) \rangle,
\label{eq:xm}$$ and $$\langle x_n^2 \rangle=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{n}\langle\cos(\lambda\theta_i)\cos(\lambda\theta_j) \rangle.
\label{eq:xm2}$$ But, $$\langle \cos(\lambda\theta_i) \rangle = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}\cos(\lambda\theta) d\theta = \frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}{\pi\lambda}.
\label{eq:cos1}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \cos(\lambda\theta_i)\cos(\lambda\theta_j) \rangle =
\left[\frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}
{\pi\lambda}\right]^2(1-\delta_{ij})\nonumber\\+\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{\sin(2\pi\lambda)}
{2\pi\lambda}+1\right]\delta_{ij}, \label{eq:cos2}\end{aligned}$$ where $\delta_{ij}$ is the Kronecker delta.
Substituting Eqs. (\[eq:cos1\]) and (\[eq:cos2\]) in Eqs. (\[eq:xm\]) and (\[eq:xm2\]), respectively, we found $$\langle x_n \rangle = n \frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}{\pi\lambda}$$ and $$\sigma_x^2(n)=n\left \{\frac{1}{2} \left[1+\frac{\sin(2\pi\lambda)}
{2\pi\lambda}\right]- \left[\frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)} {\pi\lambda}\right]^2
\right \},$$ where $\sigma_x^2(n)=\langle x_n^2\rangle-\langle x_n\rangle^2$ is the variance of the coordinate $x_n$. With a similar analysis, we obtained $$\langle y_n \rangle =0$$ and $$\sigma_y^2(n)=n\frac{1}{2} \left[1-\frac{\sin(2\pi\lambda)}{2\pi\lambda}\right].$$ Thus, the walk mean displacement $r(n)=\sqrt{\langle x_n\rangle^2 + \langle
y_n\rangle^2} $ and the variance $\sigma^2(n)=\sigma_x^2+\sigma_y^2$ are given by $$r(n)=n \frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}{\pi\lambda}
\label{eq:rn2}$$ and $$\sigma(n)=n^{1/2}\left \{1-\left[\frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)} {\pi\lambda}\right]^2 \right \}^{1/2}.
\label{eq:sigman2}$$
The crossover of the walk dimensionality ($d=2$ for short times and $d=1$ for long ones) occurs when $r(n) \sim \sigma(n)$. Making equal Eqs. (\[eq:rn2\]) and (\[eq:sigman2\]), we obtained an estimative of the characteristic number of steps $\mathcal{N}$ necessary for the crossover $$\mathcal{N}=\left[\frac{\pi\lambda}{\sin(\pi\lambda)}\right]^2-1.$$ Thus, the characteristic crossover length is $$\xi_w=r(\mathcal{N})=\frac{\pi\lambda}{\sin(\pi\lambda)}-\frac{\sin(\pi\lambda)}{\pi\lambda}.
\label{eq:xi2}$$ In Fig. (\[fig:cross\]), $\xi_w$ is plotted as a function of $1-\lambda$. Expanding Eq. (\[eq:xi2\]) around $\lambda=1$, we found $\xi_w\sim
|1-\lambda|^{-1}$.
[67]{}
P. Meakin, *Fractals, scaling and growth far from equilibrium* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998).
T. Vicsek, *Fractal Growth Phenomena* (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992).
A.-L. Barabasi and H. E. Stanley, *Fractal Concepts on Surface growth*, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).
T. A. Witten and L. M. Sander, Phys. Rev. Lett. **47**, 1400 (1981).
M. Matsushita, M. Sano, Y. Hayakawa, H. Honjo, and Y. Sawada, Phys. Rev. Lett. **53**, 286 (1984).
K. J. M[å]{}l[ø]{}y, J. Feder, and T. J[ø]{}ssang, Phys. Rev. Lett. **55**, 2688 (1985).
M. Matsushita and H. Fujikawa, Physica A **168**, 498 (1990).
F. Caserta, H. E. Stanley, W. D. Eldred, G. Daccord, R. E. Hausman, and J. Nittmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. **64**, 95 (1990).
M. J. Vold, J. Colloid Sci. **18**, 684 (1963).
S. Liang and L. P. Kadanoff, Phys. Rev. A, **31**, 2628 (1985).
P. Meakin, Phys. Rev. B **28**, 5221 (1983).
Y. Kim, K. R. Choi, and H. Pak, Phys. Rev. A **45**, 5805 (1992).
Y. Kim and K. R. Choi, Phys. Rev. E **48**, 1586 (1993).
T. Nagatani, Phys. Rev. A **39**, 438 (1989).
M. Castro, R. Cuerno, A. Sánchez, and F. Domínguez-Adame, Phys. Rev. E **62**, 161 (2002).
Y. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc. **30**, 511 (1997).
T. Nagatani, Phys. Rev. A **37**, 3514 (1988).
R. C. Ball and R. M. Brady, J. Phys. A **18**, L809 (1985).
P. Meakin, J. Phys. A **18**, L661 (1985).
S. Tolman and P. Meakin, Phys. Rev. A **40**,428 (1989).
S. C. Ferreira Jr., Eur. Phys. J. B **42**, 263 (2004).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Light Field (LF) offers unique advantages such as post-capture refocusing and depth estimation, but low-light conditions severely limit these capabilities. To restore low-light LFs we should harness the geometric cues present in different LF views, which is not possible using single-frame low-light enhancement techniques. We, therefore, propose a deep neural network architecture for Low-Light Light Field (L3F) restoration, which we refer to as L3Fnet. The proposed L3Fnet not only performs the necessary visual enhancement of each LF view but also preserves the epipolar geometry across views. We achieve this by adopting a two-stage architecture for L3Fnet. Stage-I looks at all the LF views to encode the LF geometry. This encoded information is then used in Stage-II to reconstruct each LF view.
To facilitate learning-based techniques for low-light LF imaging, we collected a comprehensive LF dataset of various scenes. For each scene, we captured four LFs, one with near-optimal exposure and ISO settings and the others at different levels of low-light conditions varying from low to extreme low-light settings. The effectiveness of the proposed L3Fnet is supported by both visual and numerical comparisons on this dataset. To further analyze the performance of low-light reconstruction methods, we also propose an L3F-wild dataset that contains LF captured late at night with almost zero lux values. No ground truth is available in this dataset. To perform well on the L3F-wild dataset, any method must adapt to the light level of the captured scene. To do this we propose a novel pre-processing block that makes L3Fnet robust to various degrees of low-light conditions. Lastly, we show that L3Fnet can also be used for low-light enhancement of single-frame images, despite it being engineered for LF data. We do so by converting the single-frame DSLR image into a form suitable to L3Fnet, which we call as *pseudo-LF*.
author:
- 'Mohit Lamba\*, Kranthi Kumar\* and Kaushik Mitra[^1][^2]'
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'Harnessing Multi-View Perspective of Light Fields for Low-Light Imaging'
---
[Shell : Bare Demo of IEEEtran.cls for IEEE Journals]{}
Low-Light, Light Field enhancement, Light Field dataset.
Introduction
============
\
\
captured in low-light such as in the dark or night-time, not only lack the pleasing visual aesthetics but are also corrupted by high amount of noise and color distortions. This forthrightly hinders the performance of many computer vision algorithms [@low_light_degenrate]. This plight of low-light conditions is not unique to conventional 2D photographs, but is also shared by Light Fields (LFs) [@adelson1992single; @ng2005TechReport; @levoy1996LF; @gortler1996lumigraph]. In contrast with a conventional camera, which captures only 2-D spatial information, a light field camera captures both 2-D spatial and 2-D angular information about the scene. Capturing the full light field allows us to perform post-capture controls such as digital refocusing and aperture control [@ng2005TechReport; @ng2005fourierslice]. It also enables easy scene depth estimation [@depthFind; @depth2; @depth3]. This has resulted in many LF applications such as view synthesis [@levoy1996LF; @gortler1996lumigraph; @LF_view_synthesis], structure from motion [@SfM_LF], pedestrian identification [@person_identification_LF], reflection removal [@reflection_removal_LF], and various other real-world application like autonomous driving and plant monitoring [@raytrix]. But, as stated previously, these LF applications are not immune to the challenges of low-light imaging. This is depicted in Fig. \[fig:title\_image\] where the depth estimation capability of LF is foiled due to low-light conditions. Commonly used techniques such as histogram equalization or having higher ISO does not help much in this regard as they boost the noise levels and introduce unwanted artifacts. Our goal, therefore, is to design a low-light LF restoration technique to mitigate these problems. Low-light restoration is an ill-posed problem because of the large amount of noise present in the low-light signal. Also, color information is not present adequately. An LF, however, by capturing multiple views of the low-light scene, contains rich geometric cues about the scene. Harnessing the complimentary information spread across the LF views should help in reducing the ill-posedness of the problem and result in better visual reconstruction. In addition to this, the restoring process should also preserve the LF epipolar constraints to allow for subsequent tasks like depth estimation. The existing works on the low-light enhancement [@guo2017lime; @park2017lowGamma; @2019underexposed; @ren2019lowRetouch; @chen2018learning2seeindark; @lore2017llnet] are, however, not designed to keep these points in consideration and so are not suitable candidates for enhancing low-light LFs.
We propose a two-stage deep neural network for Low-Light Light Field (L3Fnet) reconstruction. Stage-I of the L3Fnet operates on the full LF to first encode the LF geometry. This encoded information is then used as an auxiliary information in Stage-II for actual view restoration. Adopting such a two-staged architecture helps us to restore low-light LFs both aesthetically and with geometric correctness.
Training a learning-based model such as L3Fnet requires a low-light LF dataset but, unfortunately, there is no such dataset. An easy way out would have been to create a synthetic dataset using gamma correction, noise addition, or even retouching the images in software such as Adobe Photoshop and GIMP as was done for the single frame case [@2019underexposed; @gammaarxiv; @park2017lowGamma; @lore2017llnet; @guo2019pipelineGamma]. But these are only proxy solutions, and as pointed out by Pl[ö]{}tz and Stefan [@plotz2017benchmarking], benchmarking algorithms on synthetic dataset may not correlate with their performance on real-world data. We, therefore, collected our own Low-Light Light Field (L3F) dataset using commercially available Lytro Illum LF camera. L3F dataset was captured in the evenings when the visibility was below normal level. For each scene, $4$ shots were taken. For the first shot, optimal camera exposure and ISO settings were used to get the ground truth LF. Lytro Illum’s exposure was then reduced in definite proportions to capture three more low-light LFs. While taking these shots, much care has been taken to avoid moving objects such as passing vehicles and wavering leaves to prevent any registration issues. Camera shake is another cause of incurring registration problems and is much more pronounced for Lytro Illum. Lytro Illum, unlike modern single-frame DSLR cameras, does not allow remote connectivity for capturing data. So the only way to capture LF was by physically pressing the shutter button causing unintentional camera shake. To limit this we captured multiple sets of four LFs for each scene and employed additional measures to keep the camera rigidly fixed. We then did a manual check to identify the set exhibiting the least amount of camera shake. Using these techniques the maximum pixel shift in the captured LFs is about $3-4$ pixels.
While capturing the L3F dataset we were constrained to capture the ground truth for each scene. This was essential to train our network. Because of this constraint, we were unable to capture extremely low-light LFs. We, therefore, decided to forsake this restriction and collected a separate low-light LF dataset captured late in the night with near $zero$ lux conditions at the camera lens. We call this dataset L3F-wild, which we use only for evaluation. L3F-wild LFs were captured with typical camera exposure of $1/5$ second and nominal ISO levels. Note that we do not use the standard practice of capturing images with a long exposure, of say $10$ seconds, in low-light conditions. This is to avoid possible motion blur and is a step towards fast low-light imaging. The L3F-wild dataset has a good amount of variation in scene brightness level, portraying a real-world scenario. We, consequently, propose a novel pre-processing block which when appended to L3Fnet makes it robust to such variations in light levels by automatically estimating an appropriate amplification factor.
We have already discussed why single-frame techniques are not suitable for enhancing low-light LF. And we now address the reverse question, *can LF methods be used for single-frame DSLR images?* The proposed L3Fnet has been specifically engineered for LF and so cannot be directly operated on single-frame images. However, we propose a novel pixel shuffling mechanism, which can convert any DSLR image into a *pseudo-LF*. Pseudo-LF has a form suitable to L3Fnet, and so can be enhanced using it. Later on, the enhanced pseudo-LF is transformed back into a single-frame DSLR image in a lossless fashion. This gives L3Fnet architecture a universal appeal for both LF and single-frame image low-light enhancement with restoration being more optimized for LF but maintaining a decent recovery for single-frame images. To summarize, we make the following contributions:
- We propose a two-stage deep neural network, L3Fnet, for restoring extremely low-light LFs.
- [We collected L3F dataset consisting of real LFs with varying levels of low-light, which can be used for training and evaluation of data driven methods.]{}
- [We propose a novel pre-processing block that automatically adapts L3Fnet to changing light levels.]{}
- Our proposed Pseudo-L3Fnet framework enables L3Fnet to process even single-frame DSLR images for better enhancement in several cases.
Related Work
============
**LF processing algorithm:** Many techniques and models have been proposed for several LF related tasks. This includes tasks such as spatial super-resolution [@wanner2012LF; @wang2018lfnetTIP; @zhang2019residual; @LFviewCoherence], deblurring [@ravi_arxiv_deblurring; @2017lfdeblurring; @2018lfdeblurring], denoising [@2012LFdenoising; @bm5d; @2013LFdenoisng; @lfdenosing2016; @dansereau2013decoding], and depth estimation [@depthFind; @depth2; @depth3]. But, to the best of our knowledge, no prior work has considered solving the challenges involved in low-light LF imaging. We, therefore, outline some of the important works on LF denoising as denoising is a crucial part of low-light restoration. The easiest approach to LF denoising is to individually denoise each LF view using standard techniques like BM3D [@bm3d]. This, however, does not capture the 4D structure of LF and was addressed by Mitra and Veeraraghavan [@2012LFdenoising]. By operating on LF patches, they modeled each 4D patch using Gaussian Mixture Models (GMM) subject to the patch disparity information. This way they provided a common framework for several LF tasks such as super-resolution and denoising. Dansereau [@2013LFdenoisng] observed that the LF of a Lambertian surface has a hyperfan-like shape in the frequency domain. By appropriately choosing the passband they tried to remove noise. Sepas-Moghaddam [@lfdenosing2016] treating LF akin to video frames, first converted LF into an epipolar sequence and then applied video-based techniques to denoise the LF. This 3D stacking of epipoles, however, has limitations in capturing the 4D nature of LF and was consequently addressed by LFBM5D [@bm5d], a popular LF denoising technique. LFBM5D does a realistic 4D LF modeling and is a natural extension to the then state-of-the-art denoising method BM3D. However, LFBM5D does not address the problem with low-light LFs because of its inability to enhance color.
**Single-frame low-light enhancement:** A significant amount of literature exists for low-light single-frame image enhancement. We briefly review some of them. LIME [@guo2017lime] used a non deep learning optimization framework for low-light enhancement. It utilized the retinex theory [@retinex_1997] to decouple the captured image into reflectance and illumination components for subsequent enhancement. A similar idea was used by Park [@park2017lowGamma] and proposed another variational optimization-based retinex model. Ying [@ying2017new] also used the retinex model but combined it with the camera response model to preserve the naturalness of the enhanced image. Deep learning based methods employing encoder-decoder architecture have also been recently used for low-light enhancement [@lore2017llnet; @2019underexposed; @ren2019lowRetouch; @chen2018learning2seeindark]. Amongst all these recent works, the work by Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] is a landmark paper on low-light reconstruction and is closest to our work on low-light restoration. Other recent works [@2019underexposed; @ren2019lowRetouch; @lore2017llnet] also aim at low-light but their main objective is the enhancement of dim images. These images already had a good representation of the target scene and only lacked in aesthetics and contrast but had a decent amount of scene visibility. This is an interesting problem to solve but in our work we target data with much lower visibility, see Fig \[fig:wild\]. Moreover, they worked on synthetic data where the images were darkened with global gamma operation or retouched in photo-editing software for well-lit ground truth.
![Sample center-view images from the Low-Light Light Field (L3F) dataset consisting of $27$ scenes. For each scene, we capture a LF at near optimal exposure setting and at three other exposure settings with the exposures being $1/20^{th}, 1/50^{th}$ and $1/100^{th}$ of the optimal setting. Refer supplementary material to view the full dataset.[]{data-label="fig:sample_L3F_images"}](dataset_dataset.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
L3F Dataset
===========
Creating a low-light LF enhancement dataset is a major challenge in designing learning-based solutions. Synthetic low-light LF data can be created using gamma correction and noise addition [@gammaarxiv; @park2017lowGamma; @lore2017llnet; @guo2019pipelineGamma], however, such techniques act globally and so do not mimic a real low-light situation which severely affects some regions more than others. Also, in synthetic data noise is generally modeled as Gaussian or Poisson distribution which may not hold true in real low-light data. The other popular technique is to retouch the low-light images in photo-editing software by trained photographers to obtain the ground-truth [@2019underexposed; @ren2019lowRetouch]. Such proxy solutions are not suitable for evaluating low-light LFs because any local edit in a LF view needs to be propagated to all the other SAIs which is difficult to enforce manually. Thus, different from recent methods that adopt such techniques, we introduce a Low-Light Light Field (L3F) dataset containing both low-light LF and the corresponding ground-truth LF. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first dataset available for training and benchmarking low-light LF enhancement techniques.
{width="\linewidth"}
All the LFs in the proposed L3F dataset were captured in outdoor situations. The scene content predominantly includes an outdoor urban campus environment with lambertian and non-lambertian surfaces at varying depth and occlusion levels. The captured LFs do not include any dynamic objects in the scene such as moving people and vehicles. All the LFs were captured in the evening with limited natural light where the typical illuminance was between $0.1$ Lux to $20$ Lux.
We use the Lytro Illum Camera to capture all the LFs. For each scene we captured four LF data. One of them was captured using the least ISO and appropriate exposure settings to make it look like a well-lit image. This we use as the ground truth reference LF for that scene. The other three LFs were captured by reducing the exposure setting to $1/20^{th}$, $1/50^{th}$ and $1/100^{th}$ of the reference LF exposure time. For brevity, we refer them as L3F $-$ 20, 50 and 100 datasets. Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] limited their work to approximately $1/20^{th}$ setting but we go even more low-light with L3F-100 dataset for better understanding and contrasting the effect of low-light on LF reconstruction.
Motion blur caused due to camera shake is a common artifact when capturing long-exposure sequences. To limit this we mount the Lytro camera on tripod and capture the LFs using timer mode. Unlike DSLR cameras the Lytro Illum camera does not allow remote capture which makes the data capturing process harder and laborious. Consequently, the four LFs captured for the same scene exhibits small spatial misalignment. To contain this we capture multiple sets of these four LFs for a target scene and choose the set exhibiting the least alignment problem. No subsequent alignment operation was performed on the LFs. The small misalignment in L3F dataset is taken care by our proposed method.
The images were captured in the Light Field Raw (LFR) format of the Lytro Illum camera. The resolution of each LFR file is $5368 \times 7728$ pixels. The raw images are captured in the Bayer sensor pattern where the pixels are hexagonally packed. We use Light Field Matlab Toolbox [@dansereau2013decoding] to demosaic, decode, devignetize and color-correct the LFR files. The decoded $4$D LF data have a resolution of $15\times15\times434\times625\times3$, where $15\times15$ represents the angular resolution, $434 \times 625$ represents the spatial resolution of each view and $3$ corresponds to the RGB channels.
The proposed dataset contains a total of $108$ LFs organized into $27$ sets. Each set corresponds to a unique scene with $4$ LFs captured at various exposure settings. Fig. \[fig:sample\_L3F\_images\] shows a few sample LF center-views from the proposed dataset. $33\%$ of the dataset i.e., $9$ sets ($36$ LFs) forms the test set.
While capturing L3F$-$20, 50, and 100 datasets, we were constrained to capture the well-lit LF image also, which is required for training the L3Fnet. Forsaking this restriction, we captured even darker low-light LFs taken late in the night. While capturing this dataset, the Lux measure at Lytro Illum’s lens was almost nil, and so no ground truth was possible for these LF images. We call this dataset *L3F-wild*. Although L3F-wild cannot be used for training, the performance of methods trained on L3F$-$20, 50, and 100 dataset can be checked by evaluating on L3F-wild dataset. L3F-wild dataset is a step forward towards fast low-light imaging because it does not adopt the standard practices of low-light imaging such as prolonged exposure or high ISO. Long exposures like $5-10$ seconds cause a lot of motion blur, and high ISO boosts the noise. L3F-wild was, however, captured with a typical exposure time of $1/4 - 1/15$ second and low ISO values around $100$. In the experimental section and supplementary, we demonstrate the effectiveness of L3Fnet on both L3F-100 and L3F-wild datasets.
Low-Light Light Field Network (L3Fnet)
======================================
Our proposed method is designed to enhance LFs captured in low-light. But before describing the details of the proposed solution, we highlight some of the desired characteristics that the proposed solution should have. These characteristics are not specific to any particular task but essentially are features sought-after in any LF architecture. These features were cataloged after studying different architectures for various LF related tasks, based on which we designed our algorithm. Firstly, L3Fnet should *not make strong assumptions* about the scene, so that, given any low-light LF we should be able to restore it. This is contrary to works like [@wanner2012LF; @2015LFgeoprior], which required explicit geometric information of the scene, such as depth-map, to perform the LF related task. Secondly, L3Fnet should not reconstruct the LF views independent of each other. This may lead to visually pleasing reconstruction, but the LF epipolar geometry would not preserved. This was noticed in work like [@LFviewCoherence], where only pairs of LF views were fed to the CNN model, failing to capture the high *view coherence* of the LF [@wang2018lfnetTIP]. The third desired characteristics is *view parallelization* that essentially means that should be able to reconstruct each view parallelly. This is contrary to the approach taken by LFNet [@wang2018lfnetTIP], which used bidirectional recurrent units to model the inter-view dependencies. But as pointed out in [@zhang2019residual], the dependencies were not modeled well, and the algorithm was slow because of sequential processing over time. So if possible, recurrent units should not be used in L3Fnet for potential *view parallelization*. View parallelization also has the advantage that we can selectively reconstruct only some of the desired LF, without reconstructing the full Light Field, saving time and memory. Lastly, we do not want multiple architectures with multiple sets of weights for view reconstruction. This was adopted by [@zhang2019residual] to retrain their network for each Sub-Aperture Image (SAI) and consequently have a separate set of weights for each LF view. We, on the other hand, would want to avoid this and have a *single architecture with shared weights* for all LF views. We have summarized this discussion in Table. \[table:guidlines\].
\[table:guidlines\]
We have incorporated these features in the design of L3Fnet to the extent possible without harming the primary purpose of enhancing low-light LFs. L3Fnet admits no strong assumption about the target scene because it requires no extra information other than the low-light LF for enhancement. To achieve view-coherence, we have a Global Representation Block (GRB), which operates on the entire LF to obtain a latent representation that encodes the LF epipolar geometry. To demonstrate the view-coherence property we show the epipolar and depth-estimation results in the experimental section. While GRB is good to incorporate view-coherence, it defies the view parallelization property. To compensate for this, L3Fnet adopts a two-stage architecture. The second stage operates on each LF view individually and using the encoded information from Stage-I (GRB) enhances each SAI independently. We elaborate on this in much detail after we fully describe the L3Fnet architecture. Finally, L3Fnet shares the architecture and weights amongst all LF views.
Network Architecture
--------------------
**Stage-I Global Representation Block (GRB):** Given an input LF $\mathcal{L}^{low}\in \mathbf{R}^{U\times V\times W\times H\times 3}$, we first stack all the views across channels to obtain $\mathcal{\hat{I}}\in \mathbf{R}^{W\times H\times 3UV}$. Such a represenation can be processed using a 2D Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to obtain a low-dimensional LF representation useful for any down-stream task.
In the Global Representation Block (GRB) a convolutional layer $\mathcal{H}^{GRB}$ is used to reduce the input channel dimensions of $\mathcal{\hat{I}}$, see Table \[Table:architecturevalues\]. $$ {J}_{0} = \mathcal{H}^{GRB}\left(\mathcal{\hat{I}} \right)$$ To now extract useful information, we further process this representation using $M$ (fixed at $4$) residual blocks [@ResidualBlock] to obtain the global representation $${J}_{m} = \mathcal{B}^{GRB}_{m}\left({J}_{m-1} \right), \quad m\in\{1,\hdots,M\},$$ where $\mathcal{B}^{GRB}_{m}$ denotes the m$^{th}$ residual block in the GRB. This feature map is then fed to the final convolutional layer $\mathcal{T}^{GRB}$ as a post-processing step $${J}_{M+1} = \mathcal{T}^{GRB}\left({J}_{M} \right).$$ By processing all the views together using a CNN architecture the network captures the implicit LF structure such as disparity, sub-pixel information etc., relevant for the final task at hand. This global representation is then used by the view reconstruction block as an augmented information to reconstruct any of the input view.
**Stage-II View Reconstruction Block (VRB):** While the GRB representation is too coarse and common to all SAIs, for better reconstruction of each SAI we explicitly use its immediate neighbours. Formally, to reconstruct a particular view $\mathcal{I}(u,v) \in \mathbf{R}^{W\times H\times 3}$, its neighbours $\{\mathcal{I}(u,v-1),\mathcal{I}(u-1,v),\mathcal{I}(u,v+1),\mathcal{I}(u+1,v)\}$ are stacked across channels to obtain $\mathcal{\Tilde{I}}\in \mathbf{R}^{W\times H\times 15}$. The view restoration process begins by processing $\mathcal{\Tilde{I}}$ using a convolutional layer $\mathcal{H}^{VRB}$ to obtain the feature map $C_0$: $${C}_{0} = \mathcal{H}^{VRB}\left(\mathcal{\Tilde{I}} \right).$$ The global feature map is concatenated with this before being fed to $N$ (fixed at $6$) residual blocks: $$\begin{aligned}
{C}_{1} &= \mathcal{B}^{VRB}_{1}\left({C}_{0} \oplus {J}_{M+1} \right) \\
{C}_{n} &= \mathcal{B}^{VRB}_{n}\left({C}_{n-1} \right), \quad\quad n\in\{2,\hdots,N\},\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathcal{B}^{VRB}_{n}$ denotes the n$^{th}$ resblock in the view reconstruction block and $\oplus$ denotes the concatenation operation. The resblocks in GRB and VRB branches share the same structure. Finally, the output feature map is passed through a transposed convolution block $\mathcal{T}^{VRB}$ followed by a long skip connection from the input SAI to restore the SAI $${I}_{out}(u,v) = \mathcal{T}^{VRB}\left({C}_{N} \right) + I(u,v).$$
Many works [@rcan; @rir] have reported difficulty in training very deep networks by simply stacking residual blocks. Therefore, to stabilize the training and optimization of deep networks, adding a long/global skip connection has become a standard practice[@rcan; @attention_2019_CVPR]. Further, unlike the short skip connections which help in propagating finer details, long skip connection helps to transmit coarse level details which are crucial for image restoration tasks.
![The Histogram Module computes the RGB histogram of a low-light LF and outputs an amplification factor $\gamma$. Normalizing the dark LF with this module allows L3Fnet to process images of varying low-light levels mitigating the over/under saturation problem.[]{data-label="fig:histogram_module"}](architecture_arch_hist_norm_v4.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
One of our design objectives was to decouple the reconstruction of an LF view from that of others. This gives the flexibility to choose precisely which LF views need to be reconstructed, saving time and memory to a great extent. For example, to speed up training and simultaneously reduce the model size on GPU, instead of enhancing all LF SAIs, we randomly chose any $K$ (fixed at 12) SAIs and reconstructed them parallely in Stage-II for each training iteration. All these $K$ SAIs used the same global encoding produced at the end of Stage-I. This global encoding is also obtained in a single feed-forward pass of Stage-I avoiding any kind of recurrence, which consumes more time. At test time $K$ was set to the full angular resolution of the LF.
**Branch** **Name** **Type** **K** **S** **Out**
------------ --------------------- -------------- ------- ------- ---------
Conv-2D 7 1 64
Conv-2D 3 2 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
$\mathcal{T}^{GRB}$ Conv-2D 1 1 64
Conv-2D 7 1 15
Conv-2D 3 2 64
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Res-Block 3 1 128
Transpose-2D 2 2 128
Conv-2D 3 1 3
FC - - 200
FC - - 100
FC - - 50
FC - - 1
: L3Fnet architecture summary. $K$ stands for Kernel Size, $S$ for Stride, Out for number of channels in Convolutional layers.[]{data-label="tab:my-table"}
\[Table:architecturevalues\]
**Histogram Module:** The typical illuminance of the scenes in our dataset varies from 0.1 lux$-$20 lux. This causes a lot of variation in the input data distribution. A simple workaround is to scale the input image with an appropriate amplification factor $\gamma$ which controls the brightness of the image. Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] requires a manual input for $\gamma$. Contrary to this, we automate the process by pre-processing the low-light LF with the proposed Histogram Module shown in Fig. \[fig:histogram\_module\].
To estimate the appropriate amplification factor $\gamma$, we make use of the RGB histogram of the input low-light LF image $\mathcal{L}^{low}$. Formally, let $h^c \in \mathbf{R}^L$ be the normalized $L$-bin histogram of the input image corresponding to the color channel $c \in \{R,G,B\}$. This histogram is then fed to $3$ fully connected layers $\mathcal{H}$ to compute the amplification factor $\gamma$. $\gamma$ is then used to appropriately scale the input low-light LF: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma &= \mathcal{H}\left(h^R \oplus h^G \oplus h^B\right) \\
\mathcal{L}^{norm} & = \gamma \times \mathcal{L}^{low},\end{aligned}$$ where $\oplus$ denotes concatenation. Scaling the input image with the amplification factor acts as an important pre-processing step. Without this pre-scaling step the restored LF would sometimes tend to be over or under-saturated for light levels of different gradations.
**Loss Function:** For the proposed solution we try to minimise the following loss function: $$\begin{aligned}
Loss = & ~\alpha_1 \sum_{k=1}^{K} || I^{out}(u_k,v_k) - I^{GT}(u_k,v_k)||_1 \nonumber \\
&~+~\alpha_2 \sum_{k=1}^{K} CX\left(I^{out}(u_k,v_k) , I^{GT}(u_k,v_k)\right) \nonumber \\
&~+~\lambda ||w||_1,
\label{eq:loss}\end{aligned}$$ where $CX(\cdot,\cdot)$ is the contextual loss [@contextualloss], $w$ are the weights of all the trainable parameters and $I^{GT}(u_k,v_k)$ is the ground-truth $(u_k,v_k)^{th}$ view of the LF. The first component in our loss function performs a dense matching (i.e., pixel-to-pixel) between the restored and the ground truth LF to recover the structure and color information. Since recovering the precise color information from a low-light signal is a hard problem, a small shift from actual hue information is expected, no matter how long the network is trained. So, in a bid to prevent our loss function from having large errors due to this mismatch, we chose the sum-of-absolute-deviation ($L1$ loss ) over other alternatives such as $L2$ loss to perform the dense pixel matching. But as our dataset has small misalignment, directly using the $L1$ loss would lead to blurred outputs. To prevent this we additionally used a low weighted contextual loss to handle this problem. Our ablation studies nicely demonstrate the importance of both components in our loss function.
Pseudo-LF: Extending L3Fnet to single-frame DSLR images
=======================================================
![Pseudo-LF: Extending the proposed L3Fnet to single- frame DSLR images. The figure shows the subsampling procedure to convert a DSLR image into a pseudo-LF. Pixels in the same color belong to the same pseudo-SAI.[]{data-label="fig:pseudoLFarchi"}](colorful_pseudiLF2.jpg){width="\linewidth"}
The proposed L3Fnet has been engineered for Light Fields and, consequently, so far has been delineated in the context of LF reconstruction. On contrary, we now describe the usage of L3Fnet for single-frame DSLR image reconstruction by introducing a new pipeline called *pseudo-L3Fnet* pipeline. This is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:pseudoLFarchi\].
The first step in the pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline is to convert the DSLR image into *pseudo-LF*. To do this, the high-resolution DSLR image is divided into blocks of $B \times B$ pixels. The $i^{th} $ pseudo SAI, where $i \in [1,\hdots, B^2]$, is then obtained by collecting together the $i^{th}$ pixel from each $B \times B$ pixels block. We use the term *pseudo* because the resulting pseudo-LF SAIs have no real disparity and only happen to be shifted subsampled versions of the input high-resolution DSLR image, with a maximum shift of $B$ pixels. The converted pseudo-LF, and not the original DSLR image, is then processed by the L3Fnet to obtain well-lit pseudo-LF. The resulting well-lit LF is finally converted back to well-lit DSLR image by reversing the sampling process described just now. Recently Gu [@gu2019self] and Shi [@shi2016real] have also used a similar pixel shuffling technique for better performance.
[cc]{}
[valign=t]{}
---------------- ------------------------------------ ------------------------- ---- -- --
LFBM5D [@bm5d] Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] Proposed L3Fnet GT
$13.61 / 0.32$ $18.44 / 0.59$ $\mathbf{19.41 / 0.68}$
$18.52 / 0.47$ $21.22 / 0.50$ $\mathbf{21.44 / 0.62}$
---------------- ------------------------------------ ------------------------- ---- -- --
The proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline may appear a workaround to fit L3Fnet in the DSLR image framework, but it has some inherent advantages. L3Fnet stacks all pseudo-SAIs channelwise. So with this arrangement, even a small convolution kernel of size $k \times k$ can simultaneously look at $k^2B^2$ pixels of the single-frame DSLR space, which increase the receptive field of pseudo-L3Fnet to a great extent. This helps in mitigating artificial shocks and staircasing effects [@non_local_averaging_2005; @1632203] in restored images. For example, consider $k=5$ and $B=10$. This corresponds to a kernel size of $5 \times 5$ with $10 \text{x} 10=100$ pseudo-SAIs stacked as channels (the DSLR image is decomposed into $10\text{x}10=100$ pseudo-SAIs). So, each filter in pseudo-L3Fnet has access to $5\text{x}5\text{x}10\text{x}10=2500$ pixels of the DSLR image, which is the reason behind the large receptive field of our network. To do similar operation in the DSLR space, we require a kernel size of $5B \times 5B$, which for $B=10$ corresponds to kernel size of $50\times 50$ with a stride of $10$ (shifting the kernel by one pixel in pseudo-SAI is equal to shifting by $B$ pixels on DSLR image). With such a large stride each convolution operation will down-sample the feature map by a factor of $10$, which will be difficult to up-sample at the decoder end. Anyway, our main objective here is to highlight that L3Fnet can be used for both LF and single-frame images.
[cc]{}
[valign=t]{}
------------------ ------------------------------------ ------------------------- ---- -- --
LFBM5D [@bm5d] Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] Proposed L3Fnet GT
$21.28 / 0.75$ $20.86 / 0.76$ $\mathbf{23.11 / 0.83}$
$21.64 / 0.67$ $22.22 / 0.64$ $\mathbf{24.80 / 0.71}$
------------------ ------------------------------------ ------------------------- ---- -- --
\[table:quant\_comp\]
Experimental Results
====================
Implementation details
----------------------
**Data Pre-processing:** Recent works on single-frame low-light image restoration [@burstphoto; @chen2018learning2seeindark] chose to work with raw format. This is because the raw data directly stores the signal measured by the sensor and so is immune to any loss of information in the pre/post-processing steps of the camera pipeline. However, there are few difficulties with directly working on raw LF format produced by Lytro Illum. First, the raw LF images necessarily require a significant amount of pre-processing [@dansereau2013decoding] involving tasks such as alignment rectification, hexagonal to orthogonal lattice conversion, de-vignetisation, and demosaicing [@dansereau2013decoding]. We wanted L3Fnet to focus on low-light restoration rather than learning these difficult geometric transformations for which already efficient techniques exist. So we chose to work with decoded JPEG images with the highest quality factor of 100. From the training time and resource utilization perspective also this is beneficial because the JPEG compression reduced the decoded image size form massive $400-500 MB$ to $40-50 MB$, which is still much larger than raw single-frame DSLR data.
Lytro Illum captures 225 views of a scene arranged in a $15 \times 15$ grid. As the peripheral views are affected by ghosting and vignetting effect [@zhang2019residual; @wang2018lfnetTIP], we choose to work with the central $8\times 8$ views. The L3Fnet is trained for $100k$ iterations. The number of SAIs sampled during training for Stage 2 (View Reconstruction Block) of the model is fixed at $K=12$. But, $12$ is only a small fraction of $64$ SAIs to be processed. This may give the impression that the model will not learn for all SAIs. The model nevertheless, runs for a large number of iterations, with $K=12$ randomly chosen views in each iteration. Hence all views are likely to be equally attended in $1200k$ total samplings that network performs during training. At test time all SAIs are chosen to restore the full angular resolution.
**Loss Function:** As $L1$ loss is more crucial than the contextual loss [@contextualloss], which is confirmed in our ablation studies, we set $\alpha_1=5$ and $\alpha_2=0.1$ for first $20k$ iterations. After this $\alpha_1$ is reduced to $1$. For contextual loss, we used the feature maps at the $9$, $13$ and $18^{th}$ layers of VGG19 [@vgg]. We tried to include initial layers also but they hardly added to the performance gain. On closer inspection loss due to initial layers of VGG was similar to $L1$ loss which is expected. Due to the small receptive field and a shallow channel depth of initial layers, they fail to bring about novel interactions amongst the input data and so yield no more information than direct $L1$ loss between the ground truth and reconstructed views. $\lambda$ is fixed to $10^{-6}$ fo all iterations.
**Data augmentation:** To augment the data in the training phase, we use horizontal flipping, vertical flipping, and color augmentation. Color augmentation is achieved by swapping the color channels in random order. The training is done on patches of size $180 \times 180$ and full spatial resolution is used at the time of testing. In each iteration, the patch location is chosen randomly within each sub-aperture view.
**Baseline:** We compare our L3Fnet with a LF denoising technique LFBM5D [@bm5d] and a single-frame low-light enhancement work by Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark]. As LFBM5D is a denoising technique, we pre-process it by scaling it suitably for better color restoration followed by denoising. LFBM5D additionally requires an estimate of the noise variance. For this, we took small texture-less patches from low-light LF central SAI to estimate the noise variance.
Chen for single-frame images chose to work with raw format and performed an end to end training. It is however not suited for raw Lytro LF images. For reconstruction using Chen method, it has to be independently operated over each SAI which is like a single-frame image. The SAIs are however not readily available in raw LFR format and needs to decoded using the Light Field Matlab Toolbox [@dansereau2013decoding]. Also for a fair comparison with the work of Chen , we do not use the proposed Histogram Module as this was lacking in their method. We instead train L3Fnet and Chen method independently on L3F-20, L3F-50 and L3F-100 dataset so that over/under-saturation problem does not occur. In a different experiment, we demonstrate the automatic adjusting capability of L3Fnet by training and testing on all three sets merged together. Since each view has a resolution of $625 \times 433$ and we use randomly selected patches of $180 \times 180$, along with data augmentation techniques we had sufficient training data. Further to emphasis that the performance gain of L3Fnet is due to its unique architecture engineered for LF, Chen method was trained on their original loss function consisting of just $L1$ loss as well as our loss function consisting of both $L1$ and contextual losses. Chen method gave better results with our loss function and data augmentation techniques and we have used this version in our comparisons.
Visual and Geometric Reconstruction Comparisons
-----------------------------------------------
\
We first test the proposed L3Fnet for the visual reconstruction of LF images on the L3F $-$ 20, 50, and 100 datasets. The corresponding results are shown in Fig. \[fig:vis\_epi\_comparison\_1\_100\] and Fig. \[fig:vis\_epi\_comparison\_1\_20\] and the average PSNR/SSIM values are mentioned in Table. \[table:quant\_comp\]. Regardless of the method, the first observation is that the reconstruction becomes increasingly difficult as the light level decreases. Secondly, the proposed L3Fnet does a better reconstruction in all three datasets but is highly appreciated for the extreme low-light case of L3F-100 dataset. Especially for the L3F-100 dataset, both LFBM5D [@bm5d] and Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark] struggle to regenerate the finer details.
The reconstructed image may look aesthetically pleasing but the LF geometry might be destroyed. To safeguard against this, Fig. \[fig:vis\_epi\_comparison\_1\_20\] and Fig. \[fig:vis\_epi\_comparison\_1\_100\] also show the epipolar comparisons. We additionally show the depth estimates for L3F-20 and L3F-100 dataset in Fig. \[fig:depth\]. The method proposed by Jeon [@depthFind] is used for depth estimation. We again observe the aforementioned observations. Depth reconstruction becomes more and more difficult for lower light and depth estimates for L3Fnet reconstructed images are closer to the ground truth.
For the L3F-20 dataset, depth estimates from Chen method are good but it misses the finer edges by coagulating them together giving a blurry finishing. For example the spokes of the bike’s tyre in scene I are clearly demarcated in L3Fnet’s depth estimates but not in Chen . Likewise, for scene II the sharpness of the board corners is much better preserved in our results. The same observations are better highlighted in L3F-100 results.
\[tab:gamma\_values\]
L3Fnet for LF captured in Wild
------------------------------
This section substantiates the importance of the istogram module by showing results on the L3F-wild dataset. These images were captured late in the night and so no ground truth exists for them. There was no way to obtain nice well-lit LF images for such scenes, either by changing the ISO or the exposure settings. Playing with these settings would brighten the image but with lots of unnatural artifacts.
Since ground truth is not available for these images it cannot be used for training L3Fnet. We instead re-train L3Fnet with L3F $-$ 20, 50, and 100 datasets merged together but pre-processed with the Histogram Module to estimate the desired amplification factor $\gamma$. The weights of the Histogram Module and L3Fnet were learnt together in a end-to-end fashion. We call this trained network as L3Fnet-$\gamma$. For ease in notation and brevity, we likewise refer L3Fnet trained on L3F $-$ 20, 50, and 100 datasets as L3Fnet-20, L3Fnet-50, and L3Fnet-100, respectively. We then tried to reconstruct the L3F-wild LF images. In Fig. \[fig:wild\], we show a night time scene captured using different ISO and exposure settings. We can easily notice the over/under saturation artifacts in LFs restored by L3Fnet-20, L3Fnet-50 and L3Fnet-100. The reason for these failures can be attributed to the fact that these networks are agnostic to image statistics and hence can not adapt to variations in illumination condition. But L3Fnet$\gamma$ avoids this problem to a large extent with the help of the Histogram Module. More results are shown in the supplementary material.
Ablation Study
--------------
![[]{data-label="fig:my_label"}](my_ablate_fig_10.png){width="1\linewidth"}
-- -------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
![Depth estimates from reconstructed LF with and without Stage-I of the L3Fnet model. Stage-I captures the LF geometry and hence it helps in producing better depth maps.[]{data-label="fig:depth_Ablation"}](ablation_depth_bikes_larger_patch_100.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Depth estimates from reconstructed LF with and without Stage-I of the L3Fnet model. Stage-I captures the LF geometry and hence it helps in producing better depth maps.[]{data-label="fig:depth_Ablation"}](ablation_gt_bikes.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"}
Only Stage-I Stage-I + Stage-II GT
(Net-III) (L3Fnet)
-- -------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
In this section, we perform an ablation study to further examine the contributions of each module in L3Fnet. To do this, we trained $3$ variants of the proposed L3Fnet on the L3F-100 dataset called Net-I, II, and III. The details of these networks can be found in Table \[table:new\_ablation\]. Net-I, which does not include the contextual loss, was unable to handle small misalignment present in the dataset and produced slightly blurry results. This is expected because the $L1$ loss is known to produce blurry results for non-aligned data. In the next experiment, Net-II does not include the $L1$ loss but only the contextual loss. While Net-I showed a small dip in performance due to blurriness, Net-II performed very poorly. The reason is without L1 loss, the network could not learn the correct colors, and the results showed an enormous amount of color distortion. We, therefore, first tried to restore the color and basic geometry by giving much higher importance to $L1$ loss in the first $20k$ iterations and subsequently reduce it to let contextual loss finetune the result. With this understanding, it is evident that both components are required in the loss function.
While Net-I and II compared the importance of different components in our loss function, Net-III highlights the importance of Stage-I, i.e., the the Global Representation Block (GRB), in the L3Fnet model. Without Stage-I, L3Fnet was not able to preserve the epipolar constraints of LF. Fig. \[fig:depth\_Ablation\] shows that the depth map obtained from the LF restored by Net-III is inferior to that obtained from the LF restored by L3Fnet which contains both stages.
Pseudo-LF for single-frame image reconstruction
-----------------------------------------------
Similar to the L3F-100 dataset, we capture $50$ extreme low-light DSLR images of which $14$ were reserved for testing. We process JPEG images only as the raw format did not give much improvement but instead had much slower convergence because of additional learning of the Bayer demosaicing pattern. We used all the data augmentation techniques mentioned for L3Fnet with patch-wise training.
[cc]{}
[valign=t]{}
------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
**Ground Truth** **Baseline** **Chen [@chen2018learning2seeindark]** **Pseudo-L3Fnet**
![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_5_PRED_down-1.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_5_PRED_CVPR_down-1.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_5_PRED2_LF10_down-1.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"}
BRISQUE, NIQE $47.68, 4.97$ $44.71, 5.10$ $\mathbf{38.35}, \mathbf{4.84}$
PSNR / SSIM $17.75/\mathbf{0.92}$ $20.48/0.85$ $\mathbf{20.62}/0.83$
![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_3_PRED.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_3_PRED_CVPR.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_3_PRED2_LF10.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"}
$45.59, 5.07$ $48.84, 5.11$ $\mathbf{41.24}, \mathbf{3.92}$
$17.92/0.42$ $\mathbf{19.03}/0.47$ $18.03/\mathbf{0.60}$
![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_2_PRED.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_2_PRED_CVPR.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_2_PRED2_LF10.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"}
$45.65, 4.99$ $47.85, 5.26$ $\mathbf{36.47}, \mathbf{4.36}$
$\mathbf{12.76}/0.56$ $12.16/0.58$ $12.45/\mathbf{0.64}$
![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_4_PRED.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_4_PRED_CVPR.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"} ![Single-frame low-light DSLR restoration using the proposed pseudo-L3Fnet pipeline. BRISQUE and NIQE are recent perceptual metrics for single-frame DSLR images. Lower are these metrics, better is the perception. Check supplementary for more results.[]{data-label="fig:pseudil3fnetResults"}](dslrvslf_4_PRED2_LF10.jpg "fig:"){width="0.24\linewidth"}
$46.32, 5.22$ $46.40, 5.26$ $\mathbf{40.03}, \mathbf{3.53}$
$19.68/0.36$ $19.63/0.43$ $\mathbf{20.77}/\mathbf{0.57}$
------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
Some of the reconstruction results are shown in Fig. \[fig:pseudil3fnetResults\]. The baseline and the method by Chen do good at denoising but very poorly on preserving the spatial smoothness, which is visible by the presence of color blobs spread all over the image. On the contrary, pseudo-L3Fnet obtains much gradual transitions mitigating the color blobs problem. The average PSNR(dB)/SSIM values on the test dataset of $14$ images for Chen is $17.21/0.61$, for baseline is $17.08/0.56$ and for the proposed Pseudo-LF is $19.04/0.62$. We also quantified the quality of the restored test images using recent non-reference perceptual metrics such as NIQE [@niqe] and BRISQUE [@brisque]. NIQE and BRISQUE better correlate with human perception than PSNR and SSIM. A lower value for these metrics are considered better. The average NIQE values for Chen is $5.24$, for baseline is $5.01$ and $4.29$ for pseudo-LF. The average BRISQUE values for Chen is $48.30$, for baseline is $46.48$ and $41.45$ for the proposed pseudo-LF. For exhaustive comparison, please refer to the supplementary material.
Conclusion and Discussion
=========================
The primary objective of this work was to enhance LF captured in low-light conditions. We showed that the existing single-frame low-light enhancements methods find it hard to preserve the LF geometry because they reconstruct each LF view independently. To this end, we proposed a low-light L3F dataset and a two-stage L3Fnet architecture. The effectiveness of L3Fnet was shown on LFs for varying levels of low-light by conducting experiments on L3F-20, L3F-50 and L3F-100 datasets. Additionally, we proposed the Histogram Module to automatically tune the amplification factor $\gamma$. With this pre-processing module, L3Fnet could now automatically adapt to different light levels, which was substantiated by showing results on the L3F-wild dataset.
We additionally showed that while single-frame methods are not conceptually suited for LF related tasks, our L3Fnet can be used for decent enhancement of single-frame low-light images also. This was achieved by converting the DSLR images into pseudo-LF and vice-versa. Of course, L3Fnet is better optimized for LF and may be modified in the future to equally suit both LF and DSLR images simultaneously.
As a future work, another interesting direction would be to explore which camera is more suited for low-light reconstruction: a single-frame DSLR camera or a Light Field camera? While DSLR cameras have high resolution, LF cameras may be helpful because of complementary information present in various LF views. Besides, depth estimation is a clear advantage for LF cameras.
[^1]: M. Lamba, K. Kumar and K. Mitra are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, India. (e-mail: [email protected], ee18d004@smail .iitm.ac.in, [email protected])
[^2]: \*M. Lamba and K. Kumar have contributed equally to the work
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- Michael Robinson
bibliography:
- 'multimodel\_bib.bib'
title: 'Sheaf and duality methods for analyzing multi-model systems'
---
Introduction
============
Complex predictive models are notoriously hard to construct and to study. Sheaf theory provides a toolbox for constructing predictive models described by systems of equations. Sheaves are mathematical objects that combine bits of local information into a consistent whole. The power of this approach is that complex models can be assembled from smaller, easier-to-construct models. The models discussed in this chapter span the study of continuous dynamical systems, partial differential equations, probabilistic graphical models, and discrete approximations of these models. Shadows of the sheaf theoretic perspective are apparent in a variety of disciplines, for instance in the construction of volume meshers (which construct pullbacks and pushforwards of sheaves of functions), finite element solvers (which construct the space of global sections of a sheaf), and loopy belief propagation (which iteratively determines individual global sections).
Multi-model systems can be constructed from diagrams of individual models. It is therefore helpful to abstract this idea into a convenient formalism, in which the basic features are captured. There is an interplay between the models themselves and their connections to one another. This dichotomy should be reflected in the abstract as well. Without referring to the models directly – only that a model consists of spaces and maps between them – the most readily apparent feature of a multi-model system is its topology. We propose that this topology should be modeled first, and then the spaces and maps of the individual models be specified in accordance with the topology. Axiomatically, this construction leads to *sheaves*. Our overall modeling approach consists of specifying sheaves *of* a certain type *on* a certain kind of topological space. We could aim for complete generality, though this leads to considerable computational and analytic difficulties. We will build our theory on *partial orders* (or *posets*, for short); these lend themselves to a balance between theoretical expressiveness and computational facility. We will specify a multi-model system as a sheaf of smooth, finite-dimensional manifolds on a poset. A sheaf model is a natural way to express the topological relationship among state variables and the equations relating them. Solver algorithms for the set of equations enforce consistency constraints among the state variables, which is precisely the process of computing the space of global sections of a sheaf.
Encoding models as sheaves allows one to realize two rather different capabilities:
1. Combining vastly different dynamical models into a multi-model system in a systematic way, and
2. Analyzing homological invariants to study locally- and globally-consistent states of the system.
Both of these leverage the topological structure already inherent in and among the models. For instance:
1. The base topological space is often essentially a material volume, envisioned abstractly. It can be partitioned into a cellular space, such as finite element meshers already do. All modern solid modelers store an explicit, topological model of the model volume [@Hoffmann_1989 Chap. 2]. In building sheaves, the topology can be refined (cells subdivided, for instance) in order to construct discretizations. Some solid modeling/meshing APIs can do this natively [@Li_2005 Sec. 3].
2. The local data represented in a sheaf are the state variables in the interior of each mesher cell, exactly as the finite element solver represents them.
3. The equations are encapsulated in (not necessarily linear) maps deriving boundary values from the parameters known about the interiors of each cell.
Modeling systems with diagrams {#sec:diagram}
==============================
Dynamical models usually involve a collection of state variables and equations that determine their admissible values. For instance, the famous Lorenz system specifies the values of three variables – each of which is a function of time – constrained by three equations $$\label{eq:lorenz}
\begin{cases}
\frac{dx}{dt} = a(y-x),\\
\frac{dy}{dt} = x(b-z) - y,\\
\frac{dz}{dt} = xy - cz,\\
\end{cases}$$ where $a,b,c$ are constants. The values of $x$ and $y$ determine the future values of $x$, but all three are implicated in determining $y$ and $z$. The solutions exhibit intricate behavior because the values of $z$ constrain the values of $x$ even though there is not a direct causal relationship.
![Dependency relations among state variables in the Lorenz system (left), and among variables and their derivatives (right)[]{data-label="fig:lorenz1"}](lorenz1){width="3in"}
One way to gain an understanding of the behavior of solutions to is to build a visual representation of the causal relationships between the state variables. The left frame of Figure \[fig:lorenz1\] shows one such representation, where an arrow from one variable $x \to y$ to another indicates that $x$ partially determines future values of $y$.
This representation isn’t entirely true to the way the equations in are written, because the equations also involve derivatives of the state variables. If we include derivatives of state variables as new state variables in their own right, then we obtain a rather larger diagram, such as the one in the right frame of Figure \[fig:lorenz2\]. This new diagram is a bit more instructive, in that it is the derivatives that are determined by the values of the state variables. However, it still leaves unstated the relationship between the derivative of a state variable and the state variable itself. For instance, the derivative $dx/dt$ is determined independently both by the values of $x$ (alone) and by the values of $x$ and $y$ through the first equation of . It would be useful to encode all of this information into the diagram.
The way to perform this encoding is to reinterpret the meaning of the arrows in the dependency graphs. Instead of an arrow indicating that the variable on the head is determined in part by the variable on the tail, it is better to demand that arrows be actual functional relations. This stronger requirement is not satisfied by either of the diagrams in Figure \[fig:lorenz1\]. The problem is that in , the formula for $dx/dt$ depends *jointly* on the variables $x$ and $y$. Therefore, the functional dependence between $x$, $y$, and $dx/dt$ needs to be from *pairs* of values $(x,y)$. When we perform this transformation to the dependency diagram, we obtain the diagrams in Figure \[fig:lorenz2\].
![Functional dependencies among state variables and their derivatives in the Lorenz system, according to variable names (left) and according to the spaces of values involved (right) []{data-label="fig:lorenz2"}](lorenz2){width="3in"}
There are a number of pleasing features about a functional dependency diagram like the ones in Figure \[fig:lorenz2\]. The most obvious – and most trivial – is that the arrows (on the right frame) are actual functions, and could be labeled as such. The arrows out of the spaces corresponding to tuples of variables are projections, while the others are determined by one of the equations and by the definition of the derivative. Everything about is captured in the diagram on the right, in that the equations can be recovered from the diagram. The in-degree of a variable in Figure \[fig:lorenz2\] specifies the number of functional equations that constrain its value. This means that the independent variables listed in Figure \[fig:lorenz2\] are those with no arrows pointing into them. It is easy to see that these are the pairs $(x,y)$ and the triples $(x,y,z)$. This does *not* mean that there are no constraints on these independent variables, just that there are no functional dependencies from the outset. Constraints on these independent variables arise by demanding that each listed variable in the diagram take exactly one value. Then if a variable is determined by two functional equations, the independent variables in those two equations must be chosen compatibly. Notice that there are some values that are completely dependent ($dx/dt$, $dy/dt$, and $dz/dt$), in that they have no arrows going out of them, while there are also intermediate variables ($x$, $y$, and $z$), that have arrows going in and out.
The diagram in the left frame of Figure \[fig:lorenz2\] is that of a partially ordered set. The partial order ranks the variables appearing in according to their “independence” of one another. The independent variables are the minimal elements of the partial order, while the completely dependent ones are the maximal elements. Therefore, the arrows in the diagram in the Figure point from lower variables to higher ones in the partial order.
The diagram on the right frame of Figure \[fig:lorenz2\] has the same structure as the partial order, but is labeled a bit differently. This kind of diagram is that of a *sheaf*, which is a mathematical way to represent local consistency relationships. Although the study of sheaves over general topological spaces can be quite technical, sheaves over partially ordered sets are much more tractable. Sheaves have a number of useful invariants that provide descriptive power for systems of equations, and often the mere act of encoding a system as a sheaf is illuminating. For instance, writing differential equations along a stratified manifold requires delicate management of boundary conditions of various sorts. The sheaf encoding described in this chapter makes specifying the correct kind of boundary conditions almost effortless. This chapter discusses a number of techniques for performing sheaf encodings of systems, explains some of the relationships among these encodings, and describes some of the analytical techniques that can be used on sheaf-encoded models.
Mathematical constructions of sheaves
=====================================
Since topological spaces in their full generality tend to admit rather pathological properties that are not reflected in practical models, it is wise to apply constraints. There are several other possibilities for the topological space, and they vary in expressiveness. In the author’s experience, locally finite topological spaces, cell complexes, abstract simplicial complexes, and partial orders are the most useful for problems involving models of systems. Of these, locally finite topological spaces are the most general, but nearly every useful computational example can be expressed more compactly with partial orders. For instance, graphs and abstract simplicial complexes are both special cases of *hypergraphs*, which are merely subsets of the power set of some set $V$. A hypergraph $H$ in which each element is a finite subset of $V$ can be thought of as locally finite partial order with the partial order coming from inclusion: for $A,B \in H$, $A \le B$ precisely when $A \subseteq B$.
We first build a rather specialized description of sheaves on partial orders, since they are the primary mathematical tool in this chapter. We then generalize to sheaves on general topological spaces, since they describe the spaces of functions we will discretize in later sections.
Sheaves on partial orders
-------------------------
We will mostly deal with locally finite posets, since these avoid computational difficulties.
A *partial order* on a set $P$ is a relation $\le$ on that set that is
1. Reflexive: $x \le x$ for all $x \in P$,
2. Antisymmetric: if $x \le y$ and $y \le x$, then $x = y$, and
3. Transitive: if $x \le y$ and $y \le z$ then $x \le z$.
We call the pair $(P,\le)$ a *partially ordered set* or a *poset*. When the relation is clear from context, we shall usually write $P=(P,\le)$. A poset is *locally finite* if for every pair $x,y \in P$, the set $\{z \in P : x \le z \le y\}$ is finite.
Given a partially ordered set $P=(P,\le)$, there is also the *dual partial order* $\le^{op}$ on $P$, for which $x \le^{op} y$ if and only if $y \le x$. The partially ordered set $P^{op}=(P,\le^{op})$ is called the *dual poset to $P$*.
![A poset $P$, its Alexandroff topology (Definition \[df:alexandroff\]), the dual poset $P^{op}$, and sheaves over each (Definition \[df:sheaf\_poset\]). The gluing axiom appears in Definition \[df:sheaf\].[]{data-label="fig:lattice_sheaves"}](lattice_sheaves){width="4in"}
Given a subset $A \subseteq P$ of a poset, the *infimum of $A$* is the unique greatest element in $P$ less than or equal to each element of $A$ if such an element exists. We will write $\bigwedge A$ for the infimum of $A$ if it exists. Similarly, the *supremum of $A$*, written $\bigvee A$ is the unique least element in $P$ greater than or equal to each element of $A$, if such an element exists. If $A=\{A_1,A_2\}$, we usually write $\bigwedge A = A_1 \wedge A_2$ and $\bigvee A = A_1 \vee A_2$.
Figure \[fig:lattice\_sheaves\] shows a poset $P$ with four elements at left and its dual poset $P^{op}$ at center. The diagram is to be read that $d \le a \le c$ in $P$. In $P$, the infimum of $A=\{a,b\}$ is $d$, while the supremum is $c$.
The definition of a *sheaf* is rather crisply stated in terms of the diagram of a poset, where the vertices represent elements and arrows point from lesser elements to greater ones. Merely replace each vertex by a set or a space and each arrow by a function so that the composition of functions in the diagram is path independent. If all of the functions’ inputs are at the tails of each arrow, then the diagram is that of a *sheaf on the Alexandroff topology* for that poset. (We generalize to arbitrary topologies in Section \[sec:topo\_sheaves\].) If all of the functions’ inputs are at the heads of each arrow, then the diagram defines a sheaf over the dual poset. When discussing a particular poset, we will emphasize this difference by setting sheaves over that poset in script type, and by setting sheaves over the dual poset in fraktur type.
\[df:sheaf\_poset\] Suppose that $P=(P,\le)$ is a poset. A *sheaf $\shf{S}$ of sets on $P$ with the Alexandroff topology* (briefly, a *sheaf $\shf{S}$ on $P$*) consists of the following specification:
1. For each $p \in P$, a set $\shf{S}(p)$, called the *stalk at* $p$,
2. For each pair $p \le q \in P$, there is a function $\shf{S}(p \le q):\shf{S}(p)\to\shf{S}(q)$, called a *restriction function* (or just a *restriction*), such that
3. For each triple $p \le q \le r \in P$, $\shf{S}(p \le r) = \shf{S}(q \le r) \circ \shf{S}(p \le q)$.
When the stalks themselves have structure (they are vector spaces or topological spaces, for instance) one obtains a sheaf *of* that type of object when the restrictions or extensions preserve that structure. For example, a *sheaf of vector spaces* has linear functions for each restriction, while a *sheaf of topological spaces* has continuous functions for each restriction.
Similarly, a *sheaf $\dshf{C}$ of sets on the dual poset $P^{op}$ with the Alexandroff topology* (briefly, a *dual sheaf $\dshf{C}$ on $P$*) consists of the same kind of thing, just backwards. Namely,
1. For each $p \in P$, a set $\dshf{D}(p)$, called the *stalk at* $p$,
2. For each pair $p \le q \in P$, there is a function $\dshf{D}(p \le q):\dshf{D}(q)\to\dshf{D}(p)$, called an *extension function* (or just an *extension*), such that
3. For each triple $p \le q \le r \in P$, $\dshf{D}(p \le r) = \dshf{D}(p \le q) \circ \dshf{D}(q \le r)$.
If either of the conditions (3) above are not satisfied, we call the construction a *diagram* instead of a sheaf.
\[ex:simple\_sheaves\] In Figure \[fig:lattice\_sheaves\], choosing $$\shf{S}(a) = \mathbb{R},\;\shf{S}(b) = \mathbb{R},\; \shf{S}(c) = \mathbb{R},\; \shf{S}(d) = \mathbb{R},$$ with $$\left(\shf{S}(d \le a)\right)(x) = 2x,\;\left(\shf{S}(d \le b)\right)(x) = x,\;\left(\shf{S}(a \le c)\right)(x) = x,\;\left(\shf{S}(b \le c)\right)(x) = 2x,$$ results in a sheaf. On the other hand, $$\left(\shf{S}(d \le a)\right)(x) = x,\;\left(\shf{S}(d \le b)\right)(x) = x,\;\left(\shf{S}(a \le c)\right)(x) = x,\;\left(\shf{S}(b \le c)\right)(x) = -x,$$ is merely a diagram, because the composition of the maps on the left ($d \to a \to c$) is the identity map, while the other composition ($d \to b \to c$) is not.
Encoding a multi-model system as a diagram is a useful exercise, since consistencies and inconsistencies between the component models are thereby formalized. Those elements of the stalks that are mutually consistent across the entire system, formalized as a sheaf, are called *sections*. Sections are what the combined multi-model system produces as output, and amount to the simultaneous solution of a number of equations (see Section \[sec:simultaneous\]).
\[df:section\] A *global section* of a sheaf $\shf{S}$ on a poset $P$ is an element $s$ of the direct product[^1] $\prod_{x \in P}\shf{S}(x)$ such that for all $x \le y \in P$ then $\shf{S}(x \le y)\left(s(x)\right) = s(y)$. A *local section* is defined similarly, but is defined only on a subset $Q \subseteq P$.
Dually, a *global section* of a sheaf $\dshf{C}$ on the dual poset $P^{op}$ is an element $c$ of the direct product such that $\prod_{x \in P}\dshf{C}(x)$ such that for all $x \le y \in P$ then $c(x) = \dshf{C}(x \le y)\left(c(y)\right)$. A *local section* of such a sheaf is defined only on a subset $Q \subseteq P$.
Continuing with the sheaf $\shf{S}$ from Example \[ex:simple\_sheaves\], the space of global sections is given by $\{(2x,x,2x,x) \in \shf{S}(a) \times \shf{S}(b) \times\shf{S}(c) \times \shf{S}(d) \cong \mathbb{R}^4\},$ which is itself isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}$. On the other hand, the space of local sections over $\{a,b\}$ is just $\shf{S}(a) \times \shf{S}(b) \cong \mathbb{R}^2$ since there are no further constraints.
The structure of a particular mathematical object is better understood in context, by looking at structure-preserving transformations between them. The *morphisms* between sheaves provide this context. Most authors tend to focus on the class of morphisms between sheaves over the same space, though for our purposes is quite essential to study sheaf morphisms involving different spaces.
([@TSPBook] or [@Bredon Sec. I.4]) \[df:morphism\] Suppose that $\shf{R}$ is a sheaf on a poset $Y$ and that $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf on $X$. A *sheaf morphism* $m: \shf{R}\to \shf{S}$ along an order preserving map $f: X \to Y$ (careful: $m$ and $f$ *go in opposite directions!*) consists of a set of functions $m_x: \shf{R}(f(x)) \to \shf{S}(x)$ for each $x \in X$ such that the following diagram commutes $$\xymatrix{
\shf{R}(f(y)) \ar[r]^{m_y} &\shf{S}(y)\\
\shf{R}(f(x)) \ar[r]_{m_x} \ar[u]^{\shf{R}(f(x) \le f(y))}&\shf{S}(x) \ar[u]_{\shf{S}(x \le y)}\\
}$$ for each $x \le y$. We usually call the functions $m_x$ the *components* of the sheaf morphism. A sheaf morphism is said to be *injective* (or *surjective*) if each component is injective (or surjective).
\[prop:morphism\] A sheaf morphism $m:\shf{R}\to\shf{S}$ along an order preserving $f:X \to Y$ induces a function taking global sections of $\shf{R}$ (a sheaf over $Y$) to global sections of $\shf{S}$ (a sheaf over $X$).
Suppose $r$ is a section of $\shf{R}$. If $x\in X$, then let $s(x) = m_x(r(f(x)))$. Then, $s$ is a section of $\shf{S}$ because whenever $x \le y \in X$, $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\shf{S}(x \le y)\right)s(x) &=& \left(\shf{S}(x \le y)\right) m_{x}(r(f(x)))\\
&=& \left(\shf{S}(x \le y) \circ m_{x}\right)(r(f(x)))\\
&=& \left(m_y \circ \shf{R}(f(x) \le f(y)) \right)(r(f(x)))\\
&=& m_y (r(f(y)))\\
&=&s(y)\end{aligned}$$ by the definition of a sheaf morphism.
Generalizing a bit further, it is also useful to be able to map the stalks of a dual sheaf into the stalks of a sheaf – providing a notion of a *hybrid morphism* from dual sheaves into sheaves. This plays an important role in understanding discretizations.
\[df:hybridmorphism\] Suppose that $\dshf{D}$ is a dual sheaf on a poset $Y$ and that $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf on $X$. A *hybrid morphism* $m: \dshf{D}\to \shf{S}$ along an order preserving map $f: X \to Y$ consists of a set of functions $m_x: \dshf{D}(f(x)) \to \shf{S}(x)$ for each $x \in X$ such that the following diagram commutes $$\xymatrix{
\dshf{D}(f(y)) \ar[r]^{m_y} \ar[d]_{\dshf{D}(f(x) \le f(y))} &\shf{S}(y)\\
\dshf{D}(f(x)) \ar[r]_{m_x} &\shf{S}(x) \ar[u]_{\shf{S}(x \le y)}\\
}$$ for each $x \le y$. We usually call the functions $m_x$ the *components* of the hybrid morphism. A hybrid morphism is said to be *injective* (or *surjective*) if each component is injective (or surjective).
Like sheaf morphisms, hybrid morphisms transform local (or global) sections of a dual sheaf to local (or global) sections of a sheaf.
Sheaves on topological spaces {#sec:topo_sheaves}
-----------------------------
This section explains the appropriate generalization of sheaves on posets with the Alexandroff topology to sheaves over arbitrary topological spaces. Topological spaces and partial orders are closely related, because every topology defines a unique partial order.
A *topology* on a set $X$ consists of a collection $\col{T}$ of subsets of $X$ that satisfy the following four axioms
1. $\emptyset \in \col{T}$,
2. $X \in \col{T}$,
3. If $U, V \in \col{T}$, then $U \cap V \in \col{T}$, and
4. If $\col{U} \subseteq \col{T}$, then $\cup \col{U} = \{x\in X: x \in U \text{ for some }U\in\col{U}\} \in \col{T}$.
We will call $(X,\col{T})$ a *topological space*.
\[df:open\] Every topological space $X=(X,\col{T})$ defines a poset ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T})=(\col{T},\subseteq)$ on the open sets, partially ordered by the subset relation. When the topology $\col{T}$ is clear from context, we shall usually write ${\bf Open}(X)={\bf Open}(X,\col{T})$.
The axioms for a topology ensure that in ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T})$, infima of finite sets exist, namely via $U_1 \wedge U_2 = U_1 \cap U_2$, and that suprema of any collection $\col{U}$ of open sets exists via $\bigvee \col{U} = \bigcup \col{U}$. We note that a poset in which all infima and suprema exist for finite collections is usually called a *lattice*, so every topological space defines a lattice of open sets.
Although the Definitions above suggest that we can merely focus on posets, avoiding mention of topological spaces, this is only partially true. If we take a given poset as ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T})$, this alone does not completely define a topological space.
\[ex:same\_poset\] Consider the set $X=\{a,b,c\}$ with two topologies, $$\col{T}_1 = \{\{a,b,c\}, \{a,b\},\{c\},\emptyset\}$$ and $$\col{T}_2=\{\{a,b,c\},\{a\},\{c\},\emptyset\}.$$ Both of these topologies have the same poset of open sets, namely ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T}_1)$ at left below and ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T}_2)$ at right $$\xymatrix{
&\emptyset\ar[dl]\ar[dr]& & &\emptyset\ar[dl]\ar[dr]&\\
\{a,b\}\ar[dr]&&\{c\}\ar[dl] & \{a\}\ar[dr] &&\{c\}\ar[dl]\\
&\{a,b,c\}& & &\{a,b,c\}\\
}$$ Yet $(X,\col{T}_1)$ and $(X,\col{T}_2)$ are quite different as topological spaces. Observe that both $\{a,b\} \vee \{c\} = \{a,b,c\}$ in ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T}_1)$ and $\{a\} \vee \{c\} = \{a,b,c\}$ in ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T}_2)$. However, only in $\col{T}_1$ is the union of these two elements $\{a,b\} \cup \{c\} = \{a,b,c\}$.
One particularly important topology that can be built from a partial order is the *Alexandroff* topology.
[@Alexandroff_1937] \[df:alexandroff\] In a poset $(P,\le)$, the collection of sets of the form $$\label{eq:upset}
U_x = \{y \in P : x \le y\}$$ for each $x \in P$ forms a base for a topology, called the *Alexandroff* topology, shown in Figure \[fig:lattice\_sheaves\].
\[prop:alexandroffness\] Every intersection of open sets in the Alexandroff topology on a poset $P$ is open.
Suppose that $\col{U}$ is a collection of open sets in the Alexandroff topology and that $x \in \cap \col{U}$. This means that $x$ is in every open set of $\col{U}$. Now each of these open sets contains at least $U_x$, since these are the sets of the base. Thus $U_x \subseteq \cap \col{U}$, which therefore shows that $\cap \col{U}$ is a neighborhood of each of its points.
In the Alexandroff topology for a poset, the usual topological notions of closures, interiors, and frontiers[^2] have straightforward interpretations in terms of the poset itself. Additionally, because of Proposition \[prop:alexandroffness\], the concept of a *star* is also available.
If $A \subseteq X$ is a subset of a topological space, the *star* of $A$ is the smallest open set containing $A$. In general, stars need not exist, but in the Alexandroff topology for a poset there is a star of every subset.
It suffices to observe that the star over $A$ is the intersection of the collection of all open sets containing $A$.
It is very easy to see that order preserving maps $P\to Q$ between two posets are continuous when both $P$ and $Q$ are given the Alexandroff topology.
Although the Alexandroff topology on $P$ defines a partial order on its open sets, this is both typically larger than $P$ and dual to $P$ in a particular way. Consider the small example shown at left in Figure \[fig:lattice\_sheaves\]. The poset $P$ contains four elements, and is a lattice. The Alexandroff topology consists of five open sets – it includes the empty set – each of which happens to be the star over each original element of $P$. As the Figure shows, the diagram of the Alexandroff topology contains the dual poset, namely $P^{op}$.
\[df:presheaf\] Suppose $(X,\col{T})$ is a topology. A *presheaf $\shf{S}$ of sets on $(X,\col{T})$* consists of the following specification:
1. For each open set $U \in \col{T}$, a set $\shf{S}(U)$, called the *stalk at* $U$,
2. For each pair of open sets $U \subseteq V$, there is a function $\shf{S}(U \subseteq V):\shf{S}(V)\to\shf{S}(U)$, called a *restriction function* (or just a *restriction*), such that
3. For each triple $U \subseteq V \subseteq W$ of open sets, $\shf{S}(U \subseteq W) = \shf{S}(U \le V) \circ \shf{S}(V \le W)$.
When the stalks themselves have structure (they are vector spaces or topological spaces, for instance) one obtains a presheaf *of* that type of object when the restrictions or extensions preserve that structure. For example, a *presheaf of vector spaces* has linear functions for each restriction, while a *presheaf of topological spaces* has continuous functions for each restriction.
A sheaf $\shf{S}$ on a poset $P$ with the Alexandroff topology given by Definition \[df:sheaf\_poset\] is almost a presheaf on $(P,\col{A})$, where $\col{A}$ is the Alexandroff topology on $P$. The only issue is that the stalks on unions of stars are not defined yet, but these will be defined in Proposition \[prop:poset\_sheaves\].
As Definition \[df:presheaf\] makes clear, presheaves on a topological space are only sensitive to the poset of open sets, and *not* to the points in those open sets. Therefore, we can use Definition \[df:section\] to define *sections* of a presheaf on a topological space.
Because of the situation in Example \[ex:same\_poset\], the set of global sections of a presheaf on the whole topological space may be quite different from the set of local sections over all open subsets. It is for this reason that when studying presheaves over topological spaces, an additional *gluing axiom* is included to remove this distinction.
\[df:sheaf\] Let $\shf{P}$ be a presheaf on the topological space $(X,\col{T})$. We call $\shf{P}$ a *sheaf on $(X,\col{T})$* if for every open set $U \in \col{T}$ and every collection of open sets $\col{U}\subseteq \col{T}$ with $U = \cup \col{U}$, then $\shf{P}(U)$ is isomorphic to the space of sections over the set of elements $\col{U}$.
Recall Example \[ex:same\_poset\], in which two topologies were considered on the set $X=\{a,b,c\}$, and consider the diagram $$\xymatrix{
&\{0\}&\\
\mathbb{R}\ar[ur]&&\mathbb{R}\ar[ul]\\
&\mathbb{R}\ar[ul]^{\id}\ar[ur]^{\id}&\\
}$$ where $\id$ is the identity function. This diagram defines a presheaf for both $(X,\col{T}_1)$ and $(X,\col{T}_2)$, but only a sheaf on $(X,\col{T}_2)$. Specifically, since $\{\{a,b\},\{c\}\}$ is a cover for $\{a,b,c\}$ in $\col{T}_1$, the stalk on $\{a,b,c\}$ must be the global sections on $\{\{a,b\},\{c\}\}$, which is $\mathbb{R}^2$, yet the stalk there is $\mathbb{R}$. However, the analogous structure in $\col{T}_2$ is $\{\{a\},\{c\}\}$, which is not a cover for $\{a,b,c\}$, so the gluing axiom does not apply.
![Some stalks in the sheaf of continuous functions $\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ (left) and the dual sheaf of compactly supported functions $\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ (right)[]{data-label="fig:contfunctions"}](contfunctions){width="3.5in"}
\[eg:contfunctions1\] Let $(X,\col{T})$ and $(Y,\col{S})$ be topological spaces. The space $C(X,Y)$ of continuous functions $X\to Y$ has the structure of a sheaf $\shf{C}(X,Y)$ on $(X,\col{T})$. As the left frame of Figure \[fig:contfunctions\] shows, the stalk over $U \in \col{T}$ is $C(U,Y)$ and if $U \le V$, then restricting the domain induces a restriction function $C(U,Y)\to C(V,Y)$. The gluing axiom expresses the well-known fact that whenever two continuous functions with overlapping domains are equal on the overlap, then they extend to a common continuous function over the union.
If $(P,\le)$ is a poset with the Alexandroff topology, the distinction between sheaves and presheaves vanishes.
\[prop:poset\_sheaves\] Let $\shf{R}$ be a sheaf on a poset $(P,\le)$ with nonempty stalks (Definition \[df:sheaf\_poset\]). There is a sheaf (Definition \[df:sheaf\]) $\shf{R}'$ on $(P,\col{A})$ where $\col{A}$ is the Alexandroff topology given by
1. $\shf{R}'(U_x) = \shf{R}(x)$ for each $x\in P$,
2. $\shf{R}'(U_y \subseteq U_x) = \shf{R}(x \le y) : \shf{R}(x) \to \shf{R}(y)$ for each pair of elements $x \le y$ in $P$,
3. $\shf{R}'(\bigcup_{i\in I} U_{x_i})$ is the space of sections of $\shf{R}$ over $\{x_i\}_{i\in I}$ for any collection of elements $\{x_i\}_{i\in I}$ in $P$, and
4. restrictions $\shf{R}'(U_{x_i} \subseteq \bigcup_{i\in I} U_{x_i})$ are given by projection maps.
Proposition \[prop:poset\_sheaves\] justifies our terminology “sheaf on a poset with the Alexandroff topology.” Throughout this chapter, if $(P,\le)$ is a poset, we will assume it has the Alexandroff topology unless explicitly noted. We will therefore not distinguish between *presheaves* and *sheaves* on $P$ unless a different topology is explicitly specified. For dual sheaves, we will *always* use the Alexandroff topology for the dual poset. Care is needed, if the poset $P$ is ${\bf Open}(X,\col{T})^{op}$ for some topology $\col{T}$, because then the Alexandroff topology on $P$ will generally be different from $\col{T}$!
First, observe that $\shf{R}'$ is a presheaf on $(P,\col{A})$ by construction. Conditions (3) and (4) result in $\shf{R}'$ satisfying the gluing axiom on unions of stars. The gluing axiom leaves the stalks over maximal elements of $P$ unconstrained, so we only need to investigate the other elements addressed by conditions (1) and (2). For a given element $x \in P$, suppose that $y_1, \dotsc$ are the elements strictly greater than $x$ in $P$. Observe that $\bigcup_i U_{y_i}$ cannot cover $U_x$, because in the Alexandroff topology, the only way that $U_{y_1}, \dotsc$ covers $x$ is if one of them contains the star over $x$.
Thus the gluing axiom requires us to compute the space of sections of $\shf{R}$ over at least the star over $x$, namely $\{x,y_1, \dotsc\}$, which is given by $$\{(a,b_1,\dotsc) \in \shf{R}(x) \times \prod_{i} \shf{R}(y_i) : b_i = \left(\shf{R}(x \le y_i)\right)(a)\},$$ which is evidently in bijective correspondence with $\shf{R}(x)$. Notice that the third axiom in Definition \[df:presheaf\] ensures that the above construction is well-defined.
\[eg:contfunctions2\] The compactly supported continuous functions $C_c(X,\mathbb{R})$ on some topological space $(X,\col{T})$ are best organized in a sheaf $\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{R})$ over the poset ${\bf Open}(X)$, which is a dual sheaf on ${\bf Open}(X)^{op}$. (Notice the use of the fraktur font, and beware that we are using the Alexandroff topology on ${\bf Open}(X)$ in this example!) Similar to the situation in Example \[eg:contfunctions1\], the stalk over $U$ is $C_c(U,\mathbb{R})$. But instead of restricting along $U \le V$, one can *extend* by zero, obtaining a function $C_c(V,\mathbb{R}) \to C_c(U,\mathbb{R})$ as the right frame of Figure \[fig:contfunctions\] shows.
$\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{R})$ has only one global section: the zero function. Observe that the infimum of all of ${\bf Open}(X)$ is the empty set. Thus, the gluing axiom implies that the stalk over the empty set should be the trivial vector space. For finitely many open sets $\{U_1, U_2, \dotsc, U_n\}$, the local sections are given by $C_c(U_1 \cap \dotsb U_n,\mathbb{R})$, which the gluing axiom asserts is the stalk over $U_1 \cap \dotsb U_n$.
The situation is quite different for infinite collections of open sets, since they might not have an open intersection. For instance, the intersection of the set of shrinking intervals $\{(0,1/n)\}_{n=1}^\infty$ is the (non-open) singleton $\{0\}$, but in ${\bf Open}(X)$ the infimum of the set $\{(0,1/n)\}_{n=1}^\infty$ is the empty set. The only compactly supported continuous function on this is the zero function, which is also the stalk over the empty set. On the other hand, the infimum of the set $\{(0,1+1/n)\}_{n=1}^\infty$ does not exist in ${\bf Open}(X)$, so the gluing axiom is mute about sections over this collection.
To motivate Definition \[df:morphism\] of a sheaf morphism, consider a continuous function $F:(X,\col{T}_X) \to (Y,\col{T}_Y)$ from one topological space to another. Suppose that $\shf{P}$ is a sheaf on $(X,\col{T}_X)$ and $\shf{Q}$ is a sheaf on $(Y,\col{T}_Y)$. A *sheaf morphism $m:\shf{P} \to \shf{Q}$ along $F$* consists of a set of maps $m_U$, one for each $U\in\col{T}_Y$, such that $$\xymatrix{
\shf{P}(F^{-1}(U)) \ar[r]^{m_U} &\shf{Q}(U)\\
\shf{P}(F^{-1}(V)) \ar[r]_{m_V} \ar[u]^{\shf{P}(F^{-1}(U) \subseteq F^{-1}(V))}&\shf{Q}(V) \ar[u]_{\shf{Q}(U \subseteq V)}\\
}$$ for each pair of open sets $U \subseteq V$ in $\col{T}_Y$.
Sheaf morphisms are closely related to the concept of a *pullback sheaf* along an order preserving map (Definition \[df:pullback\]) as we will see later in the chapter.
In order to focus on sheaves over posets, observe that $F$ induces an order-preserving map $f: {\bf Open}(Y,\col{T}_Y) \to {\bf Open}(X,\col{T}_X)$ given by $$f(U) = F^{-1}(U)$$ for each $U \in \col{T}_Y$. Notice that $f$ and $F$ go in opposite directions!
Discretization of functions {#sec:discretization}
===========================
The best place to start any discussion about numerical analysis is with discretization. There are two main ways to do this: by discretizing the domain or by discretizing the space of functions. Given two topological spaces $X$ and $Y$, consider the space $C(X,Y)$ of continuous functions $X\to Y$. As Example \[eg:contfunctions1\] showed, this space can also be thought of as a sheaf $\shf{C}(X,Y)$ over the topological space $X$. Following Definition \[df:open\], we define ${\bf Open}(X)^{op}$ as the poset whose elements are the open sets of $X$, and whose order relation is given by subsets: $U \le V$ if $V \subseteq U$.
The two discretizations of functions in $C(X,Y)$ involve replacing the poset ${\bf Open}(X)^{op}$ with a new *locally finite* poset $P$ and translating the sheaf $\shf{C}(X,Y)$ on $X$ into a new sheaf $\shf{D}$ or dual sheaf $\dshf{D}$ on $P$ with the Alexandroff topology. There are two basic ways to do this, namely
1. By *sampling* via a surjective sheaf morphism $\shf{C}(X,Y) \to \shf{D}$ or
2. By *collapsing* via an injective hybrid morphism $\dshf{D} \to \shf{C}(X,Y)$.
As is described in later sections of this chapter, sampling corresponds to finite difference methods, while collapsing corresponds to finite element methods. The easiest way to construct a suitable $\shf{D}$ or $\dshf{D}$ is via *pullbacks* and *pushforwards* along order preserving maps, respectively.
\[df:pullback\] If $f: X\to Y$ is an order preserving function on posets and $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf on $Y$, then the *pullback along $f$* is a sheaf $f^* \shf{S}$ on $X$ whose
1. Stalks are given by $f^* \shf{S}(x) = \shf{S}(f(x))$, and whose
2. Restrictions are given by $f^* \shf{S}(x \le y) = \shf{S}(f(x) \le f(y))$, which is well-defined because $f$ is order preserving.
This construction results in a surjective sheaf morphism $\shf{S} \to f^*\shf{S}$ in which the component maps are identity functions.
We note that every sheaf morphism factors uniquely into the composition of a pullback morphism with a morphism between sheaves on the same space (see [@TSPBook Prop 3.2] and [@Bredon I.4] for a precise statement and proof).
Let us examine sampling first. Sampling arises from specifying an order-preserving $S: P \to {\bf Open}(X)^{op}$ – going the opposite way from the morphism we intend to induce. Then, the pullback $S^* \shf{C}(X,Y)$ is a sheaf over $P$. Although the poset $P$ for this new sheaf may be smaller than ${\bf Open}(X)^{op}$, the stalks are not necessary much smaller than in the original. Therefore, we generally are interested in subsheaves of $S^* \shf{C}(X,Y)$ with finite dimensional stalks. Methodologically, these subsheaves are examined via surjective morphisms $S^* \shf{C}(X,Y) \to \shf{D}$ (see [@Robinson_SampleBook]). In all cases, we must specify the poset $P$ with care. Usually, it suffices to choose $P={\bf Open}(Z)^{op}$ for some topological space $Z$ with a coarser topology than $X$ as the next few examples show.
![The poset $P$ in Example \[eg:sample\_line\] (left), and two images of the sampling map $S$ (middle, right)[]{data-label="fig:sample_line_z"}](sample_line_z){width="3in"}
\[eg:sample\_line\] Evenly-spaced discretization of the real line $X=\mathbb{R}$ can be performed by constructing $P$ as the poset consisting of two kinds of sets: $(n,n+1)$ and $(n-1,n+1)$ and for which $(n-1,n+1) \le (n,n+1)$ and $(n-1,n+1) \le (n-1,n)$ for all $n \in \mathbb{P}$ as shown in the left frame of Figure \[fig:sample\_line\_z\]. We construct the sampling function $S: P \to {\bf Open}(\mathbb{R})^{op}$ that reinterprets each element of $P$ as an actual interval of $\mathbb{R}$. Then the stalk over $(n-1,n+1)$ of the pullback $S^* \shf{C}(\mathbb{R},Y)$ is $C((n-1,n+1),Y)$, while the stalk over $(n,n+1)$ is $C((n,n+1),Y)$. Altogether, the pullback sheaf $S^* \shf{C}(\mathbb{R},Y)$ is given by the diagram $$\xymatrix{
\dotsb & C((0,1),Y) && C((1,2),Y) &\dotsb \\
C((-1,1),Y) \ar[ur] && C((0,2),Y) \ar[ul]\ar[ur] && C((1,3),Y)\ar[ul] \\
}$$
The global sections of the pullback sheaf $S^* \shf{C}(\mathbb{R},Y)$ are precisely the continuous functions $C(\mathbb{R},Y)$. This means that although we have discretized the topology, there is still more work to be done to reduce a function to a set of function values. Although there are many ways to do this, even spacing is performed by a surjective morphism $$\xymatrix{
\dotsb & C((0,1),Y) \ar[d] && C((1,2),Y) \ar[d] &\dotsb \\
C((-1,1),Y) \ar[ur]\ar[d] &Y^n& C((0,2),Y)\ar[d] \ar[ul]\ar[ur] &Y^n& C((1,3),Y)\ar[d]\ar[ul] \\
Y^{n+1} \ar[ur]^{\sigma_+} && Y^{n+1} \ar[ul]^{\sigma_-}\ar[ur]^{\sigma_+} && Y^{n+1} \ar[ul]^{\sigma_-}
}$$ where $Y^n$ is the product of $n$ copies of $Y$, the vertical maps evaluate the continuous functions at either $n$ or $n+1$ points, and $$\sigma_+(y_0, \dotsc,y_n) = (y_0, \dotsc,y_{n-1}), \text{ and } \sigma_-(y_0, \dotsc,y_n) = (y_1, \dotsc,y_n).$$ The global sections of the bottom sheaf are infinite sequences of elements of $Y$.
![The poset $P$ for Example \[eg:sample\_plane\][]{data-label="fig:sample_plane_z"}](sample_plane_z){width="2in"}
![The pullback sheaf (shaded) and sampled discretization sheaf (not shaded) for Example \[eg:sample\_plane\] connected by a surjective sheaf morphism (dashed arrows)[]{data-label="fig:sample_plane_sheaves"}](sample_plane_sheaves){width="4in"}
\[eg:sample\_plane\] Similar to the previous example, if $X=\mathbb{R}^2$, then we can construct a poset $P$ consisting of various rectangular subsets of the plane as shown in Figure \[fig:sample\_plane\_z\] and a function $S: P \to {\bf Open}(\mathbb{R}^2)^{op}$ again given by reinterpreting the elements of $P$ as actual subsets of $\mathbb{R}^2$.
This results in a diagram for $S^* \shf{C}(\mathbb{R}^2,Y)$ like the one shown in the shaded box in Figure \[fig:sample\_plane\_sheaves\]. Again, the space of global sections of $S^* \shf{C}(\mathbb{R}^2,Y)$ is exactly $C(\mathbb{R}^2,Y)$. Discrete samples of these functions are easily extracted via a sheaf morphism, like the one shown in Figure \[fig:sample\_plane\_sheaves\] in which there are $p$ rows and $q$ columns of points on which the functions are evaluated on each unit square.
There are many other choices for $P$ that can be used to discretize $\mathbb{R}^d$ that correspond to cellular decompositions of $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Now let us consider the opposite discretization, which arises by dualization of the previous discretization. Given $\shf{C}(X,Y)$, we construct the dual sheaf $\dshf{C}(X,Y)$ by taking linear duality of all spaces and maps. Specifically, for open sets $U \le V$ in $X$ (recall $V \subseteq U$),
1. The stalk over $U$ is $\dshf{C}(X,Y)(U) = (C(U,Y))^*$, the space of continuous linear functionals $C(U,Y) \to \mathbb{C}$, and
2. The extension from $V$ to $U$ is given by $\dshf{C}(X,Y)(U \le V): (C(V,Y))^* \to (C(U,Y))^*$, the dual of the linear map $C(U,Y)) \to (C(V,Y))$ induced by restricting the domains of the continuous functions.
Consider the case of $\dshf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$, whose stalks consist of complex-signed measures that act on continuous functions $C(X,\mathbb{C})$. Specifically, if $m \in \dshf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$, then $m$ is a linear functional $C(U,\mathbb{C}) \to \mathbb{C}$, which we can formally write as an integral $$m(f) = \int_U f(x) dm(x).$$ Then, the extension maps of $\dshf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$ are obtained by extending the measure $m$ by zero. So if $U \le V$, which means $V \subseteq U$, then for $A \subseteq V$, $$\left(\left(\dshf{C}(U \le V)\right)m\right)(A) = m(A \cap U).$$
If we dualize a surjective sheaf morphism $\shf{C}(X,Y) \to \shf{D}$, we then obtain a morphism between dual sheaves $\dshf{D} \to \dshf{C}(X,Y)$, which plays the role of discretizing of the functions themselves.
Unless $X$ is compact, there is no appropriate hybrid morphism $\dshf{C}(X,Y) \to \shf{C}(X,Y)$ to complete the story, which complicates matters. There are a variety of ways out of this situation, but the most common one in numerical analysis amounts to considering a more well-behaved subsheaf of $\dshf{C}(X,Y)$ for which a hybrid morphism exists. For instance, if we restrict our attention to $Y=\mathbb{C}$, the dual sheaf of compactly supported continuous functions $\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$ (see Example \[eg:contfunctions2\]) is usually the start of a finite elements method. Each compactly supported continuous function on $U$ is both a continuous function and a continuous linear functional, so each component map of the hybrid morphism $\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C}) \to \shf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$ is an identity map as Figure \[fig:contfunctions\_hybrid\] suggests.
![The hybrid morphism taking the dual sheaf of compactly supported continuous functions into the sheaf of continuous functions[]{data-label="fig:contfunctions_hybrid"}](contfunctions_hybrid){width="3.5in"}
Usually, the poset on which $\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$ is constructed is too large because the topology on $X$ is too fine. Consider coarsening it to a new poset $P$ along an order preserving map $C: {\bf Open}(X)^{op} \to P$. This results in a pushforward dual sheaf $C_* \dshf{C}(X,Y)$ (defined below), but we will first address the construction of $P$. Consider another topological space $Z$ whose points are the same as $X$, and for which the identity map $X \to Z$ is continuous. This means that the topology of $Z$ is no finer than the topology on $X$. An appropriate coarsening map $C:{\bf Open}(X)^{op} \to {\bf Open}(Z)^{op}$ is given by $$C(U) = \text{interior}_Z(U),$$ which is well defined since the interiors of sets in a topological space are always uniquely defined. $C$ is order preserving because $V \subseteq U$ implies $\text{interior}_Z(V) \subseteq \text{interior}_Z(U)$.
\[df:pushforward\_dualsheaf\] Suppose $f:X\to Y$ is an order preserving function between posets and that $\dshf{R}$ is a dual sheaf on $X$. The *pushforward* $f_* \dshf{R}$ is a dual sheaf on $Y$ in which
1. Each stalk $(f_* \dshf{R})(c)$ is the space of sections over the set $f^{-1}(c) \subseteq X$, and
2. The extension maps $(f_* \dshf{R})(a\le b)$ are given by extending a section $s$ over $f^{-1}(b)$ to one over $f^{-1}(a)$.
This construction yields a dual sheaf morphism $f_*\dshf{R} \to \dshf{R}$.
As in the case of the pullback, we are generally not interested in $C_* \dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$, as it serves more as an upper bound on the discretization. We are more interested in subsheaves $\dshf{D}$ of $C_*\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$, thought of as injective morphisms $\dshf{D} \to C_*\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$. By composing morphisms, we obtain practical discretizations $\dshf{D} \to C_*\dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$ of the original (non-dual) sheaf $\shf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$. Evidently $C_* \dshf{C}_c(X,\mathbb{C})$ and $S^* \shf{C}(X,\mathbb{C})$ are quite different, and correspond to very different kinds of discretization methods as the following examples show (compare Examples \[eg:sample\_line\] - \[eg:sample\_plane\]).
![The coarsening pushforward morphism on the dual sheaf of compactly supported functions. Some elements of $\dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ (top row) and their counterparts in $C_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ (bottom row) as described in Example \[eg:collapse\_line\][]{data-label="fig:collapse_line1"}](collapse_line1){width="4in"}
\[eg:collapse\_line\] Consider the case of continuous on functions the real line $\mathbb{R}$. As noted above, Figure \[fig:contfunctions\_hybrid\] shows the hybrid morphism $\dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})\to \shf{C}(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$. The next step is to pushforward $\dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ to a coarser topology, such as the topological space $Z=(\mathbb{R},\col{T})$ in which the topology $\col{T}$ is generated by sets of the form $(n-1,n+1)$. This results in a coarsening map $C:{\bf Open}(\mathbb{R},\text{usual})^{op}\to {\bf Open}(\mathbb{R},\col{T})^{op}$ given by $$C(U) = \text{interior}_Z(U),$$ in which small sets get taken to the empty set in ${\bf Open}(\mathbb{R},\col{T})^{op}$. The relationship between the dual sheaves is suggested by Figure \[fig:collapse\_line1\]. The dual sheaf $C_*\dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ can be summarized in the diagram $$\includegraphics[width=3in]{collapse_line2}$$ in which the arrows correspond to extending by zero. Each stalk is still an infinite-dimensional function space, so it is convenient to replace these with smaller, or at least more convenient, spaces. Ideally, we would like a dual sheaf morphism $\dshf{D}\to C_*\dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$, which would provide a smaller description for each stalk. The primary constraint is that the following kind of diagram commute $$\xymatrix{
\dshf{D}((n,n+1)) \ar[d]\ar[r] & C_c((n,n+1),\mathbb{R}) \ar[d]\\
\dshf{D}((n-1,n+1)) \ar[r] & C_c((n-1,n+1),\mathbb{R})\\
}$$ where the vertical arrows correspond to extending by zero. This means that ideally $\dshf{D}((n,n+1))$ is a subspace of $\dshf{D}((n-1,n+1))$. This requirement is neatly satisfied by multi-scale functions, such as continuous wavelet bases or spline bases. For instance, we could let $\dshf{D}((n,n+1))$ be spanned by the set of raised cosines $$1-\cos (2m \pi x) \text{ for } x \in (n,n+1)$$ and $\dshf{D}((n-1,n+1))$ be spanned by similar kinds of functions.
\[eg:collapse\_plane\] Rectangular sampling of the plane is achieved in exactly the same sort of way as in the previous example. One may obtain the diagram of the dual sheaf $C_* \dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{R})$ by reversing the arrows in Figure \[fig:sample\_plane\_z\] and treating each arrow as an extension by zero. Although the resulting dual sheaf is fairly large, more practical spline or wavelet bases are easily constructed in a dual sheaf $\dshf{D}$ along with a dual sheaf morphism into $C_* \dshf{C}_c(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{R})$.
\[lem:pushpull\] Pulling back is a contravariant functor, while and pushing forward is a covariant functor. Explicitly, if $f:X \to Y$ and $g: Y \to Z$ then $f^* g^* = (g \circ f)^*$ and $g_* f_* = (g \circ f)_*$.
Suppose that $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf on $Z$, which we will pull back to $X$. According to Definition \[df:pullback\], we can construct pullbacks in sequence $\shf{S} \to g^*\shf{S} \to f^* g^* \shf{S}$ or all at once $\shf{S} \to (g \circ f)^* \shf{S}$. In both cases, the
1. Stalks are given by $\left(f^* (g^* \shf{S})\right)(x) = \left(g^* \shf{S}\right)(f(x)) = \shf{S}(g(f(x)) = (g \circ f)^* \shf{S} (x)$, and
2. Restrictions are given by $\left(f^* (g^* \shf{S})\right)(x \le y) = (g^*\shf{S})(f(x) \le f(y)) = \shf{S}((g(f(x)) \le g(f(y))) = (g \circ f)^* \shf{S} (x \le y)$,
which establishes the first statement.
Suppose that $\dshf{R}$ is a dual sheaf on $X$, which we will push forward along $f$ and $g$. Following Definition \[df:pushforward\_dualsheaf\], we can construct the sequence of dual sheaf morphisms $g_*(f_* \dshf{R}) \to f_* \dshf{R} \to \dshf{R}$. We can also construct a morphism $(g \circ f)_* \dshf{R} \to \dshf{R}$. If we use the notation $\dshf{R}(f^{-1}(x))$ to represent the space of sections of $\dshf{R}$ over $f^{-1}(x)$, we have the following $$\left(g_*(f_* \dshf{R})\right)(x) =(f_* \dshf{R})(g^{-1}(x))=\dshf{R}\left(f^{-1}(g^{-1}(x))\right)=\dshf{R}\left((g\circ f)^{-1}(x)\right)=((g\circ f)_*\dshf{R})(x)$$ for the stalks. A similar derivation establishes that the extensions in both dual sheaves are the same.
Simultaneous systems of equations {#sec:simultaneous}
=================================
Consider a multi-model system that consists of a set of variables $V$ whose values lie in sets $W_v$ for $v\in V$, and are interrelated through a set of equations $E$. Each equation $e\in E$ specifies a list of variables $V_e \subset V$ and a subset $S_e \subseteq \prod_{v \in V_e} W_v$ of solutions.
\[eg:aggregation\_1\] Consider the following system of equations in three variables $V=\{x,y,z\}$ $$\begin{aligned}
x^2 + y^2 - 4 &=& 0,\\
y &=& x^2 + z^2 + 1.\end{aligned}$$ In our formalism, the spaces of values for the variables should be specified. For instance, $W_x = \mathbb{R}$, $W_y = \mathbb{R}$, $W_z = \mathbb{R}$. The two equations need to be labeled, so something like $E=\{1,2\}$ will do. Given these labels, the set of variables involved in each equation are $V_1 = \{x,y\}$ and $V_2 = \{x,y,z\}$. Given that, the set of solutions for each are easily described, namely $S_1 = \text{circle of radius }2$ and $S_2 = \text{paraboloid}$.
There are natural projection functions $\pr_x: \prod_{v \in V_e} W_v \to W_x$ for each $x \in V_e$. Since these projection functions restrict to functions on $S_e$, like $\pr_x: S_e \to W_x$, it is natural to define the following poset structure. Let $P = V \sqcup E$, so elements of $P$ are either variables or equations, and define $e \le v$ if $v \in V_e$. This is generally called a *factor graph* in the literature. If we assume that $\le$ is reflexive, then this defines a partial order on $P$. A sheaf $\shf{E}'$ on $(P,\le)$ can then be given by specifying that
1. $\shf{E}'(v)=W_v$ for each variable $v$,
2. $\shf{E}'(e) = \prod_{v \in V_e} W_v$ for each equation $e$, and
3. $\shf{E}'(e \le v) = \pr_v$ whenever $e \le v$.
The sheaf $\shf{E}'$ is called an *aggregation sheaf* associated to the collection of variables $V$ and equations $E$.
\[eg:aggregation\_2\] Continuing Example \[eg:aggregation\_1\], the system of equations yields the following diagram for the sheaf $\shf{E}'$ $$\xymatrix{
\shf{E}'(x) = W_x = \mathbb{R}& \shf{E}'(y) = W_y = \mathbb{R} & \shf{E}'(z) = W_z = \mathbb{R} \\
\shf{E}'(1) = W_x \times W_y = \mathbb{R}^2 \ar[u]\ar[ur] & \shf{E}'(2) = W_x \times W_y \times W_z = \mathbb{R}^3 \ar[ul] \ar[u] \ar[ur] \\
}$$ The poset structure for $P=\{x,y,z,1,2\}$ is clear: the top row is for the variables and the bottom row is for equations. Each of the arrows in the diagram is a projection onto the space of values of a variable. The sections of $\shf{E}'$ are determined by elements of $W_x \times W_y \times W_x \times W_y \times W_z$ in which the two $x$ components agree and the two $y$ components agree.
Assuming that each variable $v$ appears in at least one equation, the set of sections of $\shf{E}'$ is in one-to-one correspondence with $\prod_{v \in V} W_v$.
Certainly each section of $\shf{E}'$ specifies all values of all variables, since each variable is in $P$ and its stalk is its respective space of values. On the other hand, specifying the value of each variable certainly specifies a section of $\shf{E}'$.
Clearly the aggregation sheaf $\shf{E}'$ does not account for the *actual equations*, since it merely specifies which variables are involved. To remedy this information loss, let us construct the following subsheaf $\shf{E}$ of $\shf{E}'$, called the *solution sheaf* of the system of equations:
1. $\shf{E}(v)=W_v$ for each variable $v$,
2. $\shf{E}(e) = S_e$ for each equation $e$ (recall that $S_e \subseteq \prod_{v \in V_e} W_v$ is the set of solutions to $e$), and
3. $\shf{E}(e \le v) = \pr_v$ whenever $e \le v$.
\[prop:simultaneous\] Sections of $\shf{E}$ consist of solutions to the simultaneous system of equations.
A section $s$ of $\shf{E}$ specifies an element of $s(e) \in S_e$ for each equation $e \in E$ which satisfies that equation. Conversely, if we start with a solution to the simultaneous system of equations, that is a specification of an element $x \in \prod_{v\in V} W_v$ for which the projection of $x$ onto $\prod_{v \in V_e} W_v$ lies in $S_e$. This can be translated to an assignment onto each variable $v\in V$ given by $$s(v) = \pr_v x,\text{ and } s(e) = \pr_{\shf{E}'(e)} x$$ which by construction we observe $s(e) \in S_e = \shf{S}(e)$.
Continuing where we left off with Example \[eg:aggregation\_2\], the sheaf $\shf{E}$ is a subsheaf of $\shf{E}'$, whose diagram is given by $$\xymatrix{
\shf{E}(x) = \mathbb{R}& \shf{E}(y) = \mathbb{R} & \shf{E}(z) = \mathbb{R} \\
\shf{E}(1) = \{(x,y):x^2 + y^2 - 4 = 0\} \ar[u]\ar[ur] & \shf{E}(2) = \{(x,y,z):y = x^2 + z^2 + 1\} \ar[ul] \ar[u] \ar[ur] \\
}$$ where again the arrows are coordinate projections. Sections are determined by the elements $(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{R}^3$ that lie on the intersection between the cylinder $\{(x,y,z):x^2 + y^2 - 4 = 0\}$ (notice that $z$ is now present!) and the paraboloid $\{(x,y,z):y = x^2 + z^2 + 1\}$.
\[eg:stoichiometry\] The sheaf model of multi-equation systems is helpful in organizing complicated systems, and is related to labeled, permutation-directed hypergraphs. For instance, labeled, directed hypergraphs[^3] can be used to model systems of stochiometric equations [@Benko_2009]. The interrelations between reagents and reactions give rise to a system of equations, which in turn defines a solution sheaf.
For instance, a very simple model of photosynthesis and combustion is given by the two reactions $$\begin{aligned}
p: CO_2 +2 H_2 O &\to& CH_2 O + O_2,\\
c: 2 H_2 + O_2 &\to& 2 H_2 O.\end{aligned}$$ In order to encode this as a system of equations, we consider the set of concentrations of each compound $\{CO_2, H_2O, CH_2O, O_2, H_2\}$ and the two reactions $\{p, c\}$. Thinking of the compounds as vertices and the reactions as hyperedges, we are led to consider the hypergraph $$\{p=[CO_2,H_2O,CH_2O,O_2],c=[H_2,O_2,H_2O]\}$$ where the square brackets indicate that order of vertices is important within a hyperedge. Diagrammatically, one usually thinks of the inclusion structure of a hypergraph, leading to the diagram $$\xymatrix{
& p & & c &\\
CO_2 \ar[ur]& H_2O \ar[u] \ar[urr] & CH_2O \ar[ul] & O_2 \ar[u] \ar[ull]& H_2 \ar[ul] \\
}$$ because the arrows represent subset relations. However, for the actual values of the variables, concentrations of the compounds, it is more natural to consider the dual diagram in which the arrows represent projections. In either case, the resulting diagram is a finite poset. The reactions can be encoded in a sheaf by the use of appropriate spaces of values. For simplicity, let us consider the state of chemical equilibrium, in which each concentration is a constant, non-negative real number. The stalk over $p$ or $c$ should be a subspace on which the reaction equation is satisfied. Namely, if $$S_p = \{(a,b,c,d) \in (\mathbb{R}^+)^4 : a + 2 b - c - d = 0\}$$ and $$S_c = \{(a,b,c) \in (\mathbb{R}^+)^4 : 2a + b - 2c = 0\},$$ then the sheaf describing the chemical equilibrium is $$\xymatrix{
\mathbb{R}^+& \mathbb{R}^+& \mathbb{R}^+& \mathbb{R}^+& \mathbb{R}^+\\
& S_p \ar[ur] \ar[u] \ar[ul] \ar[urr] & & S_c \ar[ull] \ar[u] \ar[ur] & \\
}$$ in which all arrows are coordinate projections.
We have thus far been concerned with systems of arbitrary equations, but often there is more structure available. When this happens the stalks of the sheaf $\shf{E}$ over the variables can be reduced in size, which results in computational savings. Many numerical approximation schemes (and other models, too) are written in an explicit form, in which each equation looks like $$v_{n+1} = f(v_1,\dots, v_n).$$ In this case, one often represents the relationship among the variables using a *dependency graph*.
\[def:explicit\] A system of equations $E$ on variables $V$ is called *explicit* if there is an injective function $\gamma: E \to V$ selecting a specific variable from each equation so that each equation $e \in E$ has the form $$\gamma(e) = f_e(v_1,\dotsc,v_n),$$ so that $\gamma(e)\in V_e$ and $\gamma(e) \notin \{v_1,\dotsc,v_n\}$. Any variable outside the image of $\gamma$ is said to be *free* or *independent*. Those variables in the image of $\gamma$ are called *dependent*.
A *variable dependency graph* for an explicit system is a directed graph $G$ whose vertices are given by the union $E \cup (V \backslash \gamma(E))$ consisting of the set of equations and free variables, such that the following holds:
1. Free variables have in-degree zero,
2. If $e$ is a vertex of $G$ corresponding to an equation whose incoming edges are given by $(e_1 \to e)$, ..., $(e_n \to e)$, then the equation $e\in E$ is of the form $$\gamma(e) = f_e(\gamma(e_1),\dotsc,\gamma(e_n)),$$ where we have abused notation slightly to allow $\gamma(v) = v$ for a free variable $v$.
\[eg:lorenz3\] The Lorenz system defined by in Section \[sec:diagram\] is an explicit system. Its dependency graph is shown in Figure \[fig:lorenz1\].
\[eg:aggregation\_explicit\_1\] Consider the system of equations given by $$\begin{aligned}
u_1 &=& f(u_2,u_3),\\
u_2 &=& g(u_3,u_4).\end{aligned}$$ Notice that this is an explicit system with two free variables $u_3, u_4$ and no over-determined variables. The variable dependency graph for this system is given by
{width="1.25in"}
Notice that the non-free variables $u_1, u_2$ do not appear as vertices in the variable dependency graph. Rather, $u_2$ is present as the edge out of $g$, while $u_1$ is not shown at all.
Explicit systems need not have acyclic dependency graphs, as the next example shows.
\[eg:aggregation\_explicit\_1a\] The explicit system given by the system
{width="2in"}
has a variable dependency graph with a cycle:
If $E$ is an explicit system of equations with variables in $V$, then we can construct the *explicit solution sheaf* $\shf{G}$ whose sections are the simultaneous solutions of $E$ using a slight modification of the recipe for $\shf{E}$. The underlying poset for $\shf{G}$ is still given by the union of the variables and the equations, but the stalks and restrictions are different
1. $\shf{G}(v) = W_v$ for each variable $v\in V$, just as before
2. $\shf{G}(e) = \prod_{x \in V_e \backslash \gamma(e)} W_x$ (recall that $\gamma(e) \in V_e$),
3. $\shf{G}(e \le \gamma(e)) = f_e$, and
4. $\shf{G}(e \le v): \prod_{x \in V_e \backslash \gamma(e)} W_x \to W_v$ is given by an appropriate projection if $v \not= \gamma(e)$.
\[eg:lorenz4\] The explicit solution sheaf for the Lorenz system defined by in Section \[sec:diagram\] is shown in Figure \[fig:lorenz2\].
\[eg:aggregation\_explicit\_2\] Continuing Example \[eg:aggregation\_explicit\_1\], the explicit solution sheaf $\shf{G}$ has diagram at left below, while the solution sheaf $\shf{E}$ has diagram at right below,
{width="3.75in"}
where the unlabeled arrows are projection functions. Notice that the primary difference is in the stalks over the equations; the explicit solution sheaf has a somewhat simpler construction.
The sections of an explicit solution sheaf $\shf{G}$ are in one-to-one correspondence with the simultaneous solutions of its system of equations.
Suppose that $e$ is an equation in the explicit system of the form $$\gamma(e) = f_e( \gamma(e_1), \dotsc, \gamma(e_n)).$$ It suffices to notice that $S_e=\{(v_1,\dotsc,v_n,f_e(v_1,\dotsc,v_n)): v_i \in W_{\gamma(e_i)}\}$ so the Proposition follows directly from Proposition \[prop:simultaneous\].
Ordinary differential equations {#sec:ode}
===============================
The framework developed in the previous section works equally well for differential equations. Differential equations give rise to sheaves of solutions [@Ehrenpreis_1956; @Spencer_1969], which admit various analytical techniques. Consider the case of an autonomous ordinary differential equation given by $$\label{eq:ex:diff_1}
u' = f(u),$$ where $u \in C^1(\mathbb{R}, \mathbb{R}^d)$ is a continuously differentiable function. We have essentially two options: to consider $u$ and $u'$ as two separate variables or to consider them as one variable. Considering them as one variable amounts to rewriting as $$0=F(u) = f(u) - \frac{d}{dt}u.$$ Then, the solutions of are sections of the sheaf given by the diagram $$\xymatrix{
C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)\\
\{u : F(u) = 0\} \subseteq C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d) \ar[u]^{\id} \\
}$$ From an analytic standpoint, this kind of sheaf is not particularly helpful as too much of the structure of has been “buried” in the function $F$.
At first glance, considering $u$ and $u'$ as separate variables yields a similar construction, namely $$\xymatrix{
C^0(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d) & C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)\\
C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)\ar[u]^f \ar[ur]^{\id}\\}$$ where $u'$ is on the top left and $u$ is on the top right. Although solutions of are indeed sections of this sheaf, the converse is not true: there are many sections that are not solutions. The issue is that there is another equation that links $u$ and $u'$, namely that they are related through differentiation. Including this relationship leads to the sheaf $\shf{S}$
{width="1.5in"}
whose sections are precisely solutions to the differential equation.
A benefit of formulating a differential equation as a sheaf is that it exposes a number of structural properties when we try to approximate it. For instance, we can obtain consistency conditions for numerical methods. Suppose that we wanted to discretize $u$ in finding our solution to . If we had an actual solution $u$, this would merely be a function $\Delta_h: C^0(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d) \to (\mathbb{R}^d)^{\mathbb{Z}}$, taking functions to sequences, given by something like $$(\Delta_h u)_n = u( hn )$$ for some step size $h>0$. We would like to apply this discretization to every stalk in our sheaf, to obtain a sheaf morphism of the form given by the dashed lines in exactly the form posited in Section \[sec:discretization\]
{width="3in"}
in which $D_h$ is a discretized derivative and $\tilde{f}$ is a discretized version of $f$. The sheaf morphism condition asserts that two compatibility conditions hold; the first one is straightforward, that $$\tilde{f} \circ \Delta_h = \Delta_h \circ f,$$ which asserts a kind of translation invariance on the equation. In particular, if $f$ is given by a function $\mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}^d$, then $\tilde{f}$ is given by $$\tilde{f} u_n = \left(fu\right)(nh).$$ The other condition that $$D_h \circ \Delta_h = \Delta_h \circ \frac{d}{dt}$$ is considerably more subtle. Written in more simple notation, for a function $u$, this means that $$\label{eq:discrete_deriv}
u'(nh) = D_h u_n.$$ That is, the discretization $D_h$ of the derivative operator *exactly* recovers the derivative. Of course this is an unreasonable requirement, so we usually expect to hold only approximately! There are various ways to manage this issue, which are discussed at length elsewhere. The usual approach is to attempt to minimize the discretization error in some fashion, by trying to ensure that the operator norm $$\left\|D_h \circ \Delta_h - \Delta_h \circ \frac{d}{dt}\right\|$$ remains is small. Although this method is often effective in ordinary differential equations, it can cause problems for partial differential equations. We point the interested reader to the work of Arnold [@Arnold_2006; @Arnold_2010] on finite exterior differential systems in which consistency equations like are enforced.
Discretizing functions into sequences is formally convenient, but often it is useful to be a bit more explicit. This is quite helpful when we generalize to partial differential equations in Section \[sec:pde\], since we will want to handle various irregular discretizations of the domain. As discussed in Section \[sec:discretization\], discretization of the domain still amounts to a morphism out of the sheaf describing the differential equation and is usually related to an appropriate pullback. Because of the need to describe the construction of $D_h$ more explicitly, the discretized sheaf must become somewhat more complicated. It is not unreasonable to suppose that $D_h$ involves only finitely many terms when approximating a derivative. Let us consider the case where $D_h$ is determined by $N$ terms $$v_n = D_h(u_{n-i_1}, \dotsc, u_{n-i_N}).$$ This specifies a sequence of equations, which can be represented diagrammatically as
{width="2.5in"}
in which the $v_n$ are given in the top row, while the $u_n$ are given in the bottom row. Exactly the same kind of diagram is used to specify the new formulation of the function $\tilde{f}$, which in a similar way has its term-by-term dependencies called out explicitly. Again, the appropriate consistency requirements for the discretization are encoded by a sheaf morphism from the sheaf of solutions of the differential equation. As might be imagined, the resulting diagram is quite complicated. But for a single timestep, with $N=4$, and $f: \mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$, the diagram is
{width="3.5in"}
where $\delta_{x}$ evaluates a function at $x$.
A reverse way to look at the solutions of differential equations is instead to consider morphisms *into* the sheaf encoding of the equation. This provides a connection to finite element methods, as suggested in Section \[sec:discretization\]. We again use the same basic diagram. Suppose that we have an $N$ dimensional subspace $B$ of $C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)$. This can be interpreted as a linear function $b: \mathbb{R}^N \to B \subseteq C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)$. Then, the appropriate morphism can be written
{width="2.5in"}
As before, we can derive two consistency constraints from the commutativity of the diagram. Unlike the previous case, the derivative constraint $$b \circ d = \frac{d}{dt} \circ b$$ is now easy to satisfy by choosing our subspace $B$ of $C^1(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}^d)$ so that it is invariant with respect to differentiation. For instance, a basis of monomials $\{1,x,x^2, \dotsc\}$ or trigonometric functions works well enough. The other constraint, that $$b \circ g = f \circ b$$ is much harder to satisfy, though, because it requests that the subspace $B$ is invariant under $f$. If $f$ is nonlinear, this is unlikely to be true! Generally this problem must be handled by selecting $B$ and $g$ to minimize the difference between the two sides of the above equation.
Partial differential equations {#sec:pde}
==============================
Partial differential equations can be handled similarly to ordinary differential equations. As before, the procedure is to list all relevant variables and equations, add appropriate auxiliary equations to relate functions to their (partial) derivatives, and then encode these as sheaves through a factor graph. Suppose that we are interested in a system of partial differential equations on a manifold $M$. The equations take the form $$\label{eq:pde_basic}
0=f_i(u(x),\partial_{I_{i1}}u(x),\partial_{I_{i2}}u(x), \dotsc) \text{ for all }x\in M,$$ where the $I_{ij}$ are multi-indices specifying the particular partial derivatives involved. For each partial derivative $\partial_{I_{ij}}u$, we supply an auxiliary equation $$v_{ij}(x) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{I_{ij}}} u(x)\text{ for all }x\in M,$$ so that we can reinterpret the original equations as being in terms of $v_{ij}$. Now given that $u$ and each $v_{ij}$ lies in a space of appropriately differentiable functions on $M$, we can simply follow the recipe in Section \[sec:simultaneous\] to obtain a sheaf $\shf{S}$ whose global sections are the solutions to the system .
Recalling the discussion in Section \[sec:discretization\], discretization of involves specifying an appropriate cell decomposition of $M$ to which the sheaf of solutions can be moved. There are essentially two ways to do this: (1) by looking at a cellular stratification of $M$ and (2) by looking at a topology on the cells of the stratification. The first way leads to a finite differences model via a sheaf morphism, while the second leads to a finite elements model via a hybrid morphism.
Let us see how one can construct the sheaf $\shf{S}$ and a discretization of it by way of an example.
Consider the case of the Helmholtz equation $$\Delta u + k^2 u = 0$$ on a Riemannian manifold $M$. Following the recipe in Section \[sec:simultaneous\], we obtain a sheaf given by the diagram $$\xymatrix{
C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) & C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \\
S\subseteq C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \times C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \ar[u]^{\pr_1} \ar[ur]^(0.25){\pr_2} & C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R})\ar[ul]_(0.25){\Delta} \ar[u]^{\id}\\
}$$ in which the set $S$ is given by $$S = \{(u,v) \in C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \times C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) : u(x) + k^2 v(x) = 0\text{ for all }x\in M\}.$$ Realizing that we can collapse several stalks of the sheaf without disrupting the space of global sections, we obtain a somewhat less redundant formulation: $$\xymatrix{
C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R})&\\
&C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \ar[ul]^{\Delta}\\
S\subseteq C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \times C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R}) \ar[uu]^{\pr_1} \ar[ur]^{\pr_2}
}$$
Following the construction of the pullback in Section \[sec:discretization\], let us choose an open cover $\col{U}$ of $M$ and pull back each $C^\infty(M,\mathbb{R})$ to this cover. Assuming that $n$ is the dimension of $M$, and that $x \in U \in \col{U}$, this results in a diagram like the following $$\includegraphics[width=4.5in]{discrete_helmholtz}$$ for each $U \in \col{U}$. In the diagram, the fully continuous solutions are global sections of the sheaf on the left, and fully discretized solutions appear on the right. The arrow labeled “Evaluate near $x$” takes a smooth function $f:U \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}$ to the following vector $$\left(f(x), f(x+e_1), f(x-e_1), \dotsc, f(x+e_n),f(x-e_n) \right),$$ where $e_i$ is the $i$-th coordinate vector. Given this information, the arrow labeled $D$ computes the following discrete approximation to the Laplacian $$D(a_0,a_1,\dotsc,a_{2n}) = \frac{1}{2n}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{2n} a_i\right) - a_0.$$ Finally, the set $S_x$ of local solutions to the discretized problem near $x$ is given by $$S_x = \{(u,v_0,v_1,\dotsc,v_{2n}) \in \mathbb{R}^{2n+2} : u + k^2 v_0 = 0\}.$$ Notice that even though only $v_0$ and $u$ appear in the specification of $S_x$, the other $v_i$ are constrained in the global sections of the sheaf of discretized solutions.
Consider the case of a nonlinear heat equation with a heat source, specified by $$\label{eq:nonlinear_heat}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t} u(x,t) - \Delta u(x,t) + K u^2(x,t) = f(x,t).$$ where $x\in M$ is a point in an $n$-dimensional manifold, $t\in \mathbb{R}$. We have several options for treating the nonlinearity – either it can be encapsulated into the solution space, or it can be broken out as another variable. Breaking it out as another variable has the advantage that the nonlinearity is then encoded as a restriction map in the sheaf, which makes later analysis a little easier. Therefore, we can rewrite as the following explicit system $$\begin{aligned}
f(x,t) & = & T(x,t) - L(x,t) + K V(x,t), \\
V(x,t) &=& u^2(x,t), \\
T(x,t) & = & \frac{\partial}{\partial t} u(x,t), \\
L(x,t) & = & \Delta u(x,t). \\\end{aligned}$$ The diagram for the resulting explicit solution sheaf $\shf{H}$ is $$\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{nonlinheat_sheaf}$$ in which the arrow labeled “square” represents the function taking $u$ to $u^2$.
On each open $U \subseteq M$ and $(a,b) \subseteq \mathbb{R}$, we can follow Section \[sec:discretization\] to construct a hybrid morphism that takes $$\dshf{C}_c(M\times \mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})(U\times (a,b)) = C_c(U\times (a,b), \mathbb{R}) \to C(U\times (a,b), \mathbb{R})$$ in each stalk in the diagram above. Since the nonlinear squaring map is indeed a function $C_c(U\times (a,b), \mathbb{R}) \to C_c(U\times (a,b), \mathbb{R})$, we can indeed construct the hybrid morphism.
Although the approach of discretizing using compactly supported smooth functions is attractive, there is a distinct problem: the solutions to are typically not localized in space $x$ or in time $t$. This means that trying to approximate solutions using localized functions is bound to cause numerical issues. A safer approach is instead to use a dual sheaf $\dshf{S}_k$ of degree $k$ splines: although they have local control, they can be extended. Specifically, let $\col{U}$ be a cover of $M$ consisting of open sets with compact closures, each of which is homeomorphic to an open set in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Construct a partial order[^4] formed by elements of $\col{U}$ and their pairwise intersections, with $U \le (U \cap V)$ and the dual sheaf $\dshf{S}_k$ by
1. Each stalk $\dshf{S}_k(U)$ is the vector space of degree $k$ polynomials in $n$ variables for $U \in \col{U}$,
2. Each stalk $\dshf{S}_k(U \cap V)$ is the vector space of degree $k-1$ polynomials in $n$ variables for $U,V \in \col{U}$,
3. Each extension $\dshf{S}_k( (U \cap V) \to U)$ is the composition of the transition map $(U \cap V) \to U$ in $M$ with the projection from degree $k$ polynomials to degree $k-1$ polynomials.
The benefit with this construction is that each stalk (of both types, $U$ and $U \cap V$) is directly mapped to a space of continuous functions, so there is still a hybrid morphism $\dshf{S}_k \to \shf{H}$, but compact support is not required.
The sheaf $\shf{H}$ in the previous example has a nonlinear restriction map. It is quite evident how to linearize this restriction map about a local section (see Definition \[def:linearized\]) – simply replace the square with the $2$ times the value of the section.
Multi-model systems of differential equations {#sec:multidiffeqn}
=============================================
In the previous sections, we considered differential equations in the usual sense – on manifolds. What happens on stratified manifolds? If the model is originally formulated on the entire space, then it descends to models on each stratification. Those models are not independent, but have relationships among them. Conversely – and more usefully – if one starts with models on each stratification and defines various boundary conditions, then a global model can be assembled. In order to translate models on different portions of a space, we transform sheaves along order-preserving functions using pullbacks (Definition \[df:pullback\]).
Let us now consider the case where we have a known model on a topological space $X$ encoded as a sheaf $\shf{S}$. Let $\{X_i\}$ be a finite collection of closed subspaces of $X$ whose union is $X$. Consider the intersection lattice of $\{X_i\}$: the poset $P$ whose elements are all possible intersections and unions of $X_i$, and the partial order is the subset relation. (See Figure \[fig:localizing\].) Given the sheaf $\shf{S}$, we can pull back to a sheaf $\shf{S}_i$ on $X_i$ along the inclusion $X_i \to X$.
Given this formal construction, pulling back $\shf{S}$ to each element of $P$ yields a dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$ *of sheaves* on $P$:
1. For each element $A$ of $P$, $\dshf{S}(A)=i_A^* \shf{S}$, which is the pullback of $\shf{S}$ to $A$ along the inclusion $i_A: A \to X$
2. Since pulling back is a contravariant functor by Lemma \[lem:pushpull\], each pair of elements $A,B \in P$ with $A \le B$ has a sheaf morphism induced $\dshf{S}(B) \to \dshf{S}(A)$. This defines the extension map $\dshf{S}(A \le B)$.
![Localizing a sheaf model on a space $X$ to subspaces[]{data-label="fig:localizing"}](localizing){width="4.5in"}
The interpretation of $\dshf{S}$ as a dual sheaf supports the intuition that $\shf{S}_i$ represents the solutions to a given model on the interior of a stratum $X_i$, and the solutions are *extended* to the boundary where they may interact with other strata.
From an analysis perspective, we generally want the solutions, proper. Since the extensions in this dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$ are sheaf morphisms, they induce maps on global sections of each of the pullback sheaves. Computing global sections on each stratum yields a dual sheaf of sets $\dshf{S}'$ on $P$ given by
1. For each $A$ in $P$, $\dshf{S}'(A)$ is the set of global sections of the sheaf $\dshf{S}(A)$,
2. For each pair of elements $A \le B$ in $P$, $\dshf{S}'(A \le B)$ is the map induced by Proposition \[prop:morphism\] on global sections by the extension map $\dshf{S}(A \le B)$, which is itself a dual sheaf morphism.
The global sections of the dual sheaf $\dshf{S}'$ are precisely the global sections of the original sheaf $\shf{S}$.
First, every global section of $\shf{S}$ is taken to a global section in each stalk of $\dshf{S}$, which is an element of $\dshf{S}'$ since the extensions are sheaf morphisms, by Proposition \[prop:morphism\]. On the other hand, each global section of $\dshf{S}'$ takes a value at $X$, which is by definition a global section of $\shf{S}$.
Since $\dshf{S}$ is a dual sheaf *of sheaves*, its space of sections ought to itself be a sheaf! As the next Proposition indicates, that sheaf is $\shf{S}$. (From the perspective of category theory, we are merely verifying that pulling back $\shf{S}$ to $P$ produces a diagram with $\shf{S}$ as its limit.)
\[prop:universality\] For each $A \in P$, there is a sheaf morphism $m_A: \shf{S} \to \dshf{S}(A)$ so that $m_A$ *commutes with the extensions* of $\dshf{S}$, namely $m_A = \dshf{S}(A \le B) \circ m_B$ for every pair of elements $A \le B$ in $P$.
For any other sheaf $\shf{T}$ that also has morphisms $n_A: \shf{T} \to \dshf{S}(A)$ that commute with the extensions of $\dshf{S}$, there is a sheaf morphism $t: \shf{T} \to \shf{S}$ such that $n_A = m_A \circ t$ for all $A$ in $P$.
First observe that since the stalk $\dshf{S}(A)$ on $A$ is the pullback $i_A^* \shf{S}$ of $\shf{S}$ along the inclusion map $i_A: A \to X$, we should define $m_A = i_A^* : \shf{S} \to i_A^* \shf{S}$ as given by Definition \[df:pullback\]. For the extension maps, suppose that $A \le B \le X$ in $P$. This can be thought of as a sequence of inclusions $A \to B \to X$, each of which is an order-preserving map. So by Lemma \[lem:pushpull\], these induce sheaf morphisms going the opposite direction, which by the definition of the extension maps of $\dshf{S}$ is precisely $m_A = \dshf{S}(A \le B) \circ m_B$.
Now suppose that $\shf{T}$ is any other sheaf on a poset $Y$ with morphisms $n_A: \shf{T} \to \dshf{S}(A)$ along order preserving maps $g_A: A \to Y$ commuting with the extensions of $\dshf{S}$. Suppose that $x \in A$, so that there is a map $n_{A,x} : \shf{T}(g_A(x)) \to \dshf{S}(A)(x)$. We must perform two constructions: we must construct an order preserving map $f: X \to Y$ and the morphism $t: \shf{T} \to \shf{S}$ along $f$.
Constructing $f$:
: Suppose $x\in X$, which is in at least one element of $P$, say $A$. Observe that because the $n_A$ commute with the extensions of $\dshf{S}$, it must be the case that the $g_A$ maps commute with the inclusions. Therefore, we can define $f(x) = g_A(x)$, because if $x$ is also in $B$, $g_{A\cap B} = g_A \circ i_{A\cap B\to A}$ where $i_{A\cap B \to A}: A\cap B \to A$ is the inclusion.
Constructing $t$:
: Suppose that $x \in A$, so that the component of the morphism $n_A$ is the map $n_{A,x} : \shf{T}(g_A(x)) \to \dshf{S}(A)(x)$. However, $\dshf{S}(A)(x) = i_A^* \shf{S}(x) = \shf{S}(x)$ where $i_A : A \to X$ is the inclusion. We merely need to note that $f(x) = g_A(x)$ to complete the construction.
These propositions indicate that disassembling the model encoded in $\shf{S}$ into a dual sheaf built on the intersection lattice of some subsets is a faithful representation of the model. It points the way for the reverse construction, when one doesn’t have a sheaf $\shf{S}$ on $X$ to start. To formulate a collection of interrelated models, one need only build such a dual sheaf of sheaves $\dshf{S}$ (on $P \backslash X$) from the outset and then examine $\dshf{S}'$ to find its solution.
\[thm:reconstruct\] Given a dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$ of sheaves of sets or vector spaces on the poset $P$, one can construct a sheaf $\shf{S}$ and a set of sheaf morphisms $m_A: \shf{S} \to \dshf{S}(A)$ for each $A \in P$ such that
1. $m_A = \dshf{S}(X_A \le X_B) \circ m_B$ for each $A \le B \in P$ and
2. If $\shf{R}$ is any other sheaf with this property, then there is a sheaf morphism $r : \shf{R} \to \shf{S}$ that commutes with all the $m_A$ and extensions of $\dshf{S}$.
Because the category of sets (or the category of vector spaces) is complete, then the category of sheaves of sets (or vector spaces) is complete [@Gray_1962]. The sheaf $\shf{S}$ is precisely the category theoretic *limit* of the diagram of sheaves given by $\dshf{S}$, which exists by completeness. What follows is an explicit construction following [@Gray_1962].
We first need to construct the poset for $\shf{S}$. This is easily done: let $X$ be the disjoint union of all of the posets for each sheaf $\dshf{S}(A)$ (where $A\in P$) under the equivalence relation in which elements are matched by the order preserving maps for each extension $\dshf{S}(A \le B)$. For each $x\in X$, observe that we can construct a new dual sheaf $\dshf{S}_x$ from $\dshf{S}$ by
1. $\dshf{S}_x(A) = \left(\dshf{S}(A)\right)(x)$ (a set!) for each $A \in P$, and
2. $\dshf{S}_x(A \le B) = i_{(A \to B),x}^*$, which is the $x$-component of the dual sheaf morphism $i_{A\to B}^* : \dshf{S}(B) \to \dshf{S}(A)$ induced by the inclusion $A \to B$.
Using this dual sheaf, we define $\shf{S}(x)$ to be the set of global sections of $\dshf{S}_x$. We define the restriction $\shf{S}(x \le y)$ to follow the *restrictions* of the *sheaves* $\left(\dshf{S}(A)\right)(x \le y) : \left(\dshf{S}(A)\right)(x) \to \left(\dshf{S}(A)\right)(y)$ at each element $A$ of $P$.
Each morphism $m_A$ projects out the elements of $\shf{S}(x)$ (already a direct product!) to $\dshf{S}_x(A) = \left(\dshf{S}(A)\right)(x)$. Given this construction of $\shf{S}$ and morphisms $m_\bullet$, the argument for any other sheaf $\shf{R}$ in Proposition \[prop:universality\] goes through unchanged.
![Regions for modeling waves scattering along a segmented string[]{data-label="fig:string_scattering"}](string_scattering){width="3in"}
Consider the case of waves along a string made of two segments with different phase speeds. As shown in Figure \[fig:string\_scattering\], suppose that the string is along the real line, and that the segment $X_-=\{x \le 0\}$ has phase speed $c_-$, the segment $X_+=\{x \ge 0\}$ has phase speed $c_+$, and the “knot” between the segments at $x=0$ ensures $C^1$ continuity. For simplicity, we assume linear wave models on each segment and focus on the single frequency case where all solutions have an $e^{i\omega t}$ dependence. In this case, the equations are $$\begin{cases}
-\omega^2 u_- - c_-^2u''_- = 0&\text{for }x \le 0\\
-\omega^2 u_+ - c_+^2 u''_+ = 0&\text{for }x \ge 0\\
u_-(0)=u_+(0)&\\
u'_-(0)=u'_+(0)&
\end{cases}$$ where we have used $u_{\pm}$ to emphasize that from the outset $u(x)$ for $x>0$ and $x<0$ are unrelated. The last two equations implement a particular boundary condition at $x=0$.
We can encode each of these as solution sheaves, individually over $X_-$, $X_+$, and $\{0\}$ as shown by the solid arrows in Figure \[fig:string\_sheaves\], which is built on the poset $X=\{\{0\},X_-,X_+\}$ with order coming from inclusion. Within $X_-$, the subspace $S_-$ consists of the space of functions spanned by $$\{e^{ik_-x}, e^{-ik_-x}\},$$ namely a subspace isomorphic to $\mathbb{C}^2$, where $k_-=\omega/c_-$. Similarly, the subspace $S_+$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{C}^2$.
The enforcement of the boundary conditions amounts to constructing extension maps for a dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$ of sheaves shown as the dashed arrows in Figure \[fig:string\_sheaves\]. Observe that the diagram formed by dashed and solid arrows is commutative. Without belaboring the point, the dashed arrows in the Figure are evaluations of functions – the unlabeled functions in the Figure mapping to $\mathbb{C}^2$ compute the value of a function and its derivative at $0$. Therefore, computing stalk-wise global sections of each sheaf yields a dual sheaf of vector spaces given by the diagram $$\xymatrix{ \mathbb{C}^2 \ar[rr]^-{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ik_-&-ik_-\end{pmatrix}} && \mathbb{C}^2 && \mathbb{C}^2 \ar[ll]_-{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ik_+&-ik_+\end{pmatrix}} }$$ The space of global sections of this dual sheaf is isomorphic to $\mathbb{C}^2$, because each of the matrices are of full rank if we assume that $k_-$ and $k_+$ are both nonzero.
Now, to derive the sheaf $\shf{S}$ from the dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$ according to Theorem \[thm:reconstruct\], we must construct dual sheaves $\dshf{S}_x$ associated to each element of the poset $x\in X$, namely $$\begin{aligned}
\dshf{S}_{\{0\}} &=& \xymatrix{ \mathbb{C}^2 \ar[rr]^-{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ik_-&-ik_-\end{pmatrix}} && \mathbb{C}^2 && \mathbb{C}^2 \ar[ll]_-{\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ik_+&-ik_+\end{pmatrix}} },\\
\dshf{S}_{X_-} &=& C^\infty((-\infty,0],\mathbb{C}), \text{ and} \\
\dshf{S}_{X_+} &=& C^\infty([0,\infty),\mathbb{C}).\end{aligned}$$ The Theorem has us construct $\shf{S}$ stalkwise as the space of global sections of each of these dual sheaves, and the restrictions of $\shf{S}$ are those maps induced on global sections by the restriction maps in each stalk of the dual sheaf $\dshf{S}$. Namely the diagram for $\shf{S}$ is $$\xymatrix{
C^\infty((-\infty,0],\mathbb{C})& &&& \mathbb{C}^2 \ar[llll]_-{\begin{pmatrix}\frac{-3k_--k_+}{2k_-}e^{ik_-x}&\frac{-3k_-+k_+}{2k_-}e^{ik_-x}\\\frac{k_++k_-}{2k_-}e^{-ik_-x}&\frac{k_--k_+}{2k_-}e^{-ik_-x}\\\end{pmatrix}} \ar[rr]^-{\begin{pmatrix}e^{ik_+x}&0\\0&e^{-ik_+x}\end{pmatrix}} && C^\infty([0,\infty),\mathbb{C}).
}$$
![Dual sheaf of sheaves describing the propagation of waves along a segmented string. Solid lines are restriction maps of each sheaf along each segment, marked in the shaded regions. Dashed lines are the extensions of the dual sheaf.[]{data-label="fig:string_sheaves"}](string_sheaves){width="3.5in"}
![Region for modeling the diffraction of waves exiting a channel into an open area (left) and its decomposition into strata (right)[]{data-label="fig:scattering_diffraction"}](scattering_diffraction){width="2.5in"}
If traveling waves along a narrow channel exit into a large open area, diffraction occurs. Nearly the same formulation as in the previous example works, though the stratification is quite different as is shown in Figure \[fig:scattering\_diffraction\]. Analogous to wave propagation along a string, the propagation along the narrow channel is split into two traveling waves: $$u(x) = a e^{ikx} + b e^{-ikx}.$$ However, on an open, 2-dimensional region, the solution is given by an integral $$u(x,y) = \int_0^{2\pi} c(\theta) e^{ik(x \cos \theta + y \sin \theta)} d\theta,$$ where $c$ is best thought of as a complex-valued measure on the unit circle. If we write the space of complex valued measures on a manifold $N$ as $M(N,\mathbb{C})$, then the dual sheaf (of spaces of global sections) that models the propagation of waves on each stratum in Figure \[fig:scattering\_diffraction\] is given by the diagram $$\includegraphics[width=1.75in]{scattering_cosheaf}$$ in which the map $m_1$ takes the measure $c$ on the circle to the measure $$\left(m_1 c\right)(t) = \int_0^{2\pi} c(\theta) e^{ik(p_x(t) \cos \theta + p_y(t) \sin \theta)} d\theta,$$ and $$\left(m_2 c\right)(t) = \int_0^{2\pi} c(\theta) e^{ik(q_x(t) \cos \theta + q_y(t) \sin \theta)} d\theta,$$ in which the paths $(p_x(t),p_y(t))$ and $(q_x(t),q_y(t))$ trace out the coordinates of the upper and lower edges of the 2-dimensional region.
We can study the Dirichlet problem for this dual sheaf by constraining the values taken by maps $m_1$ and $m_2$ to be zero except at the stratum $E$. This is done by way of a dual sheaf morphism that annihilates the stalks where waves are allowed to propagate. From this, we construct a new dual sheaf via stalk-wise quotients of the other two. These operations are summarized in the diagram $$\includegraphics[width=4.5in]{scattering_exactness}$$ Discretizing the leftmost dual sheaf in the above diagram by way of a dual sheaf morphism yields the usual boundary-elements formulation of this kind of problem, with the added benefit that wave propagation along the channel is automatically incorporated into the solution.
Belief propagation networks and graphical models {#sec:belief}
================================================
Consider a set of random variables $X_1, \dotsc, X_n$. Given some knowledge about some of their various joint distributions, how much can be deduced about the others? There has been considerable attention given to this kind of question in the literature, resulting in several popular algorithms for solving it under certain conditions. In essence, they all amount to resolving the network into a factor graph.
We can consider the joint distribution over $\{X_1, \dotsc, X_n\}$ and all of its marginal distributions as a set of simultaneous equations according to Section \[sec:simultaneous\]. By adding conditional distributions using Bayes’ rule, we can model a graphical model as a sheaf. Belief propagation algorithms are then seen to be approximate methods for computing certain sections of this sheaf.
Assume that $(X_i,\col{M}_i)$ are measurable spaces for $i=1,\dotsc,n$, so that a *random variable* $\Phi_{X_i}$ consists of a signed measure[^5] on $(X_i,\col{M}_i)$. The space of such signed measures $M(X_i)$ is a vector space in the obvious way, with the sum of two measures on a measurable set being the sum of their respective measures of that set. A joint distribution on a subset of the random variables, say $X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}$, specifies a probability distribution $\Phi_{X_{i_1} \dotsb X_{i_k}}$ on the measurable space $X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \times X_{i_k}$.
As vector spaces, $M(X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \times X_{i_k}) \cong M(X_{i_1})\otimes \dotsb \otimes M(X_{i_k})$.
The proof of this lemma follows directly from the definition of the tensor product.
\[cor:multiple\_marg\] The set projection $\pr_j: X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \times X_{i_k} \to X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \widehat{X_{i_j}} \dotsb \times X_{i_k}$ for any $j$ lifts to a linear *marginalization* map $m_j: M(X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \times X_{i_k}) \to M(X_{i_1}\times \dotsb \widehat{X_{i_j}} \dotsb \times X_{i_k})$, where we use the hat to indicate an omitted variable. We sometimes speak of $m_j$ “marginalizing out $X_{i_j}$” from the joint distribution. Further, marginalizing a pair of random variables out from a joint distribution is independent of their order.
\[eg:three\_rvs\] Suppose that $X_1=X_2=X_3=\{0,1\}$, so that the space of signed measures over each is 2-dimensional. By the Lemma, the space of measures over the product $X_1 \times X_2 \times X_3$ is 8-dimensional. The projection $\pr_1: X_1 \times X_2 \times X_3 \to X_2 \times X_3$ lifts to the marginalization $m_1$ given by the matrix $$m_1 = \begin{pmatrix}
1& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0\\
0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 0\\
0& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0\\
0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 1\\
\end{pmatrix},$$ in which the basis elements are written in lexicographical order. Similarly, the marginalization $m_2$ is given by $$m_2 = \begin{pmatrix}
1& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\
0& 1& 0& 1& 0& 0& 0& 0\\
0& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 1& 0\\
0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 1& 0& 1\\
\end{pmatrix}.$$ If we marginalize twice, $X_1 \times X_2 \times X_3 \to X_2 \times X_3 \to X_3$ or $X_1 \times X_2 \times X_3 \to X_1 \times X_3 \to X_3$, then we obtain the same map, namely $$\begin{pmatrix}
1& 0& 1& 0& 1& 0& 1& 0\\
0& 1& 0& 1& 0& 1& 0& 1\\
\end{pmatrix}.$$
We can use the marginalization maps to describe a set of random variables as a system of (linear) equations. Specifically, let the set $V$ of variables be the power set of $\{X_1, \dotsc, X_n\}$. For each variable $v=X_I$, let $W_v = M(X_I)$ where $I=\{i_1,\dotsc,i_k\}$. The set of equations $E$ consists of all possible marginalizations, namely equations of the form[^6] $$\label{eq:marginal}
\Phi_{X_{i_1} \dotsb \widehat{X_{i_j}} \dotsb X_{i_k}} = m_j \Phi_{X_{i_1} \dotsb X_{i_k}}.$$ Notice that this system is explicit according to Definition \[def:explicit\] and has a dependency graph in which all arrows point from joint distributions over a set of variables to subsets of those variables. Thus, it is straightforward to construct a sheaf model $\shf{J}$ of this system using the techniques of Section \[sec:simultaneous\]. Specifically, the poset in question is $V \sqcup E$, and for each variable $\shf{J}(X_I) = M(X_I)$. Each equation $e$ involves exactly two variables $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$ and $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$, so that
1. $\shf{J}(e) = M(X_{i_1} \times \dotsb \times X_{i_k})$,
2. $\shf{J}(e \le \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\})$ is the identity map, and
3. the other restriction $\shf{J}(e \le \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\})$is the marginalization function $m_j$.
\[eg:big\_marginal\] Continuing Example \[eg:three\_rvs\], the sheaf $\shf{J}$ associated to the system of random variables is given by the diagram
{width="2.5in"}
The arrows are labeled either with identity maps or marginalizations as appropriate.
From the example, it is clear that the sheaf $\shf{J}$ contains a number of duplicate stalks with identity maps between them. Since the dependency graph for the joint distributions is a directed acyclic graph, there is an equivalent sheaf $\shf{J}'$ over a smaller poset. Consider the partial order $\le$ on only the variables $V$, for which $$\label{eq:containment_order}
X_I \le X_J\text{ if }J \subseteq I.$$ Then $\shf{J}'$ is given the same stalks as $\shf{J}$ over the variables, but we let $\shf{J}'(X_I \le X_J)$ be the composition of marginalization functions.
\[eg:small\_marginal\] The sheaf diagram in Example \[eg:big\_marginal\] reduces considerably under this process, yielding a diagram consisting only of joint distributions and marginalization functions
{width="2in"}
The constructions of $\shf{J}'$ and $\shf{J}$ are related by a pushforward along an order preserving function (compare Definition \[df:pushforward\_dualsheaf\]).
\[df:pushforward\_sheaf\] Suppose $f:X\to Y$ is an order preserving function between posets and that $\shf{R}$ is a sheaf on $X$. The *pushforward* $f_* \shf{R}$ is a sheaf on $Y$ in which
1. Each stalk $(f_* \shf{R})(c)$ is the space of sections over the set $f^{-1}(c) \subset X$, and
2. The restriction maps $(f_* \shf{R})(a\le b)$ are given by restricting a section $s$ over $f^{-1}(a)$ to one over $f^{-1}(b)$.
This construction yields a sheaf morphism[^7] $f_*\shf{R} \to \shf{R}$.
\[prop:marginal\_iso\] Consider the function $f: V \sqcup E \to V$ that
1. Takes sets of random variables (elements of $V$) to sets of random variables and
2. Takes each equation $e \in E$ involving exactly two variables ($\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$ and $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$) to $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$. (All equations in the marginalization sheaf are of this form!)
If the domain $V \sqcup E$ is given the partial order that each equation is below the variables it involves, and the domain is given the partial order by set containment , then $f$ is order-preserving.
Then $\shf{J}' = f_* \shf{J}$, and the morphism $\shf{J}' \to \shf{J}$ induces isomorphisms on the space of global sections of $\shf{J}$ and $\shf{J}'$.
To see that $f$ is order preserving, merely suppose that $e\in E$ and $v\in V$ with $e \le v$. Without loss of generality, suppose that $e$ involves $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$ and $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$. Therefore, $v$ is either $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$ or $\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$. If $v = \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$ then there is nothing to prove since $f(e) = f(v)$. In the other case, $$\begin{aligned}
f(e) &=& \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}\\
&\le&\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\} = f(v).\end{aligned}$$
To see that $\shf{J}' = f_* \shf{J}$, we examine the stalks and restriction maps according to Definition \[df:pushforward\_sheaf\]. Each stalk of $\shf{J}'$ is the space of sections over its preimage through $f$ in $\shf{J}$. For instance, let $v= \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}$. Then its preimage consists of the set $$f^{-1}(v) = \left\{\{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, X_{i_k}\}, \{X_{i_2} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}, \dotsc, \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \widehat{X_{i_j}} ,\dotsc, X_{i_k}\}, \dotsc \{X_{i_1}, \dotsc, \dotsc, X_{i_{k-1}}\} \right\}.$$ The stalk in $\shf{J}$ over each element of $f^{-1}(v)$ is the same, and the restriction maps within the preimage are all identity maps. Therefore, the space of sections of $\shf{J}$ over $f^{-1}(v)$ is precisely the stalk over any element of $f^{-1}(v)$, which by construction is precisely the same as the stalk over $v$ in $\shf{J}'$. The other restriction maps – the marginalization maps – in $\shf{J}$ are carried over unchanged into $\shf{J}'$.
Finally, the above argument makes it quite clear that the global sections of $\shf{J}$ and $\shf{J}'$ must be the same.
We have thus far considered random variables and not graphical models. A *graphical model* on random variables $X_1, \dotsc, X_n$ consists of the set of all joint distributions and marginalization equations, but adds some equations of the form $$\label{eq:conditional}
\Phi_{X_I} = L_e \Phi_{X_J}, \text{ where }I \le J,$$ and where $L_e$ is a stochastic linear map (column sums are all 1). The system is still explicit, but we can no longer form a partial order on the variables alone! The sections of the resulting sheaf $\shf{B}$ are solutions to the graphical model.
![Two events can trigger an alarm. If the alarm sounds, then with some probability John or Mary will go and investigate the cause of the alarm[]{data-label="fig:alarm_causal"}](alarm_causal){width="2in"}
![The marginalization sheaf for Example \[eg:alarm\][]{data-label="fig:alarm_marginals"}](alarm_marginals){width="3in"}
![The conditional probability maps for Example \[eg:alarm\][]{data-label="fig:alarm_conditionals"}](alarm_conditionals){width="3in"}
\[eg:alarm\] (Thanks to Olivia Chen for this example and the associated graphics!) Consider the situation of two people, John and Mary, in a house in which an alarm sounds. The alarm can be triggered by two kinds of events: an earthquake or a burglary. Once the alarm sounds, one of the people may attempt to investigate. If we view this as a probabilistic situation, we might organize the different events in a causal diagram like the one shown in Figure \[fig:alarm\_causal\]. There are quite a few marginal probability distributions in this situation, as is shown in Figure \[fig:alarm\_marginals\]. To complete the graphical model, we add three conditional probabilities, shown in Figure \[fig:alarm\_conditionals\], corresponding to the arrows marked in Figure \[fig:alarm\_causal\].
In the literature, such solutions must be *converged* (not change under iterations of the explicit system) and be *consistent* (actually be sections). Unlike the case of $\shf{J}$ and $\shf{J}' = f_* \shf{J}$ however, $f_* \shf{B}$ and $\shf{B}$ can be rather different. Belief propagation algorithms generally operate only the variables, and so are reliable when the space of global sections of $f_* \shf{B}$ and $\shf{B}$ are isomorphic. Although somewhat out of scope from this chapter, sheaf cohomology (Definition \[df:cohomology\]) provides sufficient conditions for this to occur. We include the statement for completeness.
\[prop:bayes\_localcoh\] Suppose that $\shf{B}$ is a sheaf model of a graphical model and that $f$ is the order preserving map defined in Proposition \[prop:marginal\_iso\]. Then the map on global sections induced by $f_* \shf{B} \to \shf{B}$ is an isomorphism whenever $H^k(f^{-1}(v);\shf{B}) = 0$ (see Definition \[df:cohomology\]) for all sets of random variables $v$ and all $k>0$.
The proof of this statement follows immediately from the Vietoris Mapping Theorem [@Bredon Thm. 3, Section II.11] or [@TSPBook Thm. 4.2]. If the hypotheses of this proposition are satisfied, then convergence and consistency are equivalent properties for the graphical model.
Future prospects: homological analysis of multi-model systems {#sec:homological}
=============================================================
Once a system has been encoded in a diagrammatic way – as a sheaf – its analysis is effectively a purely mathematical task. For sheaves over posets whose stalks are vector spaces and whose restrictions (or extensions, for dual sheaves) are linear maps, *homological* invariants can be computed [@Baclawski_1977 Sec. 2.5].
If the sheaf model does not have linear restriction maps, then it is necessary to linearize them before homological analysis can proceed. The question of *where* to linearize is easily addressed, at least theoretically: one should linearize about a section!
\[def:linearized\] If $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf of smooth manifolds over a poset $P$ and $s$ is a global section of $\shf{S}$, then one can construct the *linearized sheaf $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s$ about $s$*. This is defined by
1. the stalk $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s(x)$ over $x \in P$ is the tangent space $T_{s(x)}\shf{S}(x)$, and
2. the restriction $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s(x \le y)$ for $x \le y \in P$ is the derivative map of the corresponding restriction in $\shf{S}$, namely $$d_{s(x)} \shf{S}(x \le y): T_{s(x)}\shf{S}(x) \to T_{s(y)}\shf{S}(y).$$
Observe that $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s$ is a sheaf of vector spaces on $P$, whose restriction maps are linear maps. The global section $s$ of $\shf{S}$ corresponds to the zero section in $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s$. Global sections of $\widetilde{\shf{S}}_s$ correspond to perturbations of $s$ in $\shf{S}$, and therefore describe the neighborhood of $s$ in the space of global sections of $\shf{S}$.
\[df:cohomology\] Suppose that $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf of vector spaces with linear restriction maps on a poset $P$. The *$k$-cochain space* $C^k(\shf{S})$ of $\shf{S}$ consists of the following direct product of stalks at the end of chains of length $k$: $$C^k(P;\shf{S}) = \prod_{a_0 < \dotsb < a_k} \shf{S}(a_k).$$ Each element in $C^k$ is therefore indexed by a chain in $P$ of length $k$, and can therefore be thought of as a function $s$ from the collection of chains in $P$. The *$k$-coboundary map* $d^k: C^k(P;\shf{S}) \to C^{k+1}(P;\shf{S})$ is given by the formula $$\begin{aligned}
\left(d^k s\right)(a_0 < \dotsb a_{k+1}) &=& \sum_{i=0}^{k} (-1)^i s(a_0 < \dotsb \widehat{a_i} < \dotsb a_{k+1}) \\
&& + (-1)^{k+1} \shf{S}(a_k < a_{k+1})\left(s(a_0 < \dotsb < a_k)\right). \end{aligned}$$ The cochain spaces and the coboundary maps form a chain complex, whose homology $$H^k(P;\shf{S}) = H^k ( C^\bullet(P;\shf{S}), d^\bullet)$$ is called the *cohomology of the sheaf $\shf{S}$*.
Although the formula for the coboundary map seems a bit unmotivated, it is rather reasonable. The usual boundary map in simplicial homology is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\partial [v_0, \dotsc, v_{k+1}] &=& \sum_{i=0}^{k+1} (-1)^i [v_0, \dotsc, \widehat{v_i}, \dotsc, v_{k+1}]\\
&=& \left(\sum_{i=0}^k (-1)^i [v_0, \dotsc, \widehat{v_i}, \dotsc, v_{k+1}]\right) + (-1)^{k+1} [v_0, \dotsc, v_k].\\\end{aligned}$$ Transferring this to the setting of chains in $P$ (by considering the space of functions on simplices), the terms in the sum all correspond to chains in $P$ that end on $v_{k+1}$, while the final term corresponds to a chain that ends at $v_{k}$. So if this is really to be a map $C^k(P;\shf{S}) \to C^{k+1}(P;\shf{S})$, all terms in the sum but the final one end up where they ought to: in $C^{k+1}(P;\shf{S})$. This is easily corrected by moving the final term along a restriction map, which is precisely what the Definition \[df:cohomology\] prescribes.
The most effective homological analysis of sheaf models follows the following work flow:
1. Encode the diagrammatic model as a sheaf over a poset as described in this chapter,
2. Linearize, if necessary,
3. Summarize the sheaf model by computing its cohomology, and
4. Reinterpret the cohomology spaces in terms of dynamical invariants.
\[prop:h0\_meaning\] $H^0(\shf{S})$ is isomorphic to the space of global sections of $\shf{S}$.
This means that computing the space of global sections – solutions to the multi-model systems developed in this chapter – amounts to computing the kernel of a linear map.
In this degenerate setting, the 0-length chains in the poset $P$ are merely all of the elements. Thus, $C^k(\shf{S})$ is the product of all stalks of $\shf{S}$. Then the coboundary maps are given by $$\left(d^0 s\right)(a_0 < a_1) = s(a_1) - \shf{S}(a_0 < a_1)s(a_0).$$ for each length 1 chain $a_0 < a_1$. Notice that the kernel of $d^0$ expresses the fact that the values chosen on each stalk agree with the values propagated along the restriction maps – precisely the condition that $s$ is a global section.
In addition to the global sections, the higher degree sheaf cohomology spaces encapsulate other useful information. For instance, there is a sheaf-theoretic Nyquist theorem [@Robinson_SampleBook] that explains the efficacy of discretization methods described in Section \[sec:discretization\]. Briefly, if $\shf{S}$ is a sheaf of solutions of some model and $\shf{S} \to \shf{D}$ is a discretization morphism, then $H^0(\shf{S}/\shf{D})$ and $H^1(\shf{S}/\shf{D})$ describe limits on the kinds of inferences that can be drawn about $\shf{S}$ from sections of $\shf{D}$. Additionally, $H^1(\shf{S})$ for non-discretized sheaf models of differential equations can describe certain dynamical properties of a system [@RobinsonQGTopo].
Since the solution sheaves, as defined in Section \[sec:simultaneous\], are written over posets with two levels – equations and variables – the maximum path length is 1. Therefore, the only nontrivial cohomology spaces can be $H^0$ and $H^1$. The interpretation of $H^0$ is clear in light of Proposition \[prop:h0\_meaning\]. $H^1$ consists of the values of variables that are not consistent across all models. Intuitively, $H^1$ measures the “degrees of freedom of the model that have been constrained out by the equations.” When we move to the dual sheaf of sheaves in Section \[sec:multidiffeqn\], then other, higher-degree cohomology spaces can become nontrivial.
The author would like to thank the anonymous referees for the thoughtful suggestions that have improved this chapter considerably. This work was partially supported under the DARPA SIMPLEX program through SPAWAR, Federal contract N66001-15-C-4040.
[^1]: Which is in general *not* the direct sum, since $P$ may be infinite!
[^2]: By *frontier* of a set $A$, we mean $\cl A \cap \cl A^c$.
[^3]: A *hypergraph* is literally a set of sets of vertices. Each element of a hypergraph is called a *hyperedge*. A hypergraph is given a direction by specifying the order of vertices in each hyperedge.
[^4]: This partial order is the 1-skeleton of the nerve of $\col{U}$.
[^5]: We take signed measures rather than probability measures for algebraic convenience. Throughout, if we start with probability measures, they remain so. Thus nothing is lost by this perspective.
[^6]: We need not consider marginalizing multiple variables out because of Corollary \[cor:multiple\_marg\].
[^7]: Warning! This morphism may not be injective. A sufficient condition for injectivity is given by the Vietoris Mapping Theorem [@Bredon Thm. 3, Section II.11], or [@TSPBook Thm. 4.2].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we derive a maximum principle for a type of elliptic systems and apply it to analyze the Hitchin equation for cyclic Higgs bundles. We show several domination results on the pullback metric of the (possibly branched) minimal immersion $f$ associated to cyclic Higgs bundles. Also, we obtain a lower and upper bound of the extrinsic curvature of the image of $f$. As an application, we give a complete picture for maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representations in the $2g-3$ Gothen components and the Hitchin components.'
address:
- |
Song Dai\
Center for Applied Mathematics of Tianjin University\
Tianjin University\
No.92 Weijinlu Nankai District\
Tianjin\
P.R.China 300072\
- |
Qiongling Li\
Centre for Quantum Geometry of Moduli Spaces (QGM)\
Department of Mathematics, Aarhus University\
Ny Munkegade 118, Bldg. 1530\
8000 Aarhus C\
Denmark\
- |
Department of Mathematics\
California Institute of Technology\
1200 East California Boulevard\
Pasadena, CA 91125\
author:
- Song Dai^1^
- Qiongling Li^2^
title: On cyclic Higgs bundles
---
Introduction
============
Let $S$ be a closed, oriented surface of genus $g\geq 2$ and $G$ be a reductive Lie group. Let $\Sigma$ be a Riemann surface over $S$ and denote its canonical line bundle by $K_{\Sigma}$. A $G$-Higgs bundle over $\Sigma$ is a pair $(E,\phi)$ where $E$ is a holomorphic vector bundle and $\phi$ is a holomorphic section of $End(E)\otimes K_{\Sigma}$ plus extra condition depending on $G$. The non-abelian Hodge theory developed by Corlette [@Corlette], Donaldson [@Donaldson], Hitchin [@Hitchin87] and Simpson [@Simpson88], provides a one-to-one correspondence between the moduli space of representations from $\pi_1(S)$ to $G$ with the moduli space of $G$-Higgs bundles over $\Sigma$. The correspondence is through looking for an equivariant harmonic map from $\widetilde{\Sigma}$ to the symmetric space $G/K$, where $K$ is the maximal compact subgroup of $G$, for a given representation $\rho$ or a given Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$.
In this paper, we are interested in the direction of the non-abelian Hodge correspondence from the moduli space of Higgs bundles to the space of equivariant harmonic maps. More explicitly, given a polystable $G$-Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$ on $\Sigma$, there exists a unique Hermitian metric $h$ compatible with $G$-structure satisfying the Hitchin equation
F\^[\^[h]{}]{}+\[,\^[\*\_[h]{}]{}\]=0,
called the harmonic metric, which gives the equivariant harmonic map from $\widetilde{\Sigma}$ to $G/K$. So for a given Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$, we would like to deduce geometric properties of the corresponding equivariant harmonic map: $\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow G/K$.
We are particularly interested in the following $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundles
E=L\_1L\_2L\_n, = (
[cccccc]{} 0 & & & \_n\
\_1 & 0 & &\
&& &\
& & \_[n-1]{} & 0
):EEK\_,
where $L_k$ is a holomorphic line bundle and $\gamma_k$ is a holomorphic section of $L_{k}^{-1}L_{k+1}K_{\Sigma}$, $k=1,\cdots, n$ $(L_{n+1}=L_1$). Suppose $\det{E}=\mathcal{O}$ and ${\gamma}_k\neq 0$, $k=1,\cdots ,n-1$. Call such a Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$ a cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,{\gamma}_2,\cdots,{\gamma}_n)$. For $G$ a subgroup of $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$, we call $(E,\phi)$ a cyclic $G$-Higgs bundle if it is a $G$-Higgs bundle and it is cyclic as a $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle. The terminology “cyclic Higgs bundles" first appeared in [@Bar]. Note that the notion here is a bit different from the one in [@Bar], where the notion “cyclic" there is referred to the group $G$. One may also view cyclic Higgs bundles as a special type of quiver bundles in [@quiver]. Cyclic Higgs bundles are special in $G$-Higgs bundles for $G$ of higher rank. The harmonic metric for a cyclic Higgs bundle is diagonal, making it possible to analyze the solution to the Hitchin equation and hence the corresponding harmonic map. So studying cyclic Higgs bundles could give us hint on predicting what may happen to general Higgs bundles. If a representation $\rho:\pi_1(S)\rightarrow SL(n,\mathbb{C})$ does not correspond to a cyclic Higgs bundle over one Riemann surface $\Sigma$, it is still possible that $\rho$ corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle over another Riemann surface $\Sigma'$. By Labourie [@LabourieCyclic], any Hitchin representation for $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$ cannot correspond to a cyclic Higgs bundle over a deformation family of Riemann surfaces and later Collier [@Collier] generalizes to a more general family of cyclic Higgs bundles.
If $n\geq 3$, the associated harmonic map for a cyclic Higgs bundle is conformal and hence is a (possibly branched) minimal immersion. In [@DaiLi], the authors studied the pullback metric and curvature of the minimal immersion for cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component (the $q_n$ case). In this paper, we derive a maximum principle for the elliptic systems. The maximum principle is very useful for the Toda-type equation with function coefficient, which appears in the Hitchin equation for cyclic Higgs bundles. With this powerful tool, we generalize and improve the results in [@DaiLi] and discover some new phenomena.
Monotonicity of pullback metrics
--------------------------------
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_n)$, $n\geq 3$. Let $f$ be the corresponding harmonic map and it is in fact branched minimal. The Riemannian metric on $SL(n,\mathbb{C})/SU(n)$ is induced by the Killing form on $sl(n,\mathbb{C})$. Then the pullback metric of $f$ is given by
g=2n(\^[\*\_[h]{}]{})dzd|[z]{},
where $h$ is the harmonic metric. Though at branch points $g=0$, we still call $g$ a “metric".
There is a nature $\mathbb{C}^*$-action on the moduli space $M_{Higgs}$ of $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundles:
\^\*\_[Higgs]{}&& \_[Higgs]{}\
t(E,)&=& (E,t)
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle. Then along the $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit of $(E,\phi)$, outside the branched points, as $|t|$ increases, the pullback metric $g^t$ of the corresponding branched minimal immersions strictly increases.
If we integrate the pullback metric, it gives the Morse function $f$ (up to a constant scalar) on the moduli space of Higgs bundles as the $L^2$-norm of $\phi$:
f(E,)=\_(\^\*) dzd|z.
\[Monotonicity\] Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle. Then along the $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit of $(E,\phi)$, the Morse function $f(E,t\phi)$ strictly increases as $|t|$ increases.
The Morse function is the main tool to determine the topology of the moduli space of Higgs bundles, for example, in Hitchin [@Hitchin87; @Hitchin92], Gothen [@Gothen]. The monotonicity in Corollary \[Monotonicity\] is not new. In fact, Hitchin in [@Hitchin87] showed that with respect to the Kähler metric on the moduli space, the gradient flow of the Morse function is exactly the $\mathbb{R}^*$-part of $\mathbb{C}^*$-action. Hence, along $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit of any Higgs bundles $(E,\phi)$, the Morse function $f(E,t\phi)$ strictly increases as $|t|$ increases. Here we improve the integral monotonicity to pointwise monotonicity along $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit of cyclic Higgs bundles.
Consider the family of cyclic Higgs bundles $(E,\phi^t)$ parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,t{\gamma}_n)$. For $t\in \mathbb{C}^*$, the family $(E,\phi^t)$ is gauge equivalent to $t^{\frac{1}{n}}\cdot(E,\phi)=(E,t^{\frac{1}{n}}\phi)$. If the cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},0)$ is again stable, in this case $\sum_{i=1}^k\text{deg}(L_{n+1-k})<0$ for all $1\leq k\leq n-1$, we extend the monotonicity of $\mathbb{C}^*$-family to the $\mathbb{C}$-family.
\[domination\] Let $(E,\phi^t)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,t{\gamma}_n)$ for $t\in \mathbb{C}$. If the cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},0)$ is stable, then outside the branched points, as $|t|$ increases, the pullback metric $g^t$ of corresponding branched minimal immersions for $(E,\phi^t)$ strictly increases. So does the Morse function.
If the cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},0)$ is stable, it lies in the moduli space of Higgs bundles and is fixed by the $\mathbb{C}^*$-action. Note that the fixed points of $\mathbb{C}^*$-action are exactly the critical points of the Morse function as shown in Hitchin [@Hitchin87].
Curvature of cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component
----------------------------------------------------------
By Hitchin’s description [@Hitchin92] of the Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component, the cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component are of the following form
E=K\^K\^K\^K\^,= (
[cccccc]{} 0 & & & q\_n\
1 & 0 & &\
& & &\
& & 1 & 0
),
where $q_n$ is a holomorphic $n$-differential. We call such a Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$ a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$. If $q_n=0$, the Higgs bundle is called Fuchsian.
The corresponding harmonic map $f:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SO(n)$ is a minimal immersion for $n\geq 3$. We want to investigate that, as an immersed submanifold, how the image $f(\widetilde{\Sigma})$ sits inside the symmetric space $SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SO(n)$.
\[Introcurvature\] Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$. Let $\sigma$ be the tangent plane of the image of $f$, then the curvature $K_{\sigma}$ in $SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SO(n)$ satisfies $$-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}\leq K_{\sigma}<0.$$
The sectional curvature $K$ of $SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SO(n)$ and $SL(n,\mathbb{C})/SU(n)$ satisfies $-\frac{1}{n}\leq K\leq 0$ (see Proposition \[CurvatureSym\]). For general Higgs bundles, one should not expect there is such a nontrivial lower bound at immersed points. For example, in the case of cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,{\gamma}_2,\cdots,{\gamma}_n)$, if $n-1$ terms of ${\gamma}_i$’s have a common zero point, then the curvature of the tangent plane $\sigma$ at that point achieves the most negative, i.e., $K_{\sigma}=-\frac{1}{n}$.
\(1) The upper bound is shown in [@DaiLi]. Here we give a new proof. As shown in [@CL14], along the family of Higgs bundles parameterized by $tq_n$, $K_{\sigma}^t$ approaches to $0$ away from the zeros of $q_n$ as $|t|\rightarrow\infty$. So the upper bound $K_{\sigma}<0$ is sharp.\
(2) The lower bound $-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}$ can only be achieved at some point in the case $n=2,3$.\
(3) In the Fuchsian case, i.e. $q_n=0$, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ is $-\frac{6}{n^2(n^2-1)}$. However, it is strictly larger than the lower bound of $K_{\sigma}$ for $q_n\neq 0$ case when $n>3$. Hence, one cannot expect the curvature in Fuchsian case could serve as a lower bound of $K_{\sigma}$ for general Hitchin representations.
For details one may see the remarks in the end of Section \[curvature\].
Comparison inside the real Hitchin fibers
-----------------------------------------
Fix a Riemann surface $\Sigma$, the Hitchin fibration is a map from the moduli space of $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundles over $\Sigma$ to the direct sum of the holomorphic differentials
h:M\_[Higgs]{} &&\_[j=2]{}\^nH\^0(, K\^j)(q\_2,q\_3,,q\_n).\
(E,)&& ((\^2),(\^3),,(\^n))
Note that cyclic Higgs bundles $(E,\phi)$ lie in the Hitchin fiber at $(0,\cdots,0,n\cdot q_n)$, where $q_n=(-1)^{n-1}\det(\phi)$. There is one special point in each Hitchin fiber at $(0,\cdots,0,n\cdot q_n)$: the cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parametrized by $q_n$.
In Proposition \[harmonicmetriccomparison\], we show that the harmonic metric in the cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component dominates the ones for other cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles in the same Hitchin fiber in a certain sense.
As the applications in lower rank $n=2,3,4$, we compare the pullback metric of the harmonic map for the cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component with the ones for other cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles in the same Hitchin fiber at $(0,\cdots, 0,n\cdot q_n)$.
\[pullback\] Let $(\tilde{E},\tilde{\phi})$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$ and $(E,\phi)$ be a distinct cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle in Section \[s2\] such that $\det\phi=(-1)^{n-1}q_n$. For $n=2,3,4$, the pullback metrics $g,{\tilde}{g}$ of the corresponding harmonic maps satisfy $g<{\tilde}{g}.$
Under the assumptions above, the Morse function satisfies $f(E,\phi)<f({\tilde}E,{\tilde}\phi)$.
By Hitchin’s work in [@Hitchin87], all polystable $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles with nonvanishing Higgs field are cyclic. We can then directly apply Theorem \[pullback\] to $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$-representations, we recover the following result shown in [@DominationFuchsian].
For any non-Fuchsian reductive $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$-representation $\rho$ and any Riemann surface $\Sigma$, there exists a Fuchsian representation $j$ such that the pullback metric of the corresponding $j$-equivariant harmonic map $f_j:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow \mathbb{H}^2$ dominates the one for $f_{\rho}$.
Deroin and Tholozan in [@DominationFuchsian] show a stronger result by comparing Fuchsian representations with all $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$-representations and the condition being reductive can be removed by separate consideration. Inspired by this result, they conjecture that in the Hitchin fiber, the Hitchin section maximizes the translation length. Our Theorem \[pullback\] here is exactly in the same spirit, but using the pullback metric rather than the translation length.
We expect that Theorem \[pullback\] holds for general Higgs bundles rather than just cyclic Higgs bundles.
\[main\] Let $(\tilde{E},\tilde{\phi})$ be a Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component and $(E,\phi)$ be a distinct $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle in the same Hitchin fiber at $(q_2,q_3,\cdots,q_n)$. Then the pullback metrics $g,{\tilde}{g}$ of corresponding harmonic maps satisfy $g<{\tilde}{g}.$ As a result, the Morse function satisfies $f(E,\phi)<f({\tilde}E,{\tilde}\phi)$.
Maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representations
------------------------------------------
For each reductive representation $\rho$ into a Hermitian Lie group $G$, we can define a Toledo integer $\tau(\rho)$ satisfying the Milnor-Wood inequality $|\tau(\rho)|\leq \text{rank}(G)(g-1)$. The representation $\rho$ with $|\tau(\rho)|=\text{rank}(G)(g-1)$ is called maximal. Maximal representations are Anosov [@Burger] and hence discrete and faithful.
In the case for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$, there are $3\cdot 2^{2g}+2g-4$ connected components of maximal representations containing $2^{2g}$ isomorphic components of Hitchin representations [@Hitchin92] and $2g-3$ exceptional components called Gothen components [@Gothen]. Labourie in [@LabourieCyclic] shows that any Hitchin representation corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parametrized by $q_4$ over a unique Riemann surface. Together with the description in [@Gothen; @BradlowDeformation] and Collier’s work [@Collier], any maximal representation for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ in the Gothen components corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle over a unique Riemann surface $\Sigma$ of the form
E=NNK\^[-1]{}N\^[-1]{}KN\^[-1]{}, = (
[cccccc]{} 0 & &&\
1 &0 & &\
&&0 &\
& & 1 & 0
),
where $g-1<\deg N<3g-3$. Note that if $N=K^{\frac{3}{2}}$, the above Higgs bundle corresponds to a Hitchin representation. As a result, for any $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representation in the Hitchin components or Gothen components, there is a unique $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion of $\widetilde{S}$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$. Recently, this result is reproved and generalized to maximal $SO(2,n)$-representations in Collier-Tholozan-Toulisse [@CollierTholozan].
For each Riemann surface, the above cyclic Higgs bundles with $\nu=0$ play a similar role as the Fuchsian case: they are the fixed points of the $\mathbb{C}^*$-action. We call the corresponding representations $\mu$-Fuchsian representations. The only difference with the Fuchsian case is that they form a subset inside each component rather than one single point since $\mu\in H^0(N^{-2}K^3)$ has many choices. As a corollary of Theorem \[domination\], the space of $\mu$-Fuchsian representations serves as the minimum set in its component of maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ representations in the following sense.
For any maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representation $\rho$ in the $2g-3$ Gothen components (or the Hitchin components), there exists a $\mu$-Fuchsian (or Fuchsian) representation $j$ in the same component of $\rho$ such that the pullback metric of the unique $j$-equivariant minimal immersion $f_j:\widetilde{S}\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ is dominated by the one for $f_{\rho}$.
To consider the curvature, as a corollary of Theorem \[Introcurvature\], we have
\[HitchinCurvatureIntro\] For any Hitchin representation $\rho$ for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ of the tangent plane $\sigma$ of the unique $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion satisfies\
(1) $K_{\sigma}=-\frac{1}{40}$, if $\rho$ is Fuchsian;\
(2) $-\frac{1}{36}<K_{\sigma}<0$ and $\exists~ p$ such that $K_{\sigma}(p)<-\frac{1}{40},$ if $\rho$ is not Fuchsian.
Similarly, we also obtain an upper and lower bound on the curvature of minimal immersions for maximal representations.
\[MaximalCurvatureIntro\] For any maximal representation $\rho$ for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ in each Gothen ccomponent, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ of tangent plane $\sigma$ of the uniuqe $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion satisfies\
(1) $-\frac{1}{8}\leq K_{\sigma}<-\frac{1}{40}$ and the lower bound is sharp, if $\rho$ is $\mu$-Fuchsian;\
(2) $-\frac{1}{8}\leq K_{\sigma}<0$, if $\rho$ is not $\mu$-Fuchsian.
As shown in [@CL14],[@Mochizuki], along the family of $(E,t\phi)$, away from zeros of $det(\phi)\neq 0$, the sectional curvature goes to zero as $|t|\rightarrow \infty$. So the upper bounds in Part (2) in both Corollary \[HitchinCurvatureIntro\] and Theorem \[MaximalCurvatureIntro\] are sharp. The sectional curvature $K$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ satisfies $-\frac{1}{4}\leq K\leq 0$. So the lower bounds in Corollary \[HitchinCurvatureIntro\] and Theorem \[MaximalCurvatureIntro\] are nontrivial.
As an immediate corollary of Theorem \[pullback\] for $n=4$, comparing maximal representations in the Gothen components with Hitchin representations, we obtain
For any maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representation $\rho$ in the $2g-3$ Gothen components, there exists a Hitchin representation $j$ such that the pullback metric of the unique $j$-equivariant minimal immersion $f_j:\widetilde{S}\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ dominates the one for $f_{\rho}$.
Maximum principle
-----------------
We derive a maximum principle for the elliptic systems. It is the main tool we use throughout this paper.
Basically, we consider the following linear elliptic system $$\begin{aligned}
\triangle_{g} u_i+<X,\nabla u_i>+\sum_{j=1}^{n}c_{ij}u_j=f_i, \quad 1\leq i\leq n.\end{aligned}$$ Roughly speaking, suppose the functions $c_{ij}$ satisfy the following assumptions:\
$(a)$ cooperative: $c_{ij}\geq 0,~ i\neq j$,\
$(b)$ column diagonally dominant: $\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_{ij}\leq 0,~ 1\leq j\leq n$,\
$(c)$ fully coupled: the index set $\{1,\cdots,n\}$ cannot be split up in two disjoint nonempty sets $\alpha,\beta$ such that $c_{ij}\equiv 0$ for $i\in\alpha,j\in \beta.$\
Then the maximum principle holds, that is, if $f_i\leq 0$ for $1\leq i\leq n$, then $u_i\geq 0$ for $1\leq i\leq n$. The precise statement is Lemma \[mp\].
In the literature, it is common to require there exists a positive supersolution, which is equivalent to the maximum principle, see [@LM]. So for function coefficients, people usually suppose $c_{ij}$ satisfy the row sum condition $\sum_{j=1}^{n}c_{ij}\leq 0,~ 1\leq i\leq n$, say [@PW]. The column sum condition $\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_{ij}\leq 0,~ 1\leq j\leq n$, or in other words column diagonally dominant condition, rarely appeared in the literature. The similar column sum condition first appeared in [@LM], Theorem 3.3.
To the knowledge of the authors, the maximum principles in the literature seem not to directly imply our maximum principle Lemma \[mp\]. We also remark that our proof is more elementary.
Structure of the article. {#structure-of-the-article. .unnumbered}
-------------------------
The article is organized as follows. In Section \[pre\], we recall some fundamental results about the Higgs bundle and introduce the cyclic Higgs bundles. In Section \[MaxP\], we show a maximum principle for the elliptic systems, the main tool of this article. In Section \[monotonicity\], we show the monotonicity of the pullback metrics of the branched minimal immersions. In Section \[curvature\], we find out a lower and upper bound for the extrinsic curvature of the minimal immersions for cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component. In Section \[comparison\], we compare the harmonic metrics of cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component with other cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles in the same Hitchin fiber. In Section \[maximal\], we apply our results to maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representations.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
---------------
The authors wish to thank Nicolas Tholozan for suggesting the problem of looking for a lower bound for the extrinsic curvature of the harmonic map. The authors acknowledge support from U.S. National Science Foundation grants DMS 1107452, 1107263, 1107367 “RNMS: GEometric structures And Representation varieties" (the GEAR Network).
Preliminaries {#pre}
=============
In this section, we recall some facts in the theory of the Higgs bundles. One may refer [@Bar][@DaiLi][@LabourieCyclic]. Let $\Sigma$ be a closed Riemann surface of genus $\geq 2$ and $K=K_{\Sigma}$ be the canonical line bundle over $\Sigma$. For $p\in\Sigma$, let $\pi_1=\pi_1(\Sigma,p)$ be the fundamental group of $\Sigma$. Let $\tilde{\Sigma}$ be the universal cover of $\Sigma$.
A $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle over $\Sigma$ is a pair $(E,\phi)$, where $E$ is a holomorphic vector bundle with $\det E=\mathcal{O}$ and $\phi$ is a trace-free holomorphic section of $End(E)\bigotimes K$. We call $(E,\phi)$ is stable if for any proper $\phi$-invariant holomorphic subbundle $F$, $\frac{\text{deg}F}{\text{rank}F}<\frac{\text{deg}E}{\text{rank}E}$. We call $(E, \phi)$ is polystable if $(E,\phi)$ is a direct sum of stable Higgs bundles of degree $0$.
Higgs bundles and harmonic maps
-------------------------------
(Hitchin [@Hitchin87] and Simpson [@Simpson88])\[dh\] Let $(E,\phi)$ be a stable $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle. Then there exists a unique Hermitian metric $h$ on $E$ compatible with $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$ structure, called the harmonic metric, solving the Hitchin equation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hit eq}
F^{\nabla^h}+[\phi,\phi^{*_h}]=0, \label{curvature equation}\end{aligned}$$ where ${\nabla^h}$ is the Chern connection of $h$, in local holomorphic trivialization,
F\^[\^h]{}=(h\^[-1]{}h),
and $\phi^{*_{h}}$ is the adjoint of $\phi$ with respect to $h$, in the sense that
h((u),v)=h(u,\^[\*\_[h]{}]{}(v))K,u,vE
in local frame, $\phi^{*_{h}}=\bar{h}^{-1}\bar{\phi}^{\top}\bar{h}$.
Denote
&&G=SL(n,),K=SU(n)\
&&=sl(n,),=su(n),={Xsl(n,):|X\^t=X},=.\
&& B(X,Y)=2n(XY)��
The harmonic metric $h$ gives rise to a flat $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$ connection $D=\nabla^h+\Phi=\nabla^{h}+\phi+\phi^{*_{h}}$. The holonomy of $D$ gives a representation $\rho:\pi_1\to SL(n,\mathbb{C})$ and the bundle $(E,D)$ is isomorphic to $\widetilde{\Sigma}\times_{\rho}\mathbb{C}^n$ with the associated flat connection. A Hermitian metric $h$ on $E$ is equivalent to a reduction $i:P_K\rightarrow P_G$ from unimodule frame bundle $P_G=\widetilde{\Sigma}\times_{\rho}G$ of $E=\widetilde{\Sigma}\times_{\rho}\mathbb{C}^n$ to the unitary frame bundle $P_K$ of $E$ with respect to $h$. Then it descends to be a section of $P_G/K=\widetilde{\Sigma}\times_{\rho}G/K$ over $\Sigma$. Equivalently, it gives a $\rho$-equivariant map $f: \tilde{\Sigma}\to G/K$. Denote the bundle $\tilde{P}_K$ be the pullback of the principle $K$-bundle $G\rightarrow G/K$ by $f$. Note that $\pi^*P_K=\tilde{P}_K$, where $\pi$ is the covering map $\pi: \tilde{\Sigma}\to \Sigma$. The Maurer-Cartan form $\omega$ of $G$ gives a flat connection on $P_G$, we still use $\omega$ to denote the connection. It coincides with the flat connection $D$. Consider $i^{*}\omega$, which is a ${\mathfrak{g}}$-value one form on $P_K$. Decomposing $i^{*}\omega=A+\Phi$ from ${\mathfrak{g}}={\mathfrak{k}}\oplus\mathfrak{p}$, where $A$ is ${\mathfrak{k}}$-valued and $\Phi$ is $\mathfrak{p}$-valued. Then $A\in\Omega^1(P_K,\mathfrak{k})$ is a principal connection on $P_K$ and $\Phi$ is a section of $T^*\Sigma\otimes (P_{K}\times_{Ad_{K}}\mathfrak{p})$. By complexification, $\Phi$ is also a section of
(T\^\*)([P]{}\_[K]{}\_[Ad\_[K]{}]{})&=&(T\^\*)([P]{}\_[K\^]{}\_[Ad\_[K\^]{}]{}\^)\
&=&(K|[K]{})([P]{}\_G\_[Ad\_G]{})=(K|[K]{})End\_0(E)
where $End_0(E)$ the trace-free endormorphism bundle of $E$. With respect to the decomposition $(K\oplus\bar{K})\otimes End_0(E)$, $\Phi=\phi+\phi^*$.
With respect to the decomposition $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}+\mathfrak{p}$, we can decompose $\omega=\omega^{\mathfrak{k}}+\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}$, where $\omega^{\mathfrak{k}}\in \Omega^1(G,\mathfrak{k}), \omega^{\mathfrak{p}}\in \Omega^1(G,\mathfrak{p})$. Moreover, $\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}$ descends to be an element in $\Omega^1(G/K,G\times_{Ad_K}\mathfrak{p})$. In fact, using the Maurer-Cartan form $\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}\in \Omega^1(G/K,G\times_{Ad_K}\mathfrak{p})$ over $G/K$: $T(G/K)\cong G\times_{Ad_K}\mathfrak{p}$. Then $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus\mathfrak{p}$ gives an $Ad_K$-invariant orthogonal decomposition and the Killing form $B$ on $\mathfrak{g}$ is positive on $\mathfrak{p}$. The Killing form $B$ induces a Riemannian metric $\tilde{B}$ on $G/K$: for two vectors $Y_1,Y_2\in T_p(G/K)$, $${\tilde}B(Y_1,Y_2)=B(\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y_1),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y_2)).$$ Then $f^*\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a section of $T^*\tilde{\Sigma}\otimes (\tilde{P}_K\times_{Ad_K}\mathfrak{p})$ over $\tilde{\Sigma}$. By comparing the two decomposition of the Maurer-Cartan form $\omega$, we obtain: $$f^*\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}=\pi^*\Phi.$$ So for every tangent vector $X\in T\widetilde\Sigma$, under the isomorphism by the Maurer-Cartan form $$\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}:T(G/K)\cong G\times_{Ad_K}\mathfrak{p},$$ we have $$\label{KeyFormula}
\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(f_*(X))=f^*\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(X)=\pi^*\Phi(X)=\Phi(\pi_*(X)).$$
We consider the pullback metric $g$ on $\Sigma$, $g=\pi_{*}f^{*}\tilde{B}$. Since $f$ is $\rho$-equivariant and $\tilde{B}$ is $G$-invariant, $g$ is well defined. Then $\forall X,Y\in T\Sigma$, locally choose any lift $\tilde{X},\tilde{Y}\in T\tilde{\Sigma}$,
g(X,Y)=(f\_\*(),f\_\*())=B(\^(f\_\*()),\^(f\_\*())=B((X),(Y)).
Later in the paper, we may ignore this covering map $\pi$ for short. Then we have $$\text{Hopf}(f)=g^{2,0}=2n\text{tr}(\phi\phi),\quad g^{1,1}=2n\text{tr}(\phi\phi^{*_{h}})dz\otimes d\bar{z}.$$ If $\text{Hopf}(f)=0$, then as a section of $K\otimes\bar{K}$, the Hermitian metric is
g=g\^[1,1]{}=2n(\^[\*\_[h]{}]{})dzd|z.
The associated Riemannian metric of $g$ is $g+\bar{g}$ on $\Sigma$, i.e., $2n\text{tr}(\phi\phi^{*_{h}})dz\cdot d\bar{z}$, where $$dz\cdot d\bar{z}=dz\otimes d\bar{z}+d\bar{z}\otimes dz=2|dz|^2=2(dx^2+dy^2).$$
We focus on the cyclic Higgs bundles introduced below.
Cyclic Higgs bundles {#s1}
--------------------
A cyclic Higgs bundle is a $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$ of the following form
E=L\_1L\_2L\_n, = (
[cccccc]{} 0 & & & \_n\
\_1 & 0 & &\
& & &\
& & \_[n-1]{} & 0
),
where $L_k$ is a holomorphic line bundle over $\Sigma$ and $\gamma_k$ is a holomorphic section of $L_{k}^{-1}L_{k+1}K$, $k=1,\cdots, n$. The subscript is counted modulo $n$, i.e., $n+1\equiv 1$. Here $\det {E}=\mathcal{O}$ and ${\gamma}_k\neq 0$, $k=1,\cdots ,n-1$. If ${\gamma}_n\neq 0$, $(E,\phi)$ is automatically stable, which implies the existence of the solution to the Hitchin equation $(\ref{hit eq})$. If $\gamma_n=0$, $(E,\phi)$ stable in this case means $\sum_{i=1}^k\text{deg}(L_{n+1-i})<0$ for all $1\leq k\leq n-1$.
Following the proof in Baraglia [@Bar], Collier [@Collier; @BrianThesis], the harmonic metric is diagonal for cyclic Higgs bundles. We include the proof here for completeness.
For a cyclic Higgs bundle $(E,\phi)$, the harmonic metric $h$ is diagonal, i.e. $$h=\text{diag}(h_1,h_2,\cdots, h_n)$$ where each $h_k$ is a Hermitian metric on $L_{k}$.
For $\omega=e^{\frac{2\pi i}{n}}$, consider the holomorphic $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-gauge transformation $g_{\omega}$: $$g_{\omega}=\begin{pmatrix}\omega^{\frac{n-1}{2}}&&&\\&\omega^{\frac{n-3}{2}}&&
\\&&\ddots&\\&&&\omega^{\frac{1-n}{2}}\end{pmatrix}:E\rightarrow E$$ It acts on the Higgs field $\phi$ as follows $$g_{\omega}\cdot \phi=g_{\omega}\phi g_{\omega}^{-1}=\omega\cdot \phi$$
Then the metric $hg_{\omega}^{*_h}g_{\omega}$ is a solution to the Higgs bundle $(g_{\omega}^{-1}\bar\partial_{E}g_{\omega},g_{\omega}^{-1}\phi g_{\omega})=(\bar\partial_E,\omega^{-1}\cdot \phi)$. Since $U(1)$-action does not change the harmonic metric, $hg_{\omega}^{*_h}g_{\omega}$ is also the solution to the Higgs bundle $(\partial_E,\phi)$. Hence, by the uniqueness of harmonic metrics, $$h=hg_{\omega}^{*_h}g_{\omega}.$$ Then $h$ splits as $(h_1,h_2,\cdots,h_n)$.
Denote $L\otimes\bar{L}=|L|^2$, then $h_k$ is a smooth section of $|L_k|^{-2}$. Chosen a local holomorphic frame, we abuse ${\gamma}_k$ to denote the local coefficient function of the section ${\gamma}_k$. Then locally the Hitchin equation is
h\_k+|\_k|\^2h\_k\^[-1]{}h\_[k+1]{}-|\_[k-1]{}|\^2h\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_k=0,k=1,, n,
where $\triangle=\partial_z\bar{\partial}_{z}$, $|{\gamma}_k|^2={\gamma}_k\bar{{\gamma}}_k$ as a local function. If $n\geq 3$, the Hopf differential of the harmonic map $\text{Hopf}(f)=\text{tr}(\phi^2)=0$. And $f$ is immersed at $p$ if and only if $\phi(p)\neq 0$. At point $p$ where $\phi(p)=0$, $f$ is branched at $p$. Then outside the branch points, the harmonic map is conformal, then minimal. The pullback metric is given by $$g=2n\text{tr}(\phi\phi^{*_{h}})=2n(\sum_{k=1}^{n}|\gamma_k|^2h_k^{-1}h_{k+1})dz\otimes d\bar{z}.$$
For $n=2$, we consider the $(1,1)$ part of the pullback metric $g$ instead.
Cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles {#s2}
---------------------------------------
A $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle over $\Sigma$ is a triple $(E,\phi, Q)$, where $(E,\phi)$ is a $SL(n,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundle and $Q$ is a non-degenerate holomorphic quadratic form on $E$ such that $Q(\phi u,v)=Q(u,\phi v)$ for $u,v\in E$. Such $(E,\phi,Q)$ corresponds to a representation
:\_1SL(n,)SL(n,).
Here we consider the holomorphic quadratic form $$Q=\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
&&& 1\\
&& 1&\\
& \udots &&\\
1& &&
\end{array}
\right):E\xrightarrow{\cong} E^*.$$
For $n=2m$, the cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle is of the following form
E=L\_1L\_mL\_m\^[-1]{}L\_1\^[-1]{},= (
[cccccccc]{} 0 & & & & & & &\
\_1 & & & & & & &\
& & 0 & & & & &\
& & \_[m-1]{} & 0 & & & &\
& & & & 0 & & &\
& & & & \_[m-1]{} & 0 & &\
& & & & & & &\
& & & & & & \_[1]{} & 0
).
By the uniqueness of the solution, $h=\text{diag}(h_1,\cdots,h_m,h_{m}^{-1},\cdots,h_1^{-1})$. Locally, the Hitchin equation is
h\_1+|\_1|\^2h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}-||\^2h\_[1]{}\^[2]{}&=&0,\
h\_k+|\_k|\^2h\_k\^[-1]{}h\_[k+1]{}-|\_[k-1]{}|\^2h\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_k&=&0,k=2,, m-1,\
h\_m+||\^2h\_m\^[-2]{}-|\_[m-1]{}|\^2h\_[m-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_m&=&0.
The pullback metric is $g=2n(|\nu|^2h_{1}^{2}+|\mu|^2h_m^{-2}+2\sum_{k=1}^{m-1}|\gamma_k|^2h_k^{-1}h_{k+1})dz\otimes d\bar{z}.$\
For $n=2m+1$, the cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle is of the following form
E=L\_1L\_mL\_m\^[-1]{}L\_1\^[-1]{},= (
[ccccccccc]{} 0 & & & & & & & &\
\_1 & & & & & & & &\
& & 0 & & & & & &\
& & \_[m-1]{} & 0 & & & & &\
& & & & 0 & & & &\
& & & & & 0 & & &\
& & & & & \_[m-1]{} & 0 & &\
& & & & & & & &\
& & & & & & & \_[1]{} & 0
).
In this case, $h=\text{diag}(h_1,\cdots,h_m,1,h_{m}^{-1},\cdots,h_1^{-1})$. Locally, the Hitchin equation is
h\_1+|\_1|\^2h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}-||\^2h\_[1]{}\^[2]{}&=&0,\
h\_k+|\_k|\^2h\_k\^[-1]{}h\_[k+1]{}-|\_[k-1]{}|\^2h\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_k&=&0,k=2,, m-1,\
h\_m+||\^2h\_m\^[-1]{}-|\_[m-1]{}|\^2h\_[m-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_m&=&0.
The pullback metric is $g=2n(|\nu|^2h_{1}^{2}+2|\mu|^2h_m^{-1}+2\sum_{k=1}^{m-1}|\gamma_k|^2h_k^{-1}h_{k+1})dz\otimes d\bar{z}.$
Hitchin fibration and cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component {#s3}
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fix a Riemann surface $\Sigma$, the Hitchin fibration is a map $$h:M_{Higgs}(SL(n,\mathbb{C})) \longrightarrow\bigoplus\limits_{j=2}^nH^0(\Sigma, K^j)\ni (q_2,q_3,\cdots,q_n)$$ given by $h([E,\phi])=(\text{tr}(\phi^2),\dots,\text{tr}(\phi^n)).$
In [@Hitchin92], Hitchin defines a section $s_h$ of this fibration whose image consists of stable Higgs bundles with corresponding flat connections having holonomy in $SL(n,\mathbb{R}).$ Furthermore, the section $s_h$ maps surjectively to the connected component (called Hitchin component) of the $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle moduli space which naturally contains an embedded copy of Teichmüller space. The Teichmüller locus is corresponding to the image of $q_3=\cdots=q_n=0$. Such a $(E,\phi)$ corresponds to a representation $\rho$ which can be factored through $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$,
:\_1SL(2,) SL(n,)SL(n,),
where $\iota$ is the canonical irreducible representation.
The cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component are corresponding to the image of $s_h$ at $(0,\cdots,0,n\cdot q_n)$. More precisely
E=K\^K\^K\^K\^,= (
[cccccc]{} 0 & & & q\_n\
1 & 0 & &\
& & &\
& & 1 & 0
),
where $q_n$ is a holomorphic $n$-differential.
If $q_n=0$, the Higgs bundle is Fuchsian. For $n=2m$,
h\^[-1]{}\_[k]{}h\_[k+1]{}=k(n-k)g\_[0]{},1km-1,h\^[-2]{}\_[m]{}=m\^2g\_0;
for $n=2m+1$,
h\^[-1]{}\_[k]{}h\_[k+1]{}=k(n-k)g\_[0]{},1km-1,h\^[-1]{}\_m=m(m+1)g\_0.
Here $g_0$ is the hyperbolic metric such that $\triangle \log g_0=g_0$.
Maximum principle for system {#MaxP}
============================
The main tool we use in this paper is the following maximum principle for system. We abuse the same notation $g$ to denote both the metric $g(z)dz\otimes d\bar z$ and the local function $g(z)$ on the surface. Define $\triangle_{g}=g^{-1}\triangle$, which is globally defined, called the Laplacian with respect to the metric $gdz\otimes d\bar z$.
\[mp\] Let $(\Sigma,g)$ be a closed Riemannian manifold. For each $1\leq i\leq n$, let $u_i$ be a $C^2$ function on $\Sigma\setminus P_i$, where $P_i$ is an isolated subset of $\Sigma$ ($P_i$ can be empty). Suppose $u_i$ approaches to $+\infty$ around $P_i$. Let $P=\bigcup_{i=1}^{n} P_i$. Let $c_{ij}$ be continuous and bounded functions on $\Sigma\setminus P$, $1\leq i,j\leq n$. Suppose $c_{ij}$ satisfy the following assumptions: in $\Sigma\setminus P$,\
$(a)$ cooperative: $c_{ij}\geq 0,~ i\neq j$,\
$(b)$ column diagonally dominant: $\sum_{i=1}^{n}c_{ij}\leq 0,~ 1\leq j\leq n$,\
$(c)$ fully coupled: the index set $\{1,\cdots,n\}$ cannot be split up in two disjoint nonempty sets $\alpha,\beta$ such that $c_{ij}\equiv 0$ for $i\in\alpha,j\in \beta.$\
Let $f_i$ be non-positive continuous functions on $\Sigma\setminus P$, $1\leq i\leq n$ and $X$ be a continuous vector field on $\Sigma$. Suppose $u_i$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\triangle_{g} u_i+<X,\nabla u_i>+\sum_{j=1}^{n}c_{ij}u_j=f_i \text{ in } \Sigma\setminus P, \quad 1\leq i\leq n.\end{aligned}$$ Consider the following conditions:\
Condition (1) $(f_1,\cdots,f_n)\neq (0,\dots,0)$, i.e., there exists $i_{0}\in \{1,\cdots, n\}$, $p_0\in \Sigma\setminus P$, such that $f_{i_0}(p_0)\neq 0$;\
Condition (2) $P$ is nonempty;\
Condition (3) $\sum_{i=1}^n u_i\geq 0$.\
Then either condition (1) or (2) imply $u_{i}> 0$, $1\leq i\leq n$. And condition (3) implies either $u_{i}> 0$, $1\leq i\leq n$ or $u_{i}\equiv 0$, $1\leq i\leq n$.
[*Proof.* ]{}Let $A=\{1,\cdots,n\}$. For $S\subseteq A$, set $u_S=\Sigma_{i\in S}u_i$. If $S=\phi$, set $u_S=0$. Let $P_S=\bigcup_{i\in S}P_i$. Then
\_[g]{} u\_[S]{}+<X,u\_S>+\_[iA]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[li]{}u\_i0 P.
Then
\_[g]{} u\_[S]{}+<X,u\_S>+\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}u\_j+\_[kS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}u\_[k]{}0 P.
Then for $S\neq \phi$,
\_[g]{} u\_[S]{}+<X,u\_S>+\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}(u\_[{j}S]{}-u\_[S]{})+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{})(u\_[S]{}-u\_[S{k}]{})0 P.
Set
b\_[S]{}=\_ u\_[S]{}, \_[S]{}=\_[jS,kS]{}{b\_[{j}S]{},b\_[S{k}]{}},b=\_[SA]{} b\_[S]{},
Notice that all these constants are finite. By the assumptions $(a)(b)$, in $\Sigma\setminus P$, $c_{lj}\geq 0$ for $l\in S,j\notin S$, and $\sum_{l\in S}c_{lk}\leq 0$ for $k\in S$, then
\_[g]{} \_[S]{}+<X,\_S>+\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}(u\_[{j}S]{}-\_[S]{})+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{})(\_[S]{}-u\_[S{k}]{})0 P.
Then
\_[g]{} (u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})+<X,(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})>+(-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}))(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})0 P.
Step 1: We show that under condition (1) and (2), $u_{S}\geq\check{b}_{S}$ for any $S\subset A$; under condition (3), $u_{S}\geq\check{b}_{S}$ for $S\subsetneq A$. In particular, $b_{S}\geq \check{b}_{S}$ for $S\subset A$ under condition (1) and (2) and for $S\subsetneq A$ under condition (3).
If not, since $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ approaches to $+\infty$ around $P_S$ and continuous outside $P_S$, $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ must attain a negative minimum in $\Sigma\setminus P_S$. First, we suppose $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ is not a constant. By the assumptions $(a)(b)$, in $\Sigma\setminus P$,
-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{})0.
Then by the strong maximum principle for the single equation (see [@MaximumPrinciple]), the minimal point $p\notin \Sigma\setminus P$. So $p\in P\setminus P_S$. Since $P$ is isolated, we consider $p_n\in \Sigma\setminus P$, $p_n\rightarrow p$. Then
\_[p\_np]{}(\_[g]{} (u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})+<X,(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})>+(-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}))(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{}))(p\_n)0.
By the continuity,
\_[p\_np]{}(\_[g]{} (u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})+<X,(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})>)(p\_n)=(\_[g]{} (u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})+<X,(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})>)(p)0.
So
\_[p\_np]{}((-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}))(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{}))(p\_n)0.
If there exists a subsequence $p_{n_k}$ such that $(-\sum_{j\notin S}\sum_{l\in S}c_{lj}+\sum_{k\in S}(\sum_{l\in S}c_{lk}))(p_{n_k})$ approaches to a negative number, then
\_[p\_[n\_k]{}p]{}((-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}))(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{}))(p\_[n\_k]{})>0.
Contradiction. Since $P_S$ is isolated, we have $-\sum_{j\notin S}\sum_{l\in S}c_{lj}+\sum_{k\in S}(\sum_{l\in S}c_{lk})$ is continuous in $\Sigma\setminus P_S$. Then
\_[g]{} (u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})+<X,(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})>+(-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{}))(u\_[S]{}-\_[S]{})0 P\_S,
Then by the strong maximum principle for the single equation, $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ cannot achieve its negative minimum in $\Sigma\setminus P_S$ unless it is a constant. Contradiction. Second, if $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ is a negative constant, then by the assumptions $(a)(b)$, in $\Sigma\setminus P$,
-\_[jS]{}\_[lS]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS]{}(\_[lS]{}c\_[lk]{})0.
Then in $\Sigma\setminus P$, $\sum_{l\in S}c_{lk}\equiv 0$ for $k\in S$. Then by the assumptions $(a)(b)$, $c_{ij}\equiv 0$ in $\Sigma\setminus P$, for $j\in S, i\notin S$, which is a contradiction to the assumption $(c)$ unless $S=A$. If $S=A$, for condition $(2)$, we have $u_S$ cannot be a constant. And for condition $(1)$, $u_{S}-\check{b}_{S}$ is a negative constant implies $\sum_{i\in A}f_i\equiv 0$, which also gives a contraction. So we obtain $u_{S}\geq \check{b}_{S}$ on the whole $\Sigma$. For condition $(3)$, we obtain $u_{S}\geq \check{b}_{S}$ for $S\subsetneq A$. So we finish the claim.\
Step 2: We show $b=0$.
Since $u_{S}=0$ for $S=\phi$, we have $b \leq 0$. If $b<0$, suppose $b$ is achieved by $S_0$, and $|S_0|$ is the smallest among all minimizers. Then $S_0\neq \phi$. Under condition (1) and (2), $u_{S_0}\geq \check{b}_{S_0}$ is automatically true. Under condition (3), we have $u_A\geq 0$ and hence $S_0\subsetneq A$, $u_{S_0}\geq \check{b}_{S_0}$.
Since $c_{ij}$ are bounded, suppose $-\sum_{j\notin S_0}\sum_{l\in S_0}c_{lj}+\sum_{k\in S_0}(\sum_{l\in S_0}c_{lk})\geq -M$, where $M$ is a positive constant. Then in $\Sigma\setminus P$,
&&\_[g]{} (u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})+<X,(u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})>-M(u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})\
&&-(M+(-\_[jS\_0]{}\_[lS\_0]{}c\_[lj]{}+\_[kS\_0]{}(\_[lS\_0]{}c\_[lk]{})))(u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{}).
We have proved $u_{S_0}-\check{b}_{S_0}\geq 0$. Then by the continuity,
\_[g]{} (u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})+<X,(u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})>-M(u\_[S\_0]{}-\_[S\_0]{})0 P\_[S\_0]{}.
Since $b\leq \check{b}_{S_0}\leq b_{S_0}$ and $u_{S_0}$ achieves $b$, we have $\check{b}_{S_0}=b$. Then by the strong maximum principle, $u_{S_{0}}\equiv\check{b}_{S_0}=b$. Then
\_[g]{} b+<X,b>+\_[jS\_0]{}\_[lS\_0]{}c\_[lj]{}(u\_[{j}S\_0]{}-b)+\_[kS\_0]{}(\_[lS\_0]{}c\_[lk]{})(b-u\_[S\_0{k}]{})0 P.
Then by the assumptions $(a)(b)$,
(\_[lS\_0]{}c\_[lk]{})(b-u\_[S\_0{k}]{})&&0 P, kS\_0.
If $b-u_{S_0\setminus \{k\}}=0$ at one point, then $\check{b}_{S_0\setminus \{k\}}=b$, which is a contradiction since $|S_0|$ is the smallest. So in $\Sigma\setminus P$, $\sum_{l\in S_0}c_{lk}\equiv 0$ for $k\in S_0$. As the argument above, it is a contradiction to the assumption $(c)$. Then we obtain $b=0$, in particular, $u_{i}\geq 0$, $1\leq i\leq n$.\
Step 3: We finish the proof.
Since $u_{i}\geq 0$, we have in $\Sigma\setminus P$,
\_g u\_i+<X,u\_i>+c\_[ii]{}u\_i0, 1in.
Then as the argument above, by the strong maximum principle, there exists a subset $Z\subseteq A$, such that $u_i\equiv 0$ for $i\in Z$ and $u_j>0$ for $j\notin Z$. Then for $i\in Z$, in $\Sigma\setminus P$, $0\leq \sum_{j\notin Z}c_{ij}u_j=f_i\leq 0$. Since $u_j>0$ for $j\notin Z$, $c_{ij}\equiv 0$ for $i\in Z,~j\notin Z$. Suppose condition (1) $(f_1,\cdots,f_n)\not\equiv (0,\dots,0)$ or condition (2) $P$ is nonempty holds, we can rule out the possibility $Z=A$. Suppose condition (3) $\sum_{i=1}^n u_i\geq 0$ holds, $Z$ must be empty or $A$. So either $u_{i}>0$, $1\leq i\leq n$ or $u_i\equiv 0$ for $1\leq i\leq n$ .
Let $\lambda_i$ be positive numbers, $i=1,\cdots, n$. Let $u_i'=\lambda_iu_i$, $c_{ij}'=c_{ij}\lambda_i\lambda_j^{-1}$. If $c_{ij}'$ satisfy the assumptions $(a)(b)(c)$, then we still obtain the same results for $u_i$.
The assumption $(c)$ is easy to check by the following procedure. If $1\in\alpha$, consider $\beta_1=\{j: c_{1j}\equiv 0\}$, $\alpha_1=\{1,\cdots,n\}\setminus \beta_1$. Then $\alpha_1\cap \beta=\phi$. Then $\alpha_1\subseteq \alpha$. Denote $\alpha_0=\{1\}$. If $\alpha_{1}\subseteq\alpha_0$, then $\alpha=\alpha_0$ gives such a partition. If $\alpha_{1}\nsubseteq\alpha_0$, consider $\beta_2=\{j: c_{ij}\equiv 0, i\in \alpha_{0}\cup\alpha_1 \}$, $\alpha_2=\{1,\cdots,n\}\setminus \beta_2$. Then $\alpha_2\subseteq \alpha$. If $\alpha_2\subseteq \alpha_0\cup\alpha_1$, then $\alpha=\alpha_0\cup\alpha_1$ gives such a partition. If $\alpha_{2}\nsubseteq\alpha_0\cup\alpha_1$, consider $\beta_3=\{j: c_{ij}\equiv 0, i\in \bigcup_{k=0}^{2}\alpha_k \}$, $\alpha_3=\{1,\cdots,n\}\setminus \beta_3$. Repeat this procedure, then either we obtain a partition $\alpha,\beta$ such that $c_{ij}\equiv 0$ for $i\in\alpha,j\in\beta$ or we show that $1\notin \alpha$. If $1\notin \alpha$, repeat the procedure above for $2,3,\cdots, n$. Then we can show whether such a partition exists or not.
The maximum principle above may be applied to the non-linear version under certain assumptions, by using the linearization
F(u\_1,,u\_n,x)-F(v\_1,,v\_n,x)=\_[j=1]{}\^[n]{}(u\_j-v\_j)\_[0]{}\^[1]{}(tu\_1+(1-t)v\_1,,tu\_n+(1-t)v\_n,x)dt.
For the problems involving poles, we need to check whether the coefficient after linearization is bounded.
Monotonicity of pullback metrics {#monotonicity}
================================
In this section, we first consider the family of the cyclic Higgs bundles $(E,\phi^t)$ parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},t{\gamma}_n),$ $n\geq 3$ for $t\in \mathbb{C}$. We show the monotonicity of the pullback metrics of the corresponding branched minimal immersions along the family $\phi^t$.
\[domination1article\] Let $(E,\phi^t)$ be a family of cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},t{\gamma}_n)$, $n\geq 3$, $\gamma_n\neq 0$, $t\in\mathbb{C}^*$ and $h^t$ be the corresponding harmonic metrics on $E$. Then as $|t|$ increases, $h_k^{-1}h_{k+1}$, $k=1,\cdots,n-1$ and $t^2h_n^{-1}h_1$ strictly increase. As a result, outside the branch points, the pullback metric $g^t$ of the corresponding branched minimal immersions strictly increases.
[*Proof.* ]{}We show that for $0<|t'|<|t|$, all the terms for $t$ dominate the corresponding terms for $t'$.
Let $u_k=h_k^{-1}h_{k+1}$, $k=1,\cdots, n-1$, $u_n=|t|^2h_n^{-1}h_1$. Then
u\_k+|\_[k+1]{}|\^2u\_[k+1]{}-2|\_k|\^2u\_k+|\_[k-1]{}|\^2u\_[k-1]{}&=&0,k=1,, n,
And ${\tilde}{u}_k$ are similarly defined for $t'$, satisfying
[u]{}\_k+|\_[k+1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k+1]{}-2|\_k|\^2[u]{}\_k+|\_[k-1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k-1]{}&=&0,k=1,, n,
Let $v_k=\log(u_k{\tilde}{u}^{-1}_{k})$, then
v\_k+|\_[k+1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k+1]{}(e\^[v\_[k+1]{}]{}-1)-2|\_k|\^2[u]{}\_[k]{}(e\^[v\_k]{}-1)+|\_[k-1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k-1]{}(e\^[v\_[k-1]{}]{}-1)&=&0,k=1,, n,
Let $$c_k=g_0^{-1}|\gamma_k|^2{\tilde}{u}_k\int_{0}^{1}e^{(1-t)(v_k)}dt,~ k=1,\cdots, n.$$ Then $v_k$’s satisfy
\_[g\_0]{} v\_k+c\_[k-1]{}v\_[k-1]{}-2c\_kv\_k+c\_[k+1]{}v\_[k+1]{}&=&0,k=1,,n
It is easy to check that the above system of equations satisfies the assumptions in Lemma \[mp\] and condition (3), since $\sum_{k=1}^nv_k=2\log (\frac{|t|}{|t'|})>0$. One can apply the maximum principle Lemma \[mp\], then $v_k>0$, $k=1,\cdots, n$. Then we obtain $u_k>{\tilde}{u}_k, ~k=1,\cdots,n.$
Finally, the monotonicity of $g^t$ follows from $g^t=2n(\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}|\gamma_k|^2h_k^{-1}h_{k+1}+|{\gamma}_n|^2t^2h_n^{-1}h_1)dz\otimes d\bar{z}$.
For $t\in \mathbb{C}^*$, the family $(E,\phi^t)$ is gauge equivalent to $t^{\frac{1}{n}}(E,\phi)=(E,t^{\frac{1}{n}}\phi)$ by the gauge transformation $\psi_t=\text{diag}(t^{\frac{n-1}{2n}},t^{\frac{n-3}{2n}},\cdots,t^{\frac{3-n}{2n}},t^{\frac{1-n}{2n}}),$ since
t\^
0 & & & \_n\
\_1 & 0 & &\
&& &\
& & \_[n-1]{} & 0
&=&\_t\^[-1]{}
0 & & & t\_n\
\_1 & 0 & &\
&& &\
& & \_[n-1]{} & 0
\_t.
Then we obtain the following results.
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_n)$, $n\geq 3$. Let $g^t$ be the pullback metric corresponding to $t\phi$ for $t\in \mathbb{C}^*$. Then outside the branch points, along the $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit, $g^t$ strictly increases as $|t|$ increases.
Consider the Morse function $f$ on the moduli space of Higgs bundles as the $L^2$-norm of $\phi$:
f(E,)=\_(\^\*) dzd|z.
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle. Then along the $\mathbb{C}^*$-orbit of $(E,\phi)$, the Morse function $f(E,t\phi)$ strictly increases as $|t|$ increases.
Applying Proposition \[domination1article\] to $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$ case, we obtain the monotonicity of the harmonic metric.
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$ Higgs bundle parameterized by $(\nu,{\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{m-1},\mu)$, $\nu\neq 0$. Denote $\nu={\gamma}_0$, $\mu={\gamma}_m$. Consider a family of $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$ cyclic Higgs bundles parameterized by $({\gamma}_0,\cdots,t{\gamma}_l,\cdots,{\gamma}_{m})$, $l=0,\cdots,m$ for $t\in \mathbb{C}^*$. Let $h^{t{\gamma}_l}$ be the corresponding harmonic metrics. Then as $|t|$ increases, $h_{k}^{t{\gamma}_l}$ strictly increases for $k=1,\cdots,l$ and $h_{k}^{t{\gamma}_l}$ strictly decreases for $k=l+1,\cdots, m$.
If the cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},0)$ is stable, we can extend the monotonicity of the pullback metric of $\mathbb{C}^*$-family to $\mathbb{C}$-family.
\[domination2article\] Let $(E,\phi)$ be a family of cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},{\gamma}_n)$, $n\geq 3$, $\gamma_n\neq 0$ and $h$ be the corresponding harmonic metrics on $E$. If $(E,\tilde\phi)$ be a family of cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,\cdots,{\gamma}_{n-1},0)$ is stable, then $h_k^{-1}h_{k+1}$, $k=1,\cdots,n-1$ and $h_n^{-1}h_1$ for $(E,\phi)$ strictly dominate the items for $(E,\tilde\phi)$. As a result, outside the branch points, the pullback metric $g$ of the corresponding branched minimal immersions for $(E,\phi)$ strictly dominates the one for $(E,\tilde\phi)$.
Set $n+1=1$, then the equation for $h_k$ is
h\_k+|\_k|\^2h\_k\^[-1]{}h\_[k+1]{}-|\_[k-1]{}|\^2h\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_k&=&0,k=1,, n.
Let $u_k=h_k^{-1}h_{k+1}$, $k=1,\cdots, n$. Then
u\_1+|\_2|\^2u\_2-2|\_1|\^2u\_1&=&-|\_n|\^2u\_n 0,\
u\_k+|\_[k+1]{}|\^2u\_[k+1]{}-2|\_k|\^2u\_k+|\_[k-1]{}|\^2u\_[k-1]{}&=&0,k=2,, n-2,\
u\_[n-1]{}-2|\_[n-1]{}|\^2u\_[n-1]{}+|\_[n-2]{}|\^2u\_[n-2]{}&=&-|\_[n]{}|\^2u\_[n]{} 0.
And ${\tilde}{h}_k,{\tilde}{u}_k$ are similarly defined for $t=0$.
Let $v_k=\log(u_k{\tilde}{u}^{-1}_{k})$, $ k=1,\cdots, n-1$. Then
v\_1+|\_2|\^2[u]{}\_[2]{}(e\^[v\_2]{}-1)-2|\_1|\^2[u]{}\_1(e\^[v\_1]{}-1)&& 0,\
v\_k+|\_[k+1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k+1]{}(e\^[v\_[k+1]{}]{}-1)-2|\_k|\^2[u]{}\_[k]{}(e\^[v\_k]{}-1)+|\_[k-1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[k-1]{}(e\^[v\_[k-1]{}]{}-1)&=&0,k=2,, n-2,\
v\_[n-1]{}-2|\_[n-1]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[n-1]{}(e\^[v\_[n-1]{}]{}-1)+|\_[n-2]{}|\^2[u]{}\_[n-2]{}(e\^[v\_[n-2]{}]{}-1)&& 0.
Let $c_k=g_0^{-1}|\gamma_k|^2{\tilde}{u}_k\int_{0}^{1}e^{(1-t)v_k}dt,~ k=1,\cdots, n-1.$ Then $v_k$’s satisfy
\_[g\_0]{} v\_1-2c\_1v\_1+c\_2v\_2&&0,\
\_[g\_0]{} v\_k+c\_[k-1]{}v\_[k-1]{}-2c\_kv\_k+c\_[k+1]{}v\_[k+1]{}&=&0,k=2,,n-2\
\_[g\_0]{} v\_[n-1]{}+c\_[n-2]{}v\_[n-2]{}-2c\_[n-1]{}v\_[n-1]{}&&0.
It is easy to check that the above system of equations satisfies the assumptions in Lemma \[mp\] and condition (1), since $\gamma_n\neq 0$. Applying the maximum principle Lemma \[mp\], $v_k>0$, $k=1,\cdots, n-1$. Then we obtain $u_k>{\tilde}{u}_k, ~k=1,\cdots,n-1.$
Proposition \[domination1article\], \[domination2article\] is a generalization of the metric domination theorem in [@DaiLi] in two aspects: (1) from dominating the Fuchsian case to monotonicity along the $\mathbb{C}$-family; (2) from cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component to general cyclic Higgs bundles.
Curvature of cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component {#curvature}
==========================================================
In this section, we would like to obtain a lower and upper bound for the extrinsic curvature of the branched minimal immersion associated to cyclic Higgs bundles. Let’s first get to know how big the range of the sectional curvature of the symmetric space is.
\[CurvatureSym\] Let $G=SL(n,\mathbb{C}), SL(n,\mathbb{R}), Sp(2m,\mathbb{R})(n=2m)$, the maximal compact subgroup $K=SU(n), SO(n), U(m)$ respectively. For any tangent plane $\sigma$ in $G/K$, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ for the associated symmetric space $G/K$ satisfies $$-\frac{1}{n}\leq K_{\sigma}\leq 0,$$ where (1) for $SL(n,\mathbb{C}), SL(n,\mathbb{R})$, $-\frac{1}{n}$ can be achieved by the tangent plane spanned by $$E_{ij}+E_{ji}, E_{ii}-E_{jj} \quad\text{ for any $1\leq i<j\leq n.$}$$ (2) for $Sp(2m,\mathbb{R})$ where $n=2m$, $-\frac{1}{n}$ can be achieved by the tangent plane spanned by $$E_{i,m+i}+E_{m+i,i},E_{ii}-E_{m+i,m+i}\quad\text{for any~} 1\leq i\leq m.$$
[*Proof.* ]{}Suppose the Cartan decomposition of the Lie algebra is $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}+\mathfrak{p}$. The sectional curvature of the plane spanned by the vectors $Y_1,Y_2\in T_p(G/K)$ is (see [@Jost] for reference)
K(Y\_1Y\_2)=.
So it is enough by only checking $Y_1,Y_2\in T_{eK}(G/K)=\mathfrak{p}$. The upper bound is obvious since $B$ is negative definite on $\mathfrak{k}$, where $[\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y_1),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y_2)]$ lies.
Now we show the lower bound. Let $\sigma$ be the plane $\sigma=\text{span}\{Y,Z\}$ where $Y,Z\in\mathfrak{p}$ satisfying $\text{tr}(YZ)=0, \text{tr}(Y^2)=\text{tr}(Z^2)$. The Killing form $B(Y,Z)=2n\cdot\text{tr}(YZ)$. Define $U=Y+iZ, V=Y-iZ$, then the sectional curvature of the plane $\sigma=\text{span}\{Y,Z\}$ is
K\_&=&-\
&&-\
&& -
The equality holds if and only if $U^2=0$ and $UV=U\overline{U}^T$ has only one nonzero eigenvalue. In terms of $Y,Z$, the equality holds if and only if $Y^2=Z^2$, $YZ+ZY=0$, and $Y^2+Z^2+i(ZY-YZ)$ has only one nonzero eigenvalue. The rest is by direct calculation.\
For general cyclic Higgs bundles, one should not expect a nontrivial lower bound of the extrinsic curvature at immersed points since it could achieve the plane of the most negative curvature in $SL(n,\mathbb{C})/SU(n)$.
For cyclic Higgs bundles parametrized by $({\gamma}_1,{\gamma}_2,\cdots,{\gamma}_n)$, if there exists a point such that $n-1$ terms of ${\gamma}_i$’s are equal to zero, the sectional curvature of the tangent plane of the associated harmonic map at this point is $-\frac{1}{n}$.
[*Proof.* ]{}Firstly, $n=2$ case is obvious. Let $n\geq 3$. The associated harmonic map is a possibly branched minimal immersion. The tangent plane $\sigma$ of the minimal immersion at $f(p)$ inside $G/K$ is spanned by $Y_{f(p)}=f_*(\frac{\partial}{\partial x})$ and $Z_{f(p)}=f_*(\frac{\partial}{\partial y})$. Using the formula (\[KeyFormula\]) in Section \[pre\],
&&\^(Y)=()=(+\^\*)()=()+\^\*(),\
&&\^(Z)=()=(+\^\*)()=()-\^\*().
One may refer the details in Section 2 in [@DaiLi]. Hence
\[\^(Y),\^(Z)\]=-2\[(),\^\*()\]=-2\[,\^\*\](, )
Since $f$ is conformal, we have $Y\perp Z$. Then the sectional curvature of the plane $\sigma$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CurvatureFormula}
K_{\sigma}&=& K(Y\wedge Z)=\frac{B([\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Z)],[\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Z)])}{B(\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Y))B(\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Z),\omega^{\mathfrak{p}}(Z))}\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{B([\phi,\phi^*],[\phi,\phi^*])}{B(\phi,\phi^*)B(\phi,\phi^*)}=-\frac{\text{tr}([\phi,\phi^*][\phi,\phi^*])}{2n\cdot\text{tr}(\phi\phi^*)^2}\\
&=&-\frac{(h_n^{-1}h_1|{\gamma}_n|^2-h_1^{-1}h_2|{\gamma}_1|^2)^2+(h_1^{-1}h_2|{\gamma}_1|^2-h_2^{-1}h_3|{\gamma}_2|^2)^2+\cdots
+(h_{n-1}^{-1}h_n|{\gamma}_{n-1}|^2-h_n^{-1}h_1|{\gamma}_n|^2)^2}{2n(h_n^{-1}h_1|{\gamma}_n|^2+h_1^{-1}h_2|{\gamma}_1|^2
+\cdots+h_{n-1}^{-1}h_n|{\gamma}_{n-1}|^2)^2}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ In particular, if at point $p$, there exists $k_0$ such that ${\gamma}_i=0$, for $i\neq k_0$, and ${\gamma}_{k_0}\neq 0$. Then $$K_p=-\frac{2(h_{k_0-1}^{-1}h_{k_0}|{\gamma}_{k_0}|^2)^2}{2n\cdot(h_{k_0-1}^{-1}h_{k_0})^2|{\gamma}_{k_0}|^2)^2}
=-\frac{1}{n}.$$
For example, consider the cyclic Higgs bundle $(L\oplus\mathcal{O}\oplus L^{-1}, \begin{pmatrix}0&0&\beta\\\alpha&0&0\\0&\alpha&0\end{pmatrix})$, where $\deg L<\deg K, 0\neq\alpha\in H^0(L^{-1}K), 0\neq\beta\in H^0(L^2K)$. Suppose in addition, zeros of $\beta$ do not contain all zeros of $\alpha$. Then at any point where $\alpha=0,\beta\neq 0$, the map is an immersion and the extrinsic curvature is $-\frac{1}{3}$.
So instead, we restrict ourselves to cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin components. In this case, we obtain a nontrivial lower and upper bound on the extrinsic curvature of the associated minimal immersion into $G/K$.
Let $(E,\phi)$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n\neq 0$ and $(E,{\tilde}{\phi)}$ be the Fuchsian case. Let $h,{\tilde}{h}$ be the corresponding harmonic metrics. For $n=2m$ even, define
\_1=,\_k=,k=2,, m-1,\_m=.
Similarly, define
\_1=0,\_k=,k=2,,m-1,\_m=.
By the explicit description of ${\tilde}h$, ${\tilde}h_k^{-1}{\tilde}h_{k+1}=\frac{1}{2}k(n-k)g_0$ for $k=1,\cdots,m-1$ and ${\tilde}h^{-2}_{m}=\frac{m(n-m)}{2}g_0$. Here $g_0$ is the hyperbolic metric.
For $n=2m+1$ odd, $\nu_k,{\tilde}\nu_k, {\tilde}{h}_k$ are as above except $\nu_m=\frac{h_{m-1}^{-1}h_m}{h_m^{-1}}$, ${\tilde}\nu_m=\frac{{\tilde}h_{m-1}^{-1}{\tilde}h_m}{{\tilde}h_m^{-1}}$, ${\tilde}h^{-1}_m=\frac{m(n-m)}{2}g_0$.
\[keylemma\] In the above settings,
=\_k<\_k<1, k=1,, m.
The inequality $\nu_k<1$ recovers Lemma 5.3, $q_n$ case in [@DaiLi]. Here we give a new proof using the maximum principle Lemma \[mp\] directly.
[*Proof.* ]{}We only prove the case for $n=2m$. The proof is similar for $n=2m+1$.
The equation system for $h_k$ is
h\_1+h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}-|q\_n|\^2h\_[1]{}\^[2]{}&=&0,\
h\_k+h\_k\^[-1]{}h\_[k+1]{}-h\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_k&=&0,k=2,, m-1,\
h\_m+h\_m\^[-2]{}-h\_[m-1]{}\^[-1]{}h\_m&=&0.
Let
u\_0=(|q\_n|\^2h\^2\_1), u\_k=(h\^[-1]{}\_kh\_[k+1]{}),1km-1,u\_m=(h\^[-2]{}\_m).
By the holomorphicity, $\triangle\log |q_n|=0$ outside the zeros of $q_n$. Then outside the zeros of $q_n$,
u\_0+2e\^[u\_1]{}-2e\^[u\_0]{}&=&0,\
u\_k+e\^[u\_[k+1]{}]{}-2e\^[u\_k]{}+e\^[u\_[k-1]{}]{}&=&0, k=1,, m-1,\
u\_m-2e\^[u\_m]{}+2e\^[u\_[m-1]{}]{}&=&0.
To prove $\nu_k<1$, let $v_k=u_{k+1}-u_k$, $c_k=\int_0^1e^{tu_{k+1}+(1-t)u_k}dt$, $k=0,\cdots, m-1$. Then outside the zeros of $q_n$,
v\_0-3c\_0v\_0+c\_1v\_1&=&0,\
v\_k+c\_[k-1]{}v\_[k-1]{}-2c\_kv\_k+c\_[k+1]{}v\_[k+1]{}&=&0, k=1,, m-2,\
v\_[m-1]{}+c\_[m-2]{}v\_[m-2]{}-3c\_[m-1]{}v\_[m-1]{}&=&0.
Note that only $v_0$ has poles at zeros of $q_n$. To apply Lemma \[mp\], we check that $c_0$ is bounded. In fact, around the zeros of $q_n$,
c\_0=\_[0]{}\^[1]{}e\^[tu\_1+(1-t)u\_0]{}dt=\_[0]{}\^[1]{}(|q\_n|\^2h\_1\^2)\^[1-t]{}e\^[tu\_1]{}dtC.
It is then easy to check that the above system of equations satisfies the assumptions in Lemma \[mp\] and condition (2), since the set of poles (i.e. the set of zeros of $q_n$) is nonempty. Applying the maximum principle Lemma \[mp\], $v_k>0$, $k=1,\cdots, m-1$. Then we obtain $\nu_k<1, ~k=1,\cdots, m-1.$\
To prove $\nu_k>{\tilde}{\nu}_k$, define
u\_k=(h\^[-1]{}\_kh\_[k+1]{}), 1km-1, u\_m=(h\^[-2]{}\_m).
Then
(u\_[2]{}-u\_1)+e\^[u\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[2]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[1]{}]{}&=&|q\_n|\^2h\_1\^20,\
(u\_[k+1]{}-u\_k)+e\^[u\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}]{}&=&0,k=2,, m-2,\
(u\_[m]{}-u\_[m-1]{})-3e\^[u\_[m]{}]{}+4e\^[u\_[m-1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[m-2]{}]{}&=&0.
And ${\tilde}{u}_k$ are similarly defined for the Fuchsian case, satisfying
(u\_[2]{}-u\_1)+e\^[u\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[2]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[1]{}]{}&=& 0,\
(u\_[k+1]{}-u\_k)+e\^[u\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}]{}&=&0,k=2,, m-2,\
(u\_[m]{}-u\_[m-1]{})-3e\^[u\_[m]{}]{}+4e\^[u\_[m-1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[m-2]{}]{}&=&0.
To estimate $(u_{k+1}-u_k)-({\tilde}{u}_{k+1}-{\tilde}{u}_k)$, we have for $k=2,\cdots, m-2$,
&&(e\^[u\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}]{})-(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})\
&=&e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k+2]{}-[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})-2e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}) +e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}-[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})\
&&+(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-1)-2(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-1) +(e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[k-1]{}-[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}-1)\
&=&e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k+2]{}-[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})-2e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}) +e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}-[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})\
&&+(e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{})(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})-(e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}-[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})(e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})\
&&+(e\^[u\_k-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-1)(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}).
Since ${\tilde}{u}_{k+1}-{\tilde}{u}_k$ is a globally defined constant function, the equation of ${\tilde}{u}_{k+1}-{\tilde}{u}_k$ gives
e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}=0.
Then
&&(e\^[u\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}]{})-(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}+3e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{})\
&=&e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k+2]{}-[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})+(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[k+1]{}-[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}) +e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[k]{}-[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[k-1]{}-[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}).
Similarly, for $k=1$,
(e\^[u\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[u\_[2]{}]{}+3e\^[u\_[1]{}]{})-(e\^[[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[2]{}]{}+3e\^[[u]{}\_[1]{}]{}) =e\^[[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[3]{}-[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[2]{}-[u]{}\_[2]{}]{})+(e\^[[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[2]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[2]{}-[u]{}\_[2]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[1]{}-[u]{}\_[1]{}]{}),
for $k=m-1$,
&&(-3e\^[u\_[m]{}]{}+4e\^[u\_[m-1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[m-2]{}]{})-(-3e\^[[u]{}\_[m]{}]{}+4e\^[[u]{}\_[m-1]{}]{}-e\^[[u]{}\_[m-2]{}]{})\
&=&-3e\^[[u]{}\_[m]{}]{}(e\^[u\_[m]{}-[u]{}\_[m]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[m-1]{}-[u]{}\_[m-1]{}]{})+(4e\^[[u]{}\_[m-1]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[m]{}]{})(e\^[u\_[m-1]{}-[u]{}\_[m-1]{}]{}-e\^[u\_[m-2]{}-[u]{}\_[m-2]{}]{}).
Let $v_k=(u_{k+1}-u_k)-({\tilde}{u}_{k+1}-{\tilde}{u}_k)$, $k=1,\cdots, m-1$. Let $c_k=\int_{0}^{1}e^{t(u_{k+1}-{\tilde}{u}_{k+1})+(1-t)(u_{k}-{\tilde}{u}_{k})}dt$, $k=1,\cdots, m-1$. Then
v\_1+e\^[[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}c\_[2]{}v\_[2]{}+(e\^[[u]{}\_[3]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[2]{}]{})c\_1v\_1&&0\
v\_k+e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}c\_[k+1]{}v\_[k+1]{}+(e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{})c\_kv\_k+e\^[[u]{}\_[k-1]{}]{}c\_[k-1]{}v\_[k-1]{}&=&0,k=2,, m-2,\
v\_[m-1]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[m]{}]{}c\_[m-1]{}v\_[m-1]{}+(4e\^[[u]{}\_[m-1]{}]{}-3e\^[[u]{}\_[m]{}]{})c\_[m-2]{}v\_[m-2]{}&=&0.
To apply the maximum principle, we need to check
e\^[[u]{}\_[k+2]{}]{}-2e\^[[u]{}\_[k+1]{}]{}+e\^[[u]{}\_[k]{}]{}0,k=1,, m-2.
This is from the equation of ${\tilde}{u}_{k+1}$ and the fact ${\tilde}{u}_{k+1}=\text{const}+\log g_0$, $\triangle \log g_0=g_0$. Other conditions to apply the maximum principle hold clearly (for $e^{{\tilde}{u}_{m-1}}\leq e^{{\tilde}{u}_m}$, it is from Lemma \[keylemma\]), so we obtain the desired result.\
The cyclic Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component for $n\geq 3$ induce minimal immersions $f:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SU(n)$. We want to investigate that, as an immersed submanifold, how $f(\widetilde{\Sigma})$ sits in the symmetric space.
\[curvaturearticle\] Let $f:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SU(n)$ be the harmonic map associated to Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$. Then the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ of the tangent plane $\sigma$ of the image of $f$ in $G/K$ satisfies $$-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}\leq K_{\sigma}<0.$$ The equality can be achieved only if $n=2,3$.
[*Proof.* ]{}In the case $n=2$, the extrinsic curvature is constantly $-\frac{1}{2}$. Now we consider $n\geq 3$ case. We only prove the case for $n=2m$. The proof is similar for $n=2m+1$. Using the curvature formula (\[CurvatureFormula\]), the sectional curvature of the plane $\sigma$ is
K\_&=&-.
Then $K_\sigma<0$ follows from Proposition \[keylemma\].
To show $K_{\sigma}\geq-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}$, let $\mu_k=\nu_k^{-1}$, then
K\_&&-\
&=&-
Define the functions $G_k, H_k$ for $3\leq k\leq m+1$ as follows. For $3\leq k\leq m-1$,
&&G\_k=(1-\_k)\^2+(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2\_k\^2++(1-\_m)\^2\_k\^2\_[m-1]{}\^2\
&&H\_k=2+2\_k+2\_k\_[k+1]{}++2\_k\_[m-1]{}+\_k\_m
and
G\_m=(1-\_m)\^2,H\_m=2+\_m,G\_[m+1]{}=0, H\_[m+1]{}=1.
The derivatives in $\mu_k$ for $3\leq k\leq m$ are,
(G\_k)\_[\_k]{}=2\_k(1+G\_[k+1]{})-2,(H\_k)\_[\_k]{}=H\_[k+1]{}
Define $F_k$ as a function of $\mu_k$, for $3\leq k\leq m+1$,
F\_k(\_k)=.
So $K_{\sigma}\geq -\frac{1}{n}F_2.$ For $3\leq k\leq m$,
F\_k(\_k)==.
We claim:
\[lemma1\] $F_2<F_3$.
\[lemma2\] $F_k<F_{k+1}$, for $3\leq k\leq m$.
Therefore, combining Lemma \[lemma1\] and \[lemma2\], the sectional curvature
K\_-F\_2>-F\_[m+1]{}=,.
[*Proof.* ]{}(of Lemma \[lemma1\]) The derivative of $F_2$ in $\mu_2$ is
(F\_2)\_[\_2]{}&=& =,
where $F=2(\mu_2(1+G_{3})-1)-(2-\mu_2)H_{3}$. Then
F&<& 2(\_2(1+G\_[3]{})-1)-(2-\_2)H\_[3]{}\
&=&2((1+G\_[3]{})-1)-(2-)H\_[3]{}\
&=&(n-3+2(n-2)G\_[3]{}-H\_[3]{})\
&=&(n-3+2(n-2)((1-\_3)\^2++(1-\_m)\^2\_3\^2\_[m-1]{}\^2) -(2+2\_3++2\_3\_[m-1]{})-\_3\_m)\
&=&(n-3+P\_m),
where $P_k=2(n-2)((1-\mu_3)^2+\cdots+(1-\mu_k)^2\mu_3^2\cdots\mu_{k-1}^2)
-(2+2\mu_3+\cdots+2\mu_3\cdots\mu_{k-1})-(n+1-2k)\mu_3\cdots\mu_k$, for $3\leq k\leq m$.
Claim: $P_{k+1}< P_{k}$, for $3\leq k\leq m-1$.
P\_[k+1]{}&=&2(n-2)((1-\_3)\^2++(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2\_3\^2\_[k]{}\^2) -(2+2\_3++2\_3\_[k]{})-(n-1-2k)\_3\_[k+1]{}\
&=&2(n-2)((1-\_3)\^2+(1-\_[k]{})\^2\_3\^2\_[k-1]{}\^2)-(2+2\_3++2\_3\_[k]{})\
&&+2(n-2)(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2\_3\^2\_[k]{}\^2-(n-1-2k)\_3\_[k+1]{}
The last term $2(n-2)(1-\mu_{k+1})^2\mu_3^2\cdots\mu_{k}^2-(n-1-2k)\mu_3\cdots\mu_{k+1}$ satisfies
&&2(n-2)(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2\_3\^2\_[k]{}\^2-(n-1-2k)\_3\_[k+1]{}\
&=&\_3\_[k]{}(2(n-2)\_3\_[k]{}(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2-(n-1-2k)\_[k+1]{})\
&<&\_3\_[k]{}(2(n-2)\_3\_k(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2-(n-1-2k)\_[k+1]{})\
&=&\_3\_[k]{}(k(n-k)(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2-(n-1-2k)\_[k+1]{})\
&=&\_3\_[k]{} k(n-k)(\_[k+1]{}\^2-(2+)\_[k+1]{}+1)\
&&\
&<&-(n-1-2k)\_3\_k.
Hence $P_{k+1}< P_k$. So
P\_m&<& P\_3=2(n-2)(1-\_3)\^2-2-(n-5)\_3\
&& 2(n-2)(\_3\^2-(2+)\_3+1)< -(n-3).
Hence $F<0$ and then $(F_2)_{\mu_2}<0$. Therefore $F_2(\mu_2)< F_2(1)=F_3$.
[*Proof.* ]{}(of Lemma \[lemma2\]) The derivative of $F_k$ with respect to $\mu_k$ is
(F\_k)\_[\_k]{}&=&
By Proposition \[keylemma\], $\mu_k< {\tilde}\mu_k=\frac{k(n-k)}{(k-1)(n+1-k)}$,
G\_k&<&(1-\_k)\^2+(1-\_[k+1]{})\^2\_k\^2++(1-\_m)\^2\_k\^2\_[m-1]{}\^2\
&=&=.
By Proposition \[keylemma\], $\mu_k>1$, then $H_k> n+3-2k.$
The term $2(k-1)(\mu_k-1+\mu_kG_{k+1})-(2-\mu_k)H_{k+1}$ satisfies
&&2(k-1)(\_k-1+\_kG\_[k+1]{})-(2-\_k)H\_[k+1]{}\
&<& 2(k-1)((\_k-1)+\_kG\_[k+1]{})-(2-\_k)H\_[k+1]{}\
&<&((n+1-2k)+)\
&&-(2-)(n+1-2k)\
&= &(-(k-2)(n-k))\
&= &(-(k-2))\
&<&(-(k-2))<0,
Hence $F_k$ decreases as $\mu_k$ increases. Then $F_k(\mu_k)< F_k(1)=F_{k+1}$.
As shown in [@CL14], along the family of Higgs bundles parameterized by $tq_n$ ($q_n\neq 0$) for $t\in \mathbb{C}$, as $|t|\rightarrow+\infty$, away from zeros of $q_n$, the curvature $K_{\sigma}^t$ approaches to $0$.
The sectional curvature of $SL(n,\mathbb{R})/SO(n)$ satisfies $-\frac{1}{n}\leq K\leq 0$. So the lower bound $-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}$ is nontrivial.
\(1) In the Fuchsian case, i.e. $q_n=0$, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ is $-\frac{6}{n^2(n^2-1)}$. Note that $-\frac{6}{n^2(n^2-1)}\geq-\frac{1}{n(n-1)^2}$ and equality holds for $n=2,3$.\
(2) At the zeros $p$ of $q_n$, $K_{\sigma}\leq -\frac{6}{n^2(n^2-1)}$ and equality holds if and only if $n=2,3$. For example, in the case $n=2m\geq 4$,
K\_(p)&=&-\
&=&-\
&&\
&< &-\
&=&-.
The case $n=2m+1$ is similar.
Comparison inside the real Hitchin fibers at $(0,\cdots,0,q_n)$ {#comparison}
===============================================================
Fix a Riemann surface $\Sigma$, the Hitchin fibration is a map from moduli space of Higgs bundles to the direct sum of holomorphic differentials. We restrict to the $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles.
We first compare the harmonic metrics for cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles $(E,\phi)$ in the Hitchin fiber at $(0,\cdots,0,n\cdot q_n)$, that is, $\det\phi=(-1)^{n-1}q_n$.
\[harmonicmetriccomparison\] Let $(\tilde{E},\tilde{\phi})$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$ and $(E,\phi)$ be a distinct cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle in Section \[s2\] satisfying $\det\phi=(-1)^{n-1}q_n$. Let $h,{\tilde}{h}$ be the corresponding harmonic metrics.
\(1) For $n=2m$, suppose ${\gamma}_1^2{\gamma}_2^2\cdots{\gamma}_{m-1}^2\mu\nu=q_n$, then
h\_k>|\_k|\^2|\_[m-1]{}|\^2||[h]{}\_k, k=1,, m-1,&&h\_m>||[h]{}\_m.\
h\^[-1]{}\_[m+1-k]{}>|||\_1|\^2|\_[m-k]{}|\^2[h]{}\_k, k=1,, m-1,&&h\^[-1]{}\_[1]{}>||[h]{}\_m.
\(2) For $n=2m+1$, suppose ${\gamma}_1^2{\gamma}_2^2\cdots{\gamma}_{m-1}^2\mu^2\nu=q_n$, then
h\_k>|\_k|\^2|\_[m-1]{}|\^2||\^2[h]{}\_k, k=1,, m-1,&&h\_m>||\^2[h]{}\_m.
[*Proof.* ]{}We only prove the inequalities on the first line for $n=2m$. For other cases, the proofs are similar. Define a new Hermitian metric on each $L_k$,
\_k=|\_k|\^2|\_[m-1]{}|\^2||[h]{}\_k, k=1,, m-1, \_m=||[h]{}\_m.
By the holomorphicity, $\triangle\log |{\gamma}_k|=0$ outside the zeros of ${\gamma}_k$ (similar for $\mu,\nu$). Then $\hat{h}$ satisfies, outside the zeros of $q_n$, locally
\_1+|\_1|\^2\_1\^[-1]{}\_[2]{}-||\^2\_[1]{}\^[2]{}&=&0,\
\_k+|\_k|\^2\_k\^[-1]{}\_[k+1]{}-|\_[k-1]{}|\^2\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}\_k&=&0, k=2,, m-1,\
\_m+||\^2\_m\^[-2]{}-|\_[m-1]{}|\^2\_[m-1]{}\^[-1]{}\_m&=&0.
Notice that $\hat{h}$ satisfies the same equation system as $h$, but have zeros.
Define $u_i=\log (h_i/\hat{h}_i)$ and $u_i$ goes to $+\infty$ around the set $P_i$, the zeros of $\hat{h}_i$. Let
c\_1&=&g\_0\^[-1]{}||\^2\_[1]{}\^[2]{}\_[0]{}\^[1]{}e\^[(1-t)u\_1]{}dt,\
c\_k&=&g\_0\^[-1]{}|\_k|\^2\_[k-1]{}\^[-1]{}\_[k]{}\_[0]{}\^[1]{}e\^[(1-t)u\_k]{}dt,k=2,, m\
c\_[m+1]{}&=&g\_0\^[-1]{}||\^2\_[m]{}\^[-2]{}\_[0]{}\^[1]{}e\^[(1-t)u\_m]{}dt.
Then $u_i$’s satisfy
\_[g\_0]{} u\_1-(c\_2+2c\_1)u\_1+c\_2u\_2&=&0,\
\_[g\_0]{} u\_k+c\_[k+1]{}u\_[k+1]{}-(c\_k+c\_[k+1]{})u\_k+c\_[k]{}u\_[k-1]{}&=&0, k=2,, m-1,\
\_[g\_0]{} u\_m-(2c\_[m+1]{}+c\_[m]{})u\_m+c\_[m]{}u\_[m-1]{}&=&0.
We need to check the coefficients are bounded. The $c_i$’s are indeed bounded from the fact $\int_{0}^{1}x^{1-t}dt\leq C$ around $x=0$. It is then easy to check that the above system of equations satisfies the assumptions in Lemma \[mp\] and condition (2), since the set $P=\bigcup_i P_i$ of poles is nonempty. Applying Lemma \[mp\] (the maximum principle), we obtain $u_k>0$, $k=1,\cdots, m$.\
Concerning the associated harmonic maps $f:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow G/K$. We show that the pullback metric of the harmonic map for the cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$ dominates the ones for other cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundles in the Hitchin fiber at $(0,\cdots, 0, n\cdot q_n)$ for $n=2,3,4$.
\[comparisonarticle\] Let $(\tilde{E},\tilde{\phi})$ be a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parameterized by $q_n$ and $(E,\phi)$ be a distinct cyclic $SL(n,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle in Section \[s2\] such that $\det\phi=(-1)^{n-1}q_n$.\
In the case (1) $n=2,\mu\nu=q_2$, (2) $n=3,\mu^2\nu=q_3$, (3) $n=4,{\gamma}^2\mu\nu=q_4$, the pullback metrics $g,{\tilde}{g}$ of corresponding harmonic maps satisfy $g<{\tilde}{g}.$
[*Proof.* ]{}For $n=2$, locally
g=q\_2dz\^2+(||\^2h\^2+||\^2h\^[-2]{})dzd|z+|q\_2d|z\^2\
=q\_2dz\^2+(||\^2||\^2[h]{}\^2+[h]{}\^[-2]{})dzd|z+|q\_2d|z\^2
So
g(,)=(||h-||h\^[-1]{})\^2+2||,(,)=(||||[h]{}-[h]{}\^[-1]{})\^2+2||.
From Proposition \[harmonicmetriccomparison\], $|\mu||\nu|{\tilde}{h}\leq |\mu|h^{-1}<{\tilde}{h}^{-1}$, $|\mu||\nu|{\tilde}{h}\leq |\nu|h<{\tilde}{h}^{-1}$. Then
(||h-||h\^[-1]{})\^2<(||||[h]{}-[h]{}\^[-1]{})\^2,
which implies $g<{\tilde}{g}$.\
For $n=3$, we claim $|\nu|^2{\tilde}{h}h^2<1$. The Hitchin equation is reduced to
(||\^2[h]{}h\^2)+[h]{}\^[-1]{}-||\^4||\^2[h]{}\^2+2||\^2h\^[-1]{}-2||\^2h\^2=0.
Let $u=|\nu|^2{\tilde}{h}h^2$, $a=|\mu|^2{\tilde}{h}h^{-1}$. Then
u+[h]{}\^[-1]{}(1+2a-(2+a\^2)u)=0.
Notice that $u\equiv1$ is a supersolution, then by the maximum principle, $u<1$. For the pullback metric $g,{\tilde}{g}$, locally,
g=||\^2h\^2+2||\^2h\^[-1]{},[g]{}=||\^2||\^4[h]{}\^2+2[h]{}\^[-1]{}.
Let $x=|\nu|h$, ${\tilde}{x}=|\mu||\nu|^2{\tilde}{h}$, $A=|q_3|=|\nu||\mu|^2$. Outside the zeros of $\mu\nu$, from Proposition \[harmonicmetriccomparison\], $x<{\tilde}{x}$. Then
(g-[g]{})&=&(x\^2+)-([x]{}\^2+) =((x+[x]{})x[x]{}-2A)\
&<&(2x\^2[x]{}-2A) =(||\^2[h]{}h\^2-1)<0.
So outside the zeros of $q_3=\mu^2\nu$, we obtain $g<{\tilde}{g}$. We can easily see it also holds at the zeros of $q_3$.\
For $n=4$, locally
g&=&||\^2h\^2\_1+2||\^2h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2+||\^2h\^[-2]{}\_2 =(||h\_1-||h\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2+2||||h\_1h\^[-1]{}\_2+2||\^2h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2,\
[g]{}&=&||\^2||\^2||\^4[h]{}\^2\_1+2[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}[h]{}\_2+[h]{}\^[-2]{}\_2 =(||||||\^2[h]{}\_1-[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2+2||||||\^2[h]{}\_1[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_2 +2[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}[h]{}\_2.
From Proposition \[harmonicmetriccomparison\], $|\mu||\nu||{\gamma}|^{2}{\tilde}{h}_1\leq |\mu|h^{-1}_2<{\tilde}{h}^{-1}_2$, $|\mu||\nu||{\gamma}|^{2}{\tilde}{h}_1\leq |\nu|h_1<{\tilde}{h}^{-1}_2$. Then
(||||||\^2[h]{}\_1-[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2>(||h\_1-||h\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2.
Let $x=|{\gamma}|^2h_1^{-1}h_2$, ${\tilde}{x}={\tilde}{h}^{-1}_1{\tilde}{h}_2$, $A=|q_4|=|\mu||\nu||{\gamma}|^2$.\
Claim: $x<{\tilde}{x}$ and $x{\tilde}{x}> A$, outside the zeros of ${\gamma}$. Then the desired result follows from the basic identity $x+\frac{A}{x}-{\tilde}{x}-\frac{A}{{\tilde}{x}}=(x-{\tilde}{x})(1-\frac{A}{x{\tilde}{x}})$.
To show $x<{\tilde}{x}$, let $u=\frac{x}{{\tilde}{x}}=|{\gamma}|^2h_1^{-1}h_2{\tilde}{h}_1{\tilde}{h}^{-1}_2$. Then $u$ satisfies
u-2[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_1[h]{}\_[2]{}(u-1)+2||||||\^2[h]{}\_1[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_[2]{}(u\^[-1]{}-1) +(||h\_1-||h\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2-(||||||\^2[h]{}\_1-[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2=0.
Then
u-2[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_1[h]{}\_[2]{}(u-1)+2||||||\^2[h]{}\_1[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_[2]{}(u\^[-1]{}-1)>0.
Notice that $1$ is a subsolution, then by the maximum principle, $u<1$.
To show $x{\tilde}{x}> A$, let $u=\frac{A}{x{\tilde}{x}}=|\mu||\nu|h_1h^{-1}_2{\tilde}{h}_1{\tilde}{h}^{-1}_2$. Then $u$ satisfies
u+(2[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_1[h]{}\_2+2||\^2h\^[-1]{}\_1h\_2)(1-u)-(||h\_1-||h\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2-(||||||\^2[h]{}\_1-[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_2)\^2=0.
Then
u+(2[h]{}\^[-1]{}\_1[h]{}\_2+2||\^2h\^[-1]{}\_1h\_2)(1-u)>0.
Notice that $u\equiv1$ is a solution, then by the maximum principle, $u<1$. At the zeros of ${\gamma}$, we can also obtain $g<{\tilde}{g}$ from $|\mu||\nu|h_1h^{-1}_2{\tilde}{h}_1{\tilde}{h}^{-1}_2<1$. So we finish the proof.
By integration, we obtain
The Morse function achieves the maximum in the Hitchin point in the above cases.
As an immediate corollary in terms of representations for $n=2$, we recover the following result shown in [@DominationFuchsian].
For any non-Fuchsian reductive $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$-representation $\rho$ and any Riemann surface $\Sigma$, there exists a Fuchsian representation $j$ such that the pullback metric of the corresponding $j$-equivariant harmonic map $f_j:\widetilde{\Sigma}\rightarrow \mathbb{H}^2$ dominates the one for $f_{\rho}$.
For any reductive $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$-representation $\rho$, if it is into the compact subgroup $SO(2,\mathbb{R})$, the associated harmonic map is constant. In this case, the statement is clear. Given any Riemann surface $\Sigma$, if the representation $\rho$ is not into the compact group $SO(2,\mathbb{R})$, it corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $(\alpha,\beta)$ over $\Sigma$ by [@Hitchin87]. Then we choose the Fuchsian representation $j$ corresponding to the cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $q_2=\alpha\beta$ over $\Sigma$. The statement follows from Theorem \[comparisonarticle\].
Maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representations {#maximal}
==========================================
For each reductive representation $\rho$ into $Sp(2n,\mathbb{R})$, we can define a Toledo integer $\tau(\rho):=\frac{2}{\pi}\int_Sf^*\omega$ where $f$ is any $\rho$-equivariant continuous map $f:\widetilde{S}\rightarrow Sp(2n,\mathbb{R})/U(n)$ and $\omega$ is the normalized $Sp(2n,\mathbb{R})$-invariant Kähler $2$-form on $Sp(2n,\mathbb{R})/U(n)$. It is well-known that $|\tau(\rho)|\leq n(g-1)$. The representation $\rho$ with $|\tau(\rho)|=n(g-1)$ is called maximal.
A $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle over $\Sigma$ is a pair $(V\oplus V^*,\begin{pmatrix}0&\beta\\ \gamma&0\end{pmatrix})$ where $V$ is a rank $2$ holomorphic vector bundle over $\Sigma$, $\beta\in H^0(S^2V\otimes K_{\Sigma})$ and $\gamma\in H^0(\Sigma,S^2V^*\otimes K_{\Sigma})$. The Toledo integer of the $Sp(4, \mathbb{R})$-Higgs bundle is the integer $\deg(V)$. There are $3 \cdot 2^{2g} + 2g -4$ components of maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representations shown in [@Gothen] containing $2^{2g}$ Hitchin components isomorphic to each other and $2g-3$ exceptional components called Gothen components.
Labourie in [@LabourieCyclic] shows that any $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ Hitchin representation corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin components over a unique Riemann surface. As a result, there is a unique $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion of $\widetilde{S}$ into $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ for any Hitchin representation for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$.
For each Riemann surface $\Sigma$, each Gothen component is explicitly described in [@BradlowDeformation] as the moduli space of Higgs bundles of the following form
E=NNK\^[-1]{}N\^[-1]{}KN\^[-1]{}, = (
[cccccc]{} 0 &q\_2 &0 &\
1 &0 &0 &0\
0&&0 &q\_2\
0 & 0& 1 & 0
)
where $g-1<\deg(N)<3g-3$, $\nu\in H^0(N^2K), \mu\in H^0(N^{-2}K^3),$ and $q_2\in H^0(K^2)$. Here $V=N\oplus N^{-1}K$.
By Collier’s work [@Collier], we can replace the variation of $q_2$ with a variation of base Riemann surface structure. That is, any maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representation in the Gothen components corresponds to a Higgs bundle over a unique Riemann surface $\Sigma$ of the form
E=NNK\^[-1]{}N\^[-1]{}KN\^[-1]{}, = (
[cccccc]{} 0 &0 &0 &\
1 &0 &0 &0\
0&&0 &0\
0 & 0& 1 & 0
)
where $g-1<\deg(N)<3g-3$, $\mu\neq 0$ and $\nu$ can be zero. The $2g-3$ Gothen components are indexed by the degree of $N$. These are cyclic $SL(4,\mathbb{C})$-Higgs bundles. Note that If $N=K^{\frac{3}{2}}$, this gives the Hitchin representation. As a result, for any $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$-representation in the Gothen components, there is a unique $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion of $\widetilde{S}$ into $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$.
The above cyclic Higgs bundles with $\nu=0$ are stable and play a similar role as the Fuchsian case. We call the corresponding representations $\mu$-Fuchsian representations. The space of $\mu$-Fuchsian representations serves as the minimum in its component of maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ representations in the following sense.
For any maximal representation $\rho:\pi_1(S)\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ in the $2g-3$ Gothen components, there exists a $\mu$-Fuchsian representation $j$ of $\pi_1(S)$ such that the pullback metric of the unique $j$-equivariant minimal immersion $f_j:\widetilde{S}\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ is dominated by the one for $f_{\rho}$.
For any maximal representation in the Gothen component, we can realize it as a cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $(1,\mu,1,\nu)$ over some Riemann surface $\Sigma$. Then we choose the $\mu$-Fuchian representation corresponding to cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $(1,\mu,1,0)$ over $\Sigma$. Then the statement follows from Theorem \[domination2article\].
\
Since any Hitchin representation for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle over some Riemann surface $\Sigma$, we obtain bounds on the extrinsic curvature of minimal immersions for maximal representations in the Hitchin component as an immediate corollary of Theorem \[curvaturearticle\].
For any Hitchin representation $\rho$ for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ of the tangent plane $\sigma$ of the uniuqe $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion satisfies\
(1) $K_{\sigma}=-\frac{1}{40}$, if $\rho$ is Fuchsian;\
(2) $-\frac{1}{36}<K_{\sigma}<0$ and $\exists~ p$ such that $K_{\sigma}(p)<-\frac{1}{40},$ if $\rho$ is not Fuchsian.
The lower bound $-\frac{1}{36}$ is nontrivial, since the sectional curvature $K$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ satifies that $-\frac{1}{4}\leq K\leq 0$.
Similarly, we also obtain estimates on the extrinsic curvature of minimal immersions for maximal representations in $2g-3$ Gothen component.
For any maximal representation $\rho$ for $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ in each Gothen component, the sectional curvature $K_{\sigma}$ in $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ of the tangent plane $\sigma$ of the unique $\rho$-equivariant minimal immersion satisfies\
(1) $-\frac{1}{8}\leq K_{\sigma}<-\frac{1}{40}$ and the lower bound is sharp, if $\rho$ is $\mu$-Fuchsian;\
(2) $-\frac{1}{8}\leq K_{\sigma}<0$, if $\rho$ is not $\mu$-Fuchsian.
It is sufficient to work with cyclic Higgs bundle parameterized by $(1,\mu,1,\nu)$ of the above form. The Hitchin equation in this case is
\_1+[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}-||\^2[h]{}\_[1]{}\^[2]{}&=&0,\
\_2+||\^2[h]{}\_2\^[-2]{}-h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2&=&0
Using the curvature formula (\[CurvatureFormula\]), the sectional curvature of the tangent plane $\sigma$ of the minimal immersion is
K\_&=&-.
For the right inequality, outside zeros of $\mu\nu$,
&&\_1\^2h\_2\^[-2]{}||-(||\^2h\_2\^[-2]{}+||\^2[h]{}\_[1]{}\^[2]{})+2[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}=0\
&& \_1\^2h\_2\^[-2]{}||-2||h\_1h\_2\^[-1]{}-2[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}0\
&& \_1\^2h\_2\^[-2]{}||-2(h\_1\^2h\_2\^[-2]{}||-1)[h]{}\_1\^[-1]{}h\_[2]{}0
So at the maximum of $h_1^2h_2^{-2}|\mu\nu|$, $h_1^2h_2^{-2}|\mu\nu|-1\leq 0$. Hence $h_1^2h_2^{-2}|\mu\nu|\leq 1$ on the whole surface. By the strong maximum principle, we obtain that $h_1^2h_2^{-2}|\mu\nu|<1$. So ${h}_1^{-1}h_{2}=|\nu|^2{h}_{1}^{2}$ and $|\mu|^2{h}_2^{-2}=h_1^{-1}h_2$ cannot hold at any point $p$ simultaneously, since it would imply that $h_1^2h_2^{-2}|\mu\nu|=1$ at point $p$, contradiction. Therefore $K_{\sigma}<0$.\
\
For the left inequality. Let $f_1=\frac{h_1^2|\nu|^2}{h_1^{-1}h_2}, f_2=\frac{h_2^{-2}|\mu|^2}{h_1^{-1}h_2}$. Claim: $f_1,f_2<\frac{4}{3}$.\
The equation for $f_1$ is, outside zeros of $\nu$,
&&f\_1+\[3(1-f\_1)-(f\_2-1)\]h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2=0\
&&\_[h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2]{}f\_1+3(1-f\_1)-(f\_2-1)=0\
&&\_[h\_1\^[-1]{}h\_2]{}f\_1+3(1-f\_1)+10
So at the maximum of $f_1$, $3(1-f_1)+1\leq 0$, hence $f_1\leq \frac{4}{3}$. Use the strong maximum principle, $f_1<\frac{4}{3}$. It is similar for $f_2$. The claim is proven.
Using $0\leq f_1,f_2<\frac{4}{3}$,
K\_=-=--=-.
Note that $K_{\sigma}$ only achieves $-\frac{1}{8}$ if $f_1=f_2=0$. This only happens at common zeros of $\mu$ and $\nu$.
In the $\mu$-Fuchsian case, $\nu=0$. So $f_1=0$ and again $f_2<\frac{4}{3}$. Then using $(f_2+2)^{-1}\in (\frac{3}{10},\frac{1}{2}]$,
K\_= -=-=-(((f\_2+2)\^[-1]{}-)\^2-<-.
Note that at zeros of $\mu$ in $\mu$-Fuchsian case, the curvature $K_{\sigma}=-\frac{1}{8}$.
As shown in [@Mochizuki], along the family of $(E,t\phi)$, as $|t|\rightarrow \infty$, away from zeros of $\mu\nu\neq 0$, the sectional curvature goes to zero. So the upper bound in Part (2) is sharp.
We compare the Gothen components with the Hitchin components.
For any maximal representation $\rho:\pi_1(S)\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ in the $2g-3$ Gothen components, there exists a Hitchin representation $j$ of $\pi_1(S)$ such that the pullback metric of the unique $j$-equivariant minimal immersion $f_j:\widetilde{S}\rightarrow Sp(4,\mathbb{R})/U(2)$ dominates the one for $f_{\rho}$.
For any maximal representation $\rho$ in the Gothen components, it corresponds to a cyclic Higgs bundle parametrized by $(1,\mu,1,\nu)$ over some Riemann surface $\Sigma$. Then we choose the Hitchin representation $j$ corresponding to cyclic Higgs bundle in the Hitchin component parametrized by $q_4=\mu\nu$ over $\Sigma$. The statement then follows from Theorem \[comparisonarticle\] for $n=4$.
[99]{} L. Álvarez-Cónsul, O. García-Prada, [*Hitchin-Kobayashi correspondence, quivers and vortices*]{}, Comm. Math. Phys. 238 (2003), 1–31 D. Baraglia, [*$G_2$ Geometry and integrable system*]{}, thesis, arXiv:1002.1767v2, 2010. S. B. Bradlow, O. García-Prada, and P. B. Gothen, [*Deformations of maximal representations in $Sp(4, \mathbb{R})$*]{}, Q. J. Math. 63 (2012), no. 4, 795–843. MR 2999985. M. Burger, A. Iozzi, F. Labourie, and A. Wienhard, [*Maximal representations of surface groups: symplectic Anosov structures*]{}, Pure Appl. Math. Q. 1 (2005), no. 3, Special Issue: In memory of Armand Borel. Part 2, 543–590. MR 2201327 (2007d:53064) B. Collier, [*Maximal $Sp(4,\mathbb{R})$ surface group representations, minimal surfaces and cyclic surfaces*]{}, Geometriae Dedicata 180 (2015), no. 1, 241–285. B. Collier, [*Finite order automorphism of Higgs bundles: theory and application*]{}, thesis, 2016. B. Collier, Q. Li, [*Asymptotics of Higgs bundles in the Hitchin component*]{}, Adv. Math. 307 (2017), 488–558, MR3590524, Zbl 06670884. B. Collier, Nicolas Tholozan, Jérémy Toulisse, [*The geometry of maximal representations of surface groups into $SO(2,n)$*]{}, arxiv 1702.08799. K. Corlette, [*Flat $G$-bundles with canonical metrics*]{}, J. Diff. Geom. 28(1988), no. 3, 361-382, MR965220, Zbl 0676.58007. S. Dai, Q. Li , [*Minimal surfaces for Hitchin representations*]{}, to appear in Journal of Differential Geometry. B. Deroin, N. Tholozan, [*Dominating surface group representations by Fuchsian ones*]{}, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2016, no. 13, 4145–4166, MR3544632. S. K. Donaldson, [*Twisted harmonic maps and the self-duality equations*]{}, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 55 (1987), no. 1, 127–131, MR0887285, Zbl 0634.53046. P. B. Gothen, [*Components of spaces of representations and stable triples*]{}, Topology 40 (2001), 823–850. N. J. Hitchin, [*The self-duality equations on a Riemann surface*]{}, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 55 (1987), no. 1, 59–126, MR0887284, Zbl 0634.53045. N. J. Hitchin, [*Lie groups and Teichmüller space*]{}, Topology 31 (1992), no. 3, 449–473, MR1174252, Zbl 0769.32008. J. Jost, [*Riemannian Geometry and Geometric Analysis*]{}, Third edition, Universitext, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002. F. Labourie, [*Cyclic surfaces and Hitchin components in rank 2*]{}, Ann. of Math. (2) 185 (2017), no. 1, 1–58, MR3583351, Zbl 06686583. J. López-Gómez, M. Molina-Meyer, [*The maximum principle for cooperative weakly coupled elliptic systems and some applications*]{}, Differential Integral Equations 7 (1994), no. 2. T. Mochizuki, [*Asymptotic behaviour of certain families of harmonic bundles on Riemann surfaces*]{}, J. Topol. 9 (2016), no. 4, 1021–1073. MR3620459. J. Jost, [*Partial differential equations*]{}, Second edition. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, New York, 2007. M. H. Protter, H. F. Weinberger, [*Maximum Principles in Differential Equations*]{}, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984. C. Simpson, [*Constructing variations of Hodge structure using Yang-Mills theory and applications to uniformization*]{}, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 1 (1988), no. 4, 867–918. MR0944577, Zbl 0669.58008.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The tremendous success of deep neural networks has motivated the need to better understand the fundamental properties of these networks, but many of the theoretical results proposed have only been for shallow networks. In this paper, we study an important primitive for understanding the meaningful input space of a deep network: *span recovery*. For $k<n$, let $\AA \in {\mathbb{R}}^{k \times n}$ be the innermost weight matrix of an arbitrary feed forward neural network $M:{\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$, so $M(x)$ can be written as $M(x) = \sigma(\AA x)$, for some network $\sigma:{\mathbb{R}}^k \to {\mathbb{R}}$. The goal is then to recover the row span of $\AA$ given only oracle access to the value of $M(x)$. We show that if $M$ is a multi-layered network with ReLU activation functions, then partial recovery is possible: namely, we can provably recover $k/2$ linearly independent vectors in the row span of $\AA$ using ${\text{poly}}(n)$ non-adaptive queries to $M(x)$. Furthermore, if $M$ has differentiable activation functions, we demonstrate that *full* span recovery is possible even when the output is first passed through a sign or $0/1$ thresholding function; in this case our algorithm is adaptive. Empirically, we confirm that full span recovery is not always possible, but only for unrealistically thin layers. For reasonably wide networks, we obtain full span recovery on both random networks and networks trained on MNIST data. Furthermore, we demonstrate the utility of span recovery as an attack by inducing neural networks to misclassify data obfuscated by controlled random noise as sensical inputs.'
author:
- |
Rajesh Jayaram[^1]\
Carnegie Mellon University\
`[email protected]`\
- |
David P. Woodruff\
Carnegie Mellon University\
`[email protected]`\
- |
Qiuyi Zhang\
Google Brain\
`[email protected]`
bibliography:
- 'refArxiv.bib'
title: Span Recovery for Deep Neural Networks with Applications to Input Obfuscation
---
[^1]: The authors Rajesh Jayaram and David Woodruff would like to thank the partial support by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. CCF-1815840.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
date:
---
=16.5cm =-1.4cm 35[0.35in]{} \#1[$^{[#1]}$]{} \#1[$\setbox0=\hbox{#1} \dp0=1.5pt \mathsurround=0pt
\underline{\box0}$]{} ø\
i
-1.2cm -0.2cm
Feb. 25, 2000
Anisotropy of Dynamical Fluctuations as a Probe 0.4cm
for Soft and Hard Processes in High Energy Collisions[^1]
0.5cm
0.2cm
[Liu Lianshou, Chen Gang and Fu Jinghua]{} [Institute of Particle Physics, Huazhong Normal University, Wuhan 430079 China]{}
0.5in
[ABSTRACT]{}
[0.6cm It is shown using Lund Monte Carlo that, unlike the average properties of the hadronic system inside jets, the anisotropy of dynamical fluctuations in these systems changes abruptly with the variation of the cut parameter $\yct$. A transition point exists, where the dynamical fluctuations in the hadronic system inside jet behave like those in soft hadronic collisions. Thus the anisotropy property of the dynamical fluctuations can serve as a probe for the soft and hard processes in high energy collisions.]{}
0.8cm
PACS number: 13.85 Hd
0.5cm Keywords: dynamical fluctuations, hadronic jet, hard and soft\
2.6cm processes
0.24in As is well known, the presently most promissing theory of strong interaction — Quantum Chromo-Dynamics (QCD) has the special property of both asymptotic freedom and colour confinement. For this reason, in any process, even though the energy scale, $Q^2$, is large enough to be able to do perturbative QCD (pQCD) calculation, there must be a non-perturbative hadronization phase before the final state particles can be observed. Therefore, the transition or interplay between hard and soft processes is a very important problem.
In current literature, this transition is determined by some cut-parameter. For example, in doing theoretical calculation a parameter $Q_0^2$ is introduced. When $Q^2>Q_0^2$ the perturbative QCD is assumed to be applicable and the process is hard. While when $Q^2<Q_0^2$ the perturbative calculation is unallowed and the process becomes soft (nonperturbative). However, the value of $Q_0^2$ is not determined exactly. It decreases steadily as the developement of perturbative technique. In experimental data analysis people use some “jet-algorithm” (e.g. Jade [@Jade] or Durham [@Durham] ones) to combine the final-state particles into “jets”. Each jet is assumed to be originated from a hard parton, and the hadrons in the jet is produced softly from this hard parton. Thus the transition between hard and soft processes is described as the production of hard partons and the subsequent hadronization of these partons. In this formalism there is also a parameter — $\yct$. The value of this parameter determines how the hadrons are grouped into jets, and whether an event is a “2-jet event” or a “3-jet”, “4-jet” ones, Let us concentrate on the 2-jet events. By definition, these two jets should be developed softly from two hard partons and no hard process is involved in the evolution. If there is any hard process in the developement then we say that a third jet appears. Historically, it was the observation of the third jet in e$^+$e$^-$ collisions that confirmed the existence of gluon [@Brandelik]–[@Bartel]. In this sense, there should be a definite value of $\yct$, which is consistent with the physical meaning of “jet”.
On the other hand, due to the success in pQCD calculation of jet, people sometimes take the number of jets in an event as indefinite, depending on the value of $\yct$, which can be chosen arbitrarily. Their stress is in ultilizing this dependence to confront the pQCD calculation with experiments. From this point of view, the physical meaning of jet and the associated concepts —— “soft” and “hard” are neglected. A process is hard or soft is not judged physically, but is determined through the technical problem of whether the process can be calculated by perturbative QCD.
Let us remind that physically, soft and hard are distinguished through the magnitude of transverse momentum. In hadron-hadron collisions at energies below top-ISR most of the final-state hadrons have low transverse momenta and the process is soft. At collider energies high-transverse-momentum jets, coming from hard parton collisions, start to appear [@UA1jet]. The transverse momenta of this jets are higher than 10 – 20 GeV/$c$. Besides, there are also mini-jets with transverse momenta higher than about 4 – 5 GeV/$c$ [@Ciapetti], which are generally refered to as semi-hard. The critical value of transverse momentum for the transition between soft and hard (semi-hard) is about 4 – 5 GeV/$c$.
The following important questions arise: 1) Does the number of jets in an event possess any definite meaning? If yes, how to determine this number, i.e. how to decide the correct value of $\yct$ for the determination of this number. 2) Is it in principle possible to locate the transition between soft and hard processes in the hadronic final states of high energy e$^+$e$^-$ collisions? If yes, how to do that?
In order to answer these questions, let us remind that the qualitative difference between the typical soft process — moderate energy hadron-hadron collisions and the typical hard process — high energy e$^+$e$^-$ collisions can be observed most clearly in the property of dynamical fluctuations therein. It is found recently [@FFLPRD] that inspite of the similarities in the average properties, the dynamical fluctuations in the hadronic systems from these two processes are qualitatively different —— the former is anisotropic in the longitudinal-transvere plane and isotropic in the transverse planes while the latter is isotropic in three dimensional phase space.
This observation inspired us to think that the dynamical-fluctuation property may provide a probe for the transition betweem soft and hard processes inside the hadronic final state of high energy e$^+$e$^-$ collisions. In the present letter we show, using Lund Monte Carlo simulation, that this is indeed the case.
In total 500 000 events are generated for 91.2 GeV e$^+$e$^-$ collisions using JETSET7.4. The resulting hadronic systems are analysed using Durham and/or Jade jet-algorithms. The fractions $R_2$, $R_3$, $R_4$ of the 2-, 3-, 4-jet events in the whole sample are plotted versus the value of $\yct$ for both Durham and Jade algorithms in Fig.1. It can be seen clearly form the figures that the definition of “jet” depends strongly on the value of $\yct$. When $\yct$ is big, most of the events are taken to be “2-jet” events. In the limit of very large $\yct$, the whole sample consists of only “2-jet” events. On the contrary, when the value of $\yct$ decreases continuously, the jets are divided further and further, and gradually most of the events become “multi-jet” (more than two jets) ones.
At the energy in consideration, it is certainly impossible that all the events are 2-jet ones. Neither is it possible that most of the events are multi-jet ones. In order to determine a reasonable value of $\yct$, we have to use the dependence of some physical property of the system on $\yct$. As example, we show in Fig.2 the dependence of average charged multiplicity $\la N_{\rm ch}\ra$ and average ellipticity $\la e\ra$ on $\yct$ for the “2-jet” sample determined by Durham algorithm. The ellipticity $e$ is an event-shape parameter defined as the ratio of minor $T_3$ to major $T_2$ in thrust analysis [@Brandt][@Barber] e = T\_3 / T\_2. By definition $e\leq 1$. When $e=1$ the jet cone is circular in the momentum space. It is expected that, when $\yct$ increases, more and more “inpurities” (multi-jet events) are mixed into the “2-jet” event sample, and the jet cone will diviate more and more from being circular. So the average ellipticity $\la e\ra$ will drcrease with the increasing of $\yct$. It can be seen from the figure that this is indeed the case. However, the value of $\la e\ra$ changes smoothly with $\yct$ and it is hard to get a probe for a reasonable value of $\yct$ by using $\la e\ra$. The same holds also for $\la N_{\rm ch}\ra$ and other average quantities.
(250,450) (-120,290) [ ]{} (170,290) [ ]{}
-10.5cm
[as function of $\yct$ as function of $\yct$]{} 0.5cm
Let us turn now to consider the dynamical fluctuations. These fluctuations can be characterized by the anomalous scaling of factorial moments (FM) [@BP]: F\_q(M)&=&\_[m=1]{}\^[M]{}[[n\_m(n\_m-1) (n\_m-q+1)]{}]{}\
&& (M)\^[\_q]{} (M) , where a region $\Delta$ in 1-, 2- or 3-dimensional phase space is divided into $M$ cells, $n_m$ is the multiplicity in the $m$th cell, and $\langle\cdots\rangle$ denotes vertically averaging over the event sample. Note that when the fluctuations exist in higher-dimensional (2-D or 3-D) space the projection effect [@Ochs] will cause the second-order 1-D FM goes to saturation according to the rule[^2]: F\_2\^[(a)]{}(M\_a) = A\_a-B\_a M\_a\^[-\_a]{}, where $a=1,2,3$ denotes the different 1-D variables. The parameter $\gamma_a$ describes the rate of going to saturation of the FM in direction $a$ and is the most important characteristic for the higher-dimensional dynamical fluctuations. If $\gamma_a = \gamma_b$ the fluctuations are isotropic in the $a,b$ plane; while when $\gamma_a \neq \gamma_b$ the fluctuations are anisotropic in this plane. The degree of anisotropy is characterized by the Hurst exponent $H_{ab}$, which can be obtained from the values of $\gamma_a$ and $\gamma_b$ as [@ZGKX] H\_[ab]{} = [1+\_b1+\_a]{}. The dynamical fluctuations are isotropic when $H_{ab} = 1$, and anisotropic when $H_{ab} \neq 1$.
For the 250 GeV/$c$ $\pi$(K)-p collisions from NA22 the Hurst exponents are found to be [@NA22]: H\_=0.99 0.01, H\_[y]{}=0.48 0.06, H\_[y]{}=0.47 0.06, which means that the dynamical fluctuations in this moderate energy hadron-hadron collisions are isotropic in the transverse plane and anisotropic in the longitudinal-transvere planes. This is what should be [@WLprl], because there is almost no hard collisions at this energy and the direction of motion of the incident hadrons (longitudinal direction) should be previleged. Note that the special role of longitudinal direction in these soft processes is present both in the magnitude of average momentum and in the dynamical fluctuations in phase space.
In high energy e$^+$e$^-$ collisions, the longitudinal direction is chosen along the thrust axis, which is the direction of motion of the primary quark-antiquark pair. Since this pair of quark and antiquark move back to back with very high momenta, the magnitude of average momentum of final state hadrons is also anisotropic due to momentum conservation. However, the dynamical fluctuations in this case come from the QCD branching of partons [@Vineziano], which is isotropic in nature. Therfore, although the momentum distribution still has an elongated shape, the dynamical fluctuations in this case should be isotropic in 3-D phase space.
A Monte Carlo study for e$^+$e$^-$ collisions at 91.2 GeV confirms this assertion [@FFLPRD]. The dynamical fluctuations are approximately isotropic in the 3-D phase space, the corresponding Hurst exponents being H\_=1.18 0.03, H\_[y]{}=0.95 0.02, H\_[y]{}=1.11 0.02. The present available experimental data for e$^+$e$^-$ collisions at 91.2 GeV also show isotropic dynamical fluctuations in 3-D [@DELPHI].
Now we apply this technique to the “2-jet” sample obtained from a certain, e.g. Durham, jet-algorithm with some definite value of $\yct$. Doing the analysis for different values of $\yct$, the dependence of dynamical-fluctuation property of the “2-jet” sample on the value of $\yct$ can be investigated.
Let us try to discuss what results can be expected?
As we have shown in Fig.1, when $\yct$ is very big the “2-jet” sample coincides with the whole event sample, $R_2 = 1$. In this case, the fluctuations are known to be isotropic in the 3-D phase space, cf. Eq.(6), i.e. the parameter $\gamma_a$ for the three 1-D variables ($y,\pt,\vf$) equal to each other ($\gamma_\pt = \gamma_\vf = \gamma_y$).
(250,450) (-10,250) [ ]{}
-9cm
As the decreasing of $\yct$ the multi-jet events, which contaminate the “2-jet” sample, will be cleared away gradually, and at a certain value of $\yct$, a “pure” 2-jet sample will be formed. The word “pure” is used here to indicate that these two jets are developed softly from initial partons and no other jet(s) has been mixed in.
It can be expected that the dynamical fluctuations in the “pure” 2-jet sample will mimic those in the soft hadronic collisions, i.e. isotropic in the transverse plane and anisotropic in the longitudinal-transverse planes ($\gamma_\pt = \gamma_\vf \neq \gamma_y$).
Thus the variation of $\gamma$’s with the decreasing of $\yct$ (or decreasing of $R_2$) is expected to be: At first, when $\yct$ is very big, the “2-jet” sample is identical to the whole event sample ($R_2=1$), and the three $\gamma$’s equal to each other; As the decreasing of $\yct$ (the deceasing of $R_2$) the three $\gamma$’s depart, and becomes, at a certain value of $\yct$, isotropic in ($\pt,\vf$) and anisotropic in ($y,\pt$) and ($y,\vf$), $\gamma_\pt = \gamma_\vf \neq \gamma_y$.
The results of simulation are presented in Fig.3($a$). It can be seen from the figure that the above expectation comes true. The characteristic behaviour $\gamma_\pt = \gamma_\vf \neq \gamma_y$ arrives at $\yct\approx 0.0048$ ($R_2\approx 0.48$). The values of $\gamma$’s and the corresponding Hurst exponents at this point are listed in Table I. For convenience we will call this point, where $\gamma_\pt = \gamma_\vf
\neq \gamma_y$, as transition point.
0.5cm
\
$\gamma_y$ & $\gamma_\pt$ & $\gamma_\vf$ & $H_{y\pt}$ & $H_{y\vf}$ & $H_{\pt\vf}$\
1.074$\pm$0.037 & 0.514$\pm$0.080 & 0.461$\pm$0.021& 0.73$\pm$0.06 & 0.70$\pm$0.06& 0.96$\pm$0.10\
(250,450) (30,280) [ ]{}
-10.5cm
0.5cm
Note that in the Durham algorithm that we are using the test variable $y$ is essentially the relative transverse momentum $k_\perp$ squared [@Dokshitzer]. The transition point $\yct\approx 0.0048$ corresponds to $k_\perp \approx 4$ GeV/c, which is consistent with the critical value of transverse momentum between soft and hard (semi-hard) components in hadron-hadron collisions.
It is instructive also to follow the evolusion of $\gamma$’s with the increasing of $\yct$ (incresing of $R_2$).
It can be seen from Fig.3($a$) that, when $\yct$ ($R_2$) is very small, where the two “jets” are highly undeveloped and each consists mainly of one hard parton, $\gamma_\vf$ is consistent to zero, i.e. there is no dynamical fluctuation in $\vf$ at all. On the other hand, at this point $\gamma_\pt$ is almost as large as $\gamma_y$, showing that the dynamical fluctuations in this undeveloped “2-jet” system behaves as an isotropic 2-D fractal in the ($y,\pt$) plane.
When $\yct$ ($R_2$) increases, $\gamma_\pt$ departs with $\gamma_y$ and approaches to $\gamma_\vf$. What is important is that $\gamma_\pt$ and $\gamma_\vf$, instead of going up parallelly, cross over each other, turns from $\gamma_\vf < \gamma_\pt$ to $\gamma_\vf > \gamma_\pt$, resulting in a sharp transition point. After that, the three $\gamma$’s approach eventually to a common value, and the “2-jet” sample approachs to the whole event sample.
In order to show the evolusion of the anisotropy property of dynamical fluctuations with the variation of $\yct$ ($R_2$) more clearly, we take three typical points: $(A)$ $R_2=0.18$, $(B)$ $R_2=0.48$, $(C)$ $R_2=1$, indicated by arrows in Fig.3($a$). Point $A$ corresponds to the case of undeveloped jets, $B$ is the transition point and $C$ is the whole sample. Since the anisotropy property of dynamical fluctuations determines solely by the rate of approaching to saturation of FM, which is characterized by the parameter $\gamma$, we rescale the $F_2(\pt)$ and $F_2(\vf)$ appropriately, letting them coincide with $F_2(y)$ at $M=3$ and arrive at a common saturation height with $F_2(y)$. The results are shown in Fig.4. It can be seen from the figure that when $R_2=0.18$, $F_2(\vf)$ does not increase with $M$, i.e. no dynamical fluctuation at all in $\vf$, while at this point $F_2(\pt)$ and $F_2(y)$ go to saturation almost with the same speed. When $R_2=0.48$ (transition point), $F_2(\pt)$ and $F_2(\vf)$ go to saturation almost with the same speed, much slower than $F_2(y)$ do. When $R_2=1$ (whole sample) all three $F_2$ coincide and go to saturation with an identical speed.
For comparison, we have also done the same analysis using Jade algorithm. The results, shown in Fig.3($b$), are qualitatively the same: At small $\yct$ ($R_2$), $\gamma_\vf$ vanishes and $\gamma_\pt \approx
\gamma_y$; As $\yct$ ($R_2$) increases $\gamma_\pt$ and $\gamma_\vf$ approaches each other and cross over at $\yct \approx 0.158$ ($R_2 \approx 0.39$). This is the transition point for Jade algorithm. The parameter $\gamma$’s at this point are $\gamma_y=1.22\pm 0.04$, $\gamma_\pt=0.51\pm 0.09$, $\gamma_\vf=0.59\pm 0.08$.
In this letter we have shown using Lund Monte Carlo that, unlike the smooth change of average properties of the hadronic system inside jets, the anisotropy of dynamical fluctuations in these systems changes abruptly with the variation of the cut parameter $\yct$. At $\sqrt s = 91.2$ GeV, the dynamical fluctuations in the whole e$^+$e$^-$ collision sample (large $\yct$ limit) are fully isotropic in the 3-D phase space, and become highly anisotropic (almost no fluctuation at all in $\vf$) for small $\yct$ where the “jet” is highly undeveloped. A transition point exists, where the hadronic system inside jet behaves like that of the soft hadronic collisions, i.e. the dynamical fluctuations are isotropic in the transverse plane and anisotropic in the longitudinal-transverse planes. The corresponding relative transverse momentum at the transition point is about $k_\perp \approx 4$ GeV/c, which is consistent with the critical value of transverse momentum between soft and hard (semi-hard) components in hadron-hadron collisions. Thus the the transition point determines the physically meaningful value of $\yct$, and thereby gives the number of jets in an events. The anisotropy property of the dynamical fluctuations can serve as a sensible probe for hard and soft processes.
This observation is not only meaningful in the study of jets in e$^+$e$^-$ collisions but also enlightening in the jet-physics in relativistic heavy ion collisions, which will become important [@WXN] after the operation of the new generation of colliders at BNL (RHIC) and CERN (LHC).
0.5cm
The authors are grateful to Wu Yuanfang and Xie Qubin for valuable discussions.
1.5cm \#1\#2\#3\#4[[\#1]{} [**\#2**]{} (\#4) \#3]{}
[99]{}
W. Bartel et al. (JADE COll.), [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 123**]{} (1983) 460; [*Z. Phys.*]{} [**C 33**]{} (1986) 23.
Yu. L. Dokshitzer, [*J. Phys.*]{} [**G 17**]{} (1991) 1537.
R. Brandelik et al. (TASSO Coll.), [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**86 B**]{} (1979) 243.
D. P. Barber (Mark J Coll.), [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**43**]{} (1979) 830.
Ch. Berger et al. (PLUTO Coll.), [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**86 B**]{} (1979) 418.
W. Bartel et al. (JADE Coll.), [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**91 B**]{} (1980) 142.
G. Arnison (UA1 Coll.), [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**123 B**]{} (1983) 115.
G. Ciapetti (UA1 Coll.), $\la p_{\rm T}\ra$ dependence on event multiplicity in “minimum bias” events at the SPS Colliser, in Proc. of the 5th topical workshop on proton-antiproton collider physics, Eds. M. Greco, World Scientific Singapore 1986.
Liu Feng, Liu Fuming and Liu Lianshou, .
S. Brandt, Ch. Peyrou, R. Sosnowski and A. Wroblewski, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**12**]{} (1964) 57.
A. Białas and R. Peschanski, ; .
W. Ochs, .
Liu Lianshou, Zhang Yang and Deng Yue, .
Wu Yuanfang and Liu Lianshou, .
N. M. Agabayan et al. (NA22), ; N. M. Agabayan et al. (NA22), .
Wu Yuanfang and Liu Lianshou, .
G. Veneziano, Momentum and colour structure of jet in QCD, talk given at the [*3rd Workshop on Current Problems in High Energy Particle Theory*]{}, Florence, 1979.
P. Abreu (DELPHI), [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B386**]{} (1992) 471.
Yu. L. Dokshitzer, G. D. Leder, S. Moretti and B. R. Webber, [*JHEP*]{} [**08**]{} (1997) 001.
X.-N. Wang, [*Phys. Reports*]{} [**280**]{} (1997) 287.
0.8cm
The ratio of 2-, 3-, 4-jet events as function of $\yct$ 0.5cm
Average charged multiplicity and ellipticity as function of $\yct$ 0.5cm
The variation of $\gamma$ with $R_2$ and $\yct$ 0.5cm
Comparison of the speed of going to saturation of $F_2$ for different 1-D variables at different $R_2$
(250,450) (5,290) [ ]{} (35,5) [ ]{}
-9.5cm
9.5cm
(250,450) (-70,60) [ ]{}
-2cm
(250,450) (-30,130) [ ]{}
-2.5cm
[^1]: This work is supported in part by the NSFC under project 19975021.
[^2]: In order to elliminate the influence of momentum conservation [@MMTN], the first few points ($M=1,2$ or 3) should be omitted when fitting the data to Eq.(3).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'Andrés Navas & Mario Ponce'
title: A Livšic type theorem for germs of analytic diffeomorphisms
---
[**Abstract.**]{} We deal with the problem of the validity of Livšic’s theorem for cocycles of diffeomorphisms satisfying the orbit periodic obstruction over an hyperbolic dynamics. We give a result in the positive direction for cocycles of germs of analytic diffeomorphisms at the origin.
Introduction
============
Given a map (dynamical system) $T \!: X \to X$ over a compact metric space $X$ and a (topological) group $\mathcal{G}$, we consider a continuous $\mathcal{G}$-valued cocycle $A \!: {\mathbb{N}}\times X \to
\mathcal{G}$, that is, a continuous map taking values in $\mathcal{G}$ satisfying the cocycle relation $$A(n+m, x)=A(n, T^mx)A(m, x)$$ for every $m,n$ in ${\mathbb{N}}$ and every $x \in X$. This cocycle is completely determined by the continuous function $A(\cdot) := A(1, \cdot): X\to \mathcal{G}$, and the cocycle relation yields $$A(n ,x)=A(T^{n-1}x)A(T^{n-2}x)\cdots A(x)$$ for every $n \geq 1$. A natural problem is to determine conditions ensuring for such a cocycle to be conjugated to a cocycle taking values in a “small” subgroup of $\mathcal{G}$. For the case of the trivial subgroup, this property means that there exists a continuous function $B \!: X \to \mathcal{G}$ such that $$\label{solv}
A(x)=B(Tx)B(x)^{-1} \quad \textrm{for all} \quad x\in X.$$ Whenever this [*cohomological equation*]{} associated to the cocycle $A$ has a solution $B$, we say that $A$ is a [*coboundary*]{}. The simplest obstruction for the existence of $B$ is the [*P(eriodic) O(orbit) O(bstruction)*]{}: if $p\in X$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ satisfy $T^n p = p$, then $$A(n, p) = \prod_{i=0}^{n-1} A(T^ix)
= \prod_{i=0}^{n-1} B(T^{i+1} x) B(T^i x)^{-1}
= B(T^n p)B(p)^{-1}=e_{_{\mathcal{G}}}.$$ The [*Livšic problem*]{} consists in determining whether the POO($A$) condition is not only necessary but also sufficient for $A$ being a coboundary. This terminology comes from the seminal work of Livšic [@LIV72], who proved that this is the case whenever $\mathcal{G}$ is Abelian, $A$ is Hölder-continuous and $T$ is a topologically transitive hyperbolic diffeomorphism. Since then, many extensions of this classical result have been proposed. Perhaps the most relevant is Kalinin’s recent version for $\mathcal{G} = \mathrm{GL} (d,\mathbb{C})$. In this Note, we address the Livšic problem for Hölder-continuous cocycles taking values in the group of germs of analytic diffeomorphisms. In the context of general diffeomorphisms, a positive answer to the Livšic problem is unclear, despite several results pointing in this direction whenever a certain localization property is satisfied. (See, for example, [@delallave2010].)\
To state our result, we denote by $\mathcal{G}erm_d$ the group of germs of local bi-holomorphisms of the complex space ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ fixing the origin. This may be identified to the group of holomorphic maps $F(Z) = A_1Z+A_2Z^2+\dots$ having positive convergence radious, with $A_1 \in \mathrm{GL} (d, {\mathbb{C}})$ (see §\[section\_germ\] for the details).
[**Main Theorem.**]{} [*Let $T: X\to X$ be a topologically transitive homeomorphism of a compact metric space $X$ satisfying the closing property (see §\[remind\] for the details). Let $F \!: X\to \mathcal{G}erm_d$ be a Hölder-continuous function/cocycle (see §\[section\_germ\] for a discussion on continuity issues). If $F$ satisfies the POO condition, then there exists a Hölder-continuous function $H: X \to \mathcal{G}erm_d$ such that for all $x \in X$,*]{} $$\label{ecuacion_del_teorema}
F(x)=H(Tx)\circ H(x)^{-1}.$$
This theorem should be compared with [@PONC11-flores], where the second-named author shows a KAM-type result for $\mathcal{G}erm_d$-valued cocycles over a minimal torus translation.
A remind on Livšic’s theorem for complex valued cocycles {#remind}
--------------------------------------------------------
Let $X$ be a compact metric space with normalized diameter ([*i.e.*]{}, $diam(X) = 1$). We say that a function $f \!: X\to {\mathbb{C}}$ is $(C, \alpha)-$Hölder-continuous for $C>0$ and $\alpha\in (0,1]$ if for every pair of points $x, y$ in $X$, $$\label{holder}
|f(x)-f(y)|\leq C {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(x, y)^{\alpha}.$$ In the sequel, we will denote by $[f]_{\alpha}$ the smallest constant $C$ for which $f$ is $(C, \alpha)-$Hölder-continuous. The next two results are straightforward.
\[lema\_dos\] If $f$ vanishes at some point of $X$, then $\|f\|:=\sup_{x\in X}|f(x)|\leq [f]_{\alpha}.\quad_{\blacksquare}$
\[holder\_opera\] Let $f, g:X \to {\mathbb{C}}$ be two $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous functions. Then the functions $f+g$ and $fg$ are $\alpha-$Hölder-continuous, and
1. $[f+g]_{\alpha}\leq [f]_{\alpha}+[g]_{\alpha}$.
2. $[fg]_{\alpha}\leq [f]_{\alpha}\|g\| + [g]_{\alpha} \|f\|. \quad_\blacksquare$
Let $T\!:X\to X$ be a homeomorphism and let $x, y$ be points of $X$. We say that the orbit segments $x, Tx, \dots, T^kx$ and $y, Ty, \dots, T^ky$ are [*exponentially $\delta$-close with exponent $\lambda>0$*]{} if for every $j=0, \dots, k$, $$dist_X(T^jx,T^jy)\leq \delta e^{-\lambda\min\{j, k-j\}}.$$ We say that $T$ satisfies the [*closing property*]{} if there exist $c, \lambda, \delta_0>0$ such that for every $x\in X$ and $k\in {\mathbb{N}}$ so that $dist_X(x, T^kx)<\delta_0$, there exists a point $p\in X$ with $T^kp=p$ so that letting $\delta := c {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(x, T^kx)$, the orbit segments $x, Tx, \dots, T^kx$ and $p, Tp, \dots, T^kp$ are exponentially $\delta$-close with exponent $\lambda$ and there exists a point $y \in X$ such that for every $j=0,\dots, k$, $$dist_X(T^jp, T^jy)\leq \delta e^{-\lambda j} \quad \textrm{and}
\quad dist_X(T^jy, T^jx)\leq \delta e^{-\lambda(n-j)}.$$ Important examples of maps satisfying the closing property are hyperbolic diffeomorphisms of compact manifolds.
In this work, we will use two versions of the Livšic result. The first of these ([*c.f.,*]{} Theorem \[livsic\]) is the original and seminal Livšic theorem for complex valued cocycles. This theorem will be used in an iterative scheme for which having estimates for the solutions of cohomological equations will be relevant (see Corollary \[coro5\]). For this reason, we review the proof and we record certain crucial estimates. The second version (extension) of the Livšic result we will use ([*c.f.*]{}, Theorem \[kal\]) corresponds to a recent and remarkable theorem by B. Kalinin, who proves the Livšic theorem for matrix-valued cocycles (satisfying no localization condition).
\[livsic\] Let $T \!: X\to X$ be a topologically transitive homeomorphism of a compact metric space $X$ satisfying the closing property. Let $\psi\!: X\to {\mathbb{C}}$ be an $\alpha-$Hölder-continuous function for which the POO holds, that is, for every point $p \in X$ and $k \geq 1$ such that $T^k p = p$, one has $\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\psi(T^{j}p)=0$. Then there exists an $\alpha-$Hölder-continuous function $\phi:X\to {\mathbb{C}}$ that is a solution to the cohomological equation $$\phi\circ T-\phi =\psi.$$
[*Proof.*]{} Let $x_0\in X$ be such that $\overline{\{T^n x_0\}_{n\in {\mathbb{N}}}}=X$. We define $\phi$ by letting $\phi(x_0) := 0$ and $\phi(T^n x_0) := \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\psi(T^j x_0)$. We next check that $\phi$ is $\alpha-$Hölder-continuous on $\{T^n x_0\}_{n\in {\mathbb{N}}}$. Let $n>m$. There are two cases to consider:
- Assume that $dist_X(T^mx_0, T^nx_0)<\delta_0$. Then there exists a point $p\in X$ satisfying $T^{n-m}p=p$ and such that for every $j=0,\dots, n-m$, $$dist_X(T^j(T^mx_0), T^jp)\leq c {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(T^nx_0, T^mx_0)e^{-\lambda\min \{j, n-m-j\}}.$$ This yields
$$\begin{aligned}
|\phi(T^nx_0)-\phi(T^mx_0)|&=&\left|\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}\psi(T^{m+j}x_0)\right|\\
&=&\left|\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}\left(\psi(T^{m+j}x_0)-\psi(T^jp)\right)+\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}\psi(T^jp)\right|\\
&\leq&\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}\left|\psi(T^{m+j}x_0)-\psi(T^jp)\right|\\
&\leq&\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}[\psi]_{\alpha} {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(T^{m+j}x_0, T^jp)^{\alpha}\\
&\leq&\sum_{j=0}^{n-m-1}c^{\alpha}[\psi]_{\alpha} {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(T^nx_0, T^mx_0)^{\alpha} {\hspace{0.1cm}}e^{-\lambda\alpha\min \{j, n-m-j\}}\\
&\leq&\frac{2 {\hspace{0.1cm}}c^{\alpha} [\psi]_{\alpha}}{1-e^{-\lambda\alpha}} {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(T^nx_0, T^mx_0)^{\alpha}.\end{aligned}$$
- Assume that $dist_X(T^nx_0, T^mx_0)\geq \delta_0$. Since $x_0$ has dense orbit and $X$ is compact, there exists $N\in {\mathbb{N}}$, depending only on $X, T$, and $\delta_0$, such that $\{x_0, Tx_0, \dots, T^Nx_0\}$ is a $\delta_0$-dense set in $X$. For $n-m\leq N$, one easily shows that $$|\phi(T^nx_0)-\phi(T^mx_0)|\leq N\|\psi\|.$$ For $n-m>N$, there exist $r, s$ in $\{0,1,\dots, N\}$ such that $dist_X(T^{s}x_0, T^nx_0)\leq \delta_0$ and $dist_X(T^{r}x_0, T^mx_0)\leq \delta_0$. Using the preceding case, this yields $$\begin{aligned}
|\phi(T^nx_0)-\phi(T^mx_0)|
\!\!&\leq&\!\!
|\phi(T^nx_0)-\phi(T^{s}x_0)|+|\phi(T^mx_0)-\phi(T^{r}x_0)|
+|\phi(T^{s}x_0)-\phi(T^{r}x_0)|\\
\!\!&\leq&\!\!
\frac{4[\psi]_{\alpha}c^{\alpha}}{1-e^{-\lambda\alpha}}\delta_0^{\alpha}+N\|\psi\|\\
\!\!&\leq&\!\!
\left(\frac{4[\psi]_{\alpha}c^{\alpha}}{1-e^{-\lambda\alpha}}
+\frac{N\|\psi\|}{\delta_0^{\alpha}}\right)dist_{X}(T^nx_0, T^mx_0)^{\alpha}.\quad_{\blacksquare}\end{aligned}$$
A careful reading of the proof above yields useful estimates enclosed in the next
\[coro5\] The solution $\phi$ to the cohomological equation is $\alpha$-Hölder continuous, and there exists $K$ depending only on $T, X,$ and $\alpha$ such that $[\phi]_{\alpha}\leq K([\psi]_{\alpha}+\|\psi\|). \quad_{\blacksquare}$
\[kal\] Let $T$ be a topologically transitive homeomorphism of a compact metric space $X$ satisfying the closing property. Let $A:X\to GL(d, {\mathbb{C}})$ be an $\alpha$-Hölder function for which the $POO(A)$ holds. Then there exists an $\alpha$-Hölder function $C:X\to GL(d, {\mathbb{C}})$ such that for all $x \in X$, $$A(x) = B(Tx) B(x)^{-1}.$$
The group $\mathcal{G}erm_d$ {#section_germ}
----------------------------
For $d \geq 1$, we introduce the following (classical) notation:
- ${\bf j}:=(j_1, \dots, j_d)$ is a positive integer lattice point, with $j_i\geq 0$ for every $1\leq i\leq d$.
- $|{\bf j}|:=j_1+\dots+j_d$.
- ${\bf j} \preceq {\bf k}$ if $j_i\leq k_i$ for every $1\leq i\leq d$.
- ${\bf j} \prec {\bf k}$ if ${\bf j} \preceq {\bf k}$ and $j_{i_*}<k_{i_*}$ for some $i_*$.
- $Z=(z_1, z_2, \dots, z_d)$ is a point in ${\mathbb{C}}^d$.
- $Z^{\bf j}:=z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\cdots z_d^{j_d}$.
Then we can define a formal power series on ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ as $
F(Z) := (F_1(Z), F_2(Z), \dots, F_d(Z)),
$ where each $F_i(Z)$ has the form $$F_i(Z)=\sum_{{\bf j}\geq 0} t_{\bf j}^iZ^{\bf j}$$ for some coefficients $t_{\bf j}^i\in {\mathbb{C}}$. This formal power series becomes an analytic map if there exists $R>0$ such that $\limsup_{\bf j}|t_{\bf j}^i|^{\frac{1}{|{\bf j}|}} \leq
\frac{1}{R}$ for every $i$. Indeed, in this case, each $F_i$ is a convergent series on $D(0, R)^d$ (that is, for $Z \!=\! (z_1,\ldots,z_d)$ such that $|z_s| \!<\! R$ holds for every $s$).
Let $\mathcal{H}(d, R)$ be the set of continuous functions $F \!: \overline{D(0, R)^d }\to {\mathbb{C}}^d$ that are convergent power series in $D(0, R)^d$ and satisfy $F'(0) \!\in\! GL(d , {\mathbb{C}})$. We endow this complex vector space with the inner product $$\langle F, G \rangle_R
:= \sum_i\left(\int_{\partial D(0,R)^d}F_i\overline{G_i} {\hspace{0.1cm}}dZ\right).$$ The $L^2$-norm of an element $F \! \in \! \mathcal{H}(d, R)$ of the form $F_i(Z)=\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 0}t^i_{\bf j}Z^{\bf j}$ is $$\|F\|_{2, R} := \langle F, F \rangle_R^{1/2}
= \left(\sum_i\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 1}|t_{\bf j}^i|^2R^{2|{\bf j}|}\right)^{1/2}.$$ We let $\mathcal{H}_0 (d, R)$ be the subset of $\mathcal{H} (d,R)$ formed by those $F$ satisfying $F(0) = 0$, and we let the set of [*local holomorphic diffeomorphisms*]{} of ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ be defined as $$\mathcal{G}_d := \bigcup_{R> 0}\mathcal{H}_0(d, R).$$ On this set, we introduce the following equivalence relation: We say that $F, G$ in $\mathcal{G}_d$ are equivalent if there exists a neighborhood of the origin on which $F$ and $G$ coincide. Under this identification, the set $\mathcal{G}_d$ becomes a group, that we call the [*group of germs of analytic diffeomorphisms*]{} of ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ and we denote by $\mathcal{G}erm_d$.\
Although we will not worry about giving a topology on $\mathcal{G}erm_d$, we will certainly need to consider maps from $X$ to $\mathcal{G}erm_d$ that are “continuous” in some precise sense. Since $X$ is compact, any reasonable definition should lead to functions that factor throughout an space $\mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ for some positive $R$. Accordingly, given $C>0$, $\alpha \in (0,1]$, and $R>0$, a map $\Psi \!: X \to \mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ will be said to be $\left(C, \alpha, R\right)-$Hölder-continuous if $\Psi(x)$ belongs to $\mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ for every $x \in X$, and for every pair of points $x, y$ in $X$, $$\|\Psi(x)-\Psi(y)\|_{2, R} \leq C {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(x, y)^{\alpha}.$$ In terms of the coefficients of the power series, this condition reads as follows:
\[lema6666\] If $\Psi \!: X \to \mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ is $\left(C, \alpha, R\right)-$Hölder and writes as $$\Psi_i(x)(Z)=\sum_{|{\bf j}|>0} t^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j},$$ then each coefficient $t^i_{\bf j}:X\to {\mathbb{C}}$ is a $\left(\frac{C}{R^{|{\bf j}|}}, \alpha\right)$-Hölder-continuous function.
[*Proof.*]{} The Hölder condition for $\Psi$ yields $$\left(\sum_i\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 1}|t_{\bf j}^i(x)-t^i_{\bf j}(y)|^2R^{2|{\bf j}|}\right)^{1/2}
\leq C {\hspace{0.1cm}}dist_X(x, y)^{\alpha},$$ which implies that $$|t_{\bf j}^i(x)-t^i_{\bf j}(y)|^2 \leq \frac{C^2}{R^{2|{\bf j}|}}
dist_X(x, y)^{2\alpha}.\quad_{\blacksquare}$$
In an opposite direction, given a list $\{t_{\bf j}^i:X\to {\mathbb{C}}, {\hspace{0.1cm}}{\bf j} \succeq 0, {\hspace{0.1cm}}1\leq i\leq d \}$ of continuous functions, we are interested in finding conditions ensuring that $F := (F_1, \dots, F_d)$ formally defined by $F_i(x)(Z):=\sum_{{\bf j}}t^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j}$ represents a convergent power series lying in $\mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ for some $R>0$.
\[lema777\] Assume that each function $t_{\bf j}^i$ is a $\left(\frac{C}{R^{|{\bf j}}|}, \alpha\right)$-Hölder-continuous function for some positive constants $C,R$. Assume also that each $t_{\bf j}^i$ vanishes at some point of $X$. Then for all $\delta \!<\! 1$, the formal power series $F_i$ above is convergent on $D(0, R)^d$, and $x\mapsto F(x) \! = \! (F_1(x), \dots, F_d(x))$ is a $\left(O\!\left(\frac{\delta}{1-\delta}\right)^{1/2}\!, {\hspace{0.1cm}}\alpha\right)$-Hölder continuous map from $X$ to $\mathcal{H}_0(d, \delta R)$.
[*Proof.*]{} Since each $t_{\bf j}^i$ vanishes at some point of $X$, Lemma \[lema\_dos\] gives $\|t_{\bf j}^i\|\leq \frac{C}{R^{|{\bf j}|}}$ for every $i, {\bf j}$. This implies that each $F_i$ is a convergent power series on $D(0, R)^d$. Moreover, for all $x, y$ in $X$,
$$\begin{aligned}
\|F(x)-F(y)\|_{2, \delta R}^2
&=& \sum_i \sum_{\bf j}|t^i_{\bf j}(x)-t^i_{\bf j}(y)|^2(\delta R)^{2|{\bf j}|}\\
&\leq& \sum_i\sum_{\bf j}C^2dist_X(x, y)^{2\alpha}\delta ^{2|{\bf j}|}\\
&=& d {\hspace{0.1cm}}C^2dist_X(x, y)^{2\alpha}\sum_{s=1}^{\infty}\sum_{ |{\bf j}|=s} \delta^{2s}\\
&=& d {\hspace{0.1cm}}C^2dist_X(x, y)^{2\alpha}\sum_{s=1}^{\infty}\frac{(s+d-1)!}{s!(d-1)!}\delta^{2s}\\
&=& d {\hspace{0.1cm}}C^2 {\hspace{0.1cm}}O\!\left(\frac{\delta}{1-\delta}\right)dist_X(x, y)^{2\alpha}.
\quad_{\blacksquare}\end{aligned}$$
#### The Faa di Bruno formula.
We will need to consider compositions of power series in several complex variables. The following is a simplified formulation of the multivariate version by Constantine and Savits [@CONSSAVI96] of the famous Faa di Bruno formula:
Let $A(Z)=\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 1}a_{\bf j}Z^{\bf j}$ and $B_i(Z)=\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 1}b^i_{\bf j}Z^j, {\hspace{0.1cm}}1 \leq i \leq d$, be formal power series in $d$ variables. Then the power series $$C(Z)=A\left(B_1(Z), B_2(Z), \dots, B_d(Z)\right)=\sum_{|{\bf j}|\geq 1}c_{\bf j}Z^{\bf j}$$ has coefficients $$\label{faadi}
c_{\bf j_*}=\sum_{|\bf j|=1}a_{\bf j}b_{\bf j_*}^{\bf j} {\hspace{0.1cm}}+ \! \sum_{1<|{\bf j}|, \ {\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}a_{\bf j}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{B\},$$ where $P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{B\}$ is polynomial in the variables $\{b_{\bf \tilde{j}}^i\}^{1\leq i\leq d}_{{\bf \tilde j}<{\bf j_*}}$ that is homogeneous of degree $|{\bf j}|$ and has positive integer coefficients.
The Faa di Bruno formula is actually much more precise but requires hard notation. For instance, in the case $d=1$, one has $$P(j_*, j)\{B\}=\sum_{r_1+\dots+r_j=j_*}B_{r_1}\cdots B_{r_j}.$$
#### A generating function.
Let us define $J \!:\! D(0,1)^d\to {\mathbb{C}}^d$ by the convergent power series $$J_i(Z)=z_i-\sum_{|{\bf j}|> 1}Z^{\bf j}.$$ Since $DJ(0)=id_{{\mathbb{C}}^d}$, there exists an analytic map $G$ defined in a neighborhood of the origin in ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ such that $G(0) = 0$ and $$\label{misma_formal}
J \circ G (Z) = Z {\hspace{0.1cm}}{\hspace{0.1cm}}\mbox{ for every } Z \mbox{ in that neighborhood }.$$ In terms of power series, one can write $$G_i(Z)=z_i+\sum_{|{\bf j}|>1} g^i_{\bf j}Z^{\bf j},$$ where the coefficients verify $|g^i_{\bf j}|<K^{|{\bf j}|-1}$ for some $K>0$ and every $|{\bf j}| \succ 1$. Moreover, these coefficients satisfy a fundamental recurrence relation. Indeed, using $J\circ G(Z) = Z$ and the Faa di Bruno formula (\[faadi\]), one obtains $$\label{recurrencia}
0 {\hspace{0.1cm}}= {\hspace{0.1cm}}g^i_{\bf j_*} {\hspace{0.1cm}}-
\sum_{1<|{\bf j}|, \ {\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{G\}.$$ Recall that $P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{G\}$ depends only on the values of $g^s_{\bf \tilde j}$ for ${\bf \tilde j} \prec {\bf j_*}$ and every $s$. Hence, one can recursively compute $g_{\bf j_*}^i$ in terms of the previously defined $g^s_{\bf \tilde j}$.
For any $S>0$, we consider $J_S:D(0, S^{-1})^d\to {\mathbb{C}}^d$ defined by $J_S(Z):=\frac{1}{S}J(SZ)$. When solving the equation $J_S\circ G_S(Z)=Z$, one gets a map $G_S = (G_{S, 1}, \dots, G_{S, d})$, where each $G_{S, i}(Z)$ has the form $G_{S, i} (Z) = z_i + \sum_{|{\bf j}|>1} g_{S, {\bf j}}^iZ^{\bf j}$ for certain coefficients $g_{S, {\bf j}}^i$ satisfying $$\label{recurrenciaS}
g^i_{S, {\bf j_*}}=\sum_{1<|{\bf j}|, \ {\bf j}
\leq {\bf j_*}}S^{|\bf j|-1}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{G_S\}.$$
\[lema\_de\_S\] Each coefficient $g^i_{S, {\bf j}}$ is a positive real number. Moreover, there exists a constant $\mathcal{R}=\mathcal{R}(S)>0$ such that $g^i_{S, {\bf j}}\leq \mathcal{R}^{|{\bf j}|-1}$ for every ${\bf j}$. $\quad_{\blacksquare}$
Proof of the Main Theorem
-------------------------
#### A first reduction.
Let $F(x)(Z)=A_1(x)Z +
\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|>1} a^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j}\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}$ be the power series expansion of the cocycle viewed as a $\left(C, \alpha, R\right)-$Hölder-continuous function $\Psi \!: X \to \mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$. The map $x\mapsto A_1(x)\in GL(d, {\mathbb{C}})$ is an $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous function. Since POO($F$) holds, we must have $$\prod_{j=0}^{n-1}A_1(T^jp) {\hspace{0.1cm}}{\hspace{0.1cm}}= {\hspace{0.1cm}}{\hspace{0.1cm}}\frac{\partial}{\partial Z}F(T^{n-1}p)\circ \dots \circ F(p)\bigg|_{Z=0}
= {\hspace{0.1cm}}{\hspace{0.1cm}}id_{{\mathbb{C}}^d}$$ for every $p\in X$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $T^np=p$. In other words, the $GL(d, {\mathbb{C}})$-valued cocycle $A_1$ satisfies the POO. By Kalinin’s version of the Livšic theorem, there exists an $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous function $H_1:X\to GL(d, {\mathbb{C}})$ such that $A_1(x)=H_1(Tx)H_1(x)^{-1}$ for all $x\in X$. Consequently, the $\mathcal{G}erm_d$-valued cocycle $H_1(x)(Z):=H_1(x)Z$ conjugates $F$ to a cocycle of the form $$(x, Z)\longmapsto
\left(Tx, Z+\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|>1}a^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j}\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}\right).$$ Thus, we can assume that $A_1(x)=id_{{\mathbb{C}}^d}$ for all $x\in X$.
#### An iterative procedure.
We look for a map $H \!: X\to \mathcal{G}erm_d$ solving the cohomological equation (\[ecuacion\_del\_teorema\]) having the form $H(x)(Z)=Z+\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|>1}h^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j}\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}$. Notice that this equation may be written as $F(x)\circ H(x)=H(Tx)$. Applying the Faa di Bruno formula (\[faadi\]) to the left-side expression, one concludes that each coefficient $h_{\bf j}^{i}$ can be defined recursively as the solution of a cohomological equation for a ${\mathbb{C}}$-valued data: $$\begin{array}{crcl}
(ec_{\bf j_*}^{i}) & \quad h^{i}_{\bf j_*}(Tx)-h^{i}_{\bf j_*}(x)
&=&
\sum_{1<|{\bf j}|, \ {\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}a^{i}_{\bf j}(x)P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}(x).
\end{array}$$ A necessary condition for the existence of the coefficient $h^{i}_{\bf j_*}$ is that the POO condition holds for the function $$\label{formularecursiva}
R^i_{\bf j_*} {\hspace{0.1cm}}:= \sum_{1<|{\bf j}|, \ {\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}a^{i}_{\bf j}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}.$$
Each $R_{\bf j_*}^i$, with $i, |{\bf j_*}| \succ 1$, is a well-defined $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous function for which the POO holds. As a consequence, given any $x_0 \in X$, the equation $(ec_{\bf j_*}^{i})$ has an $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous solution $h^i_{\bf j_*}$ vanishing at $x_0$.
[*Proof.*]{} Suppose that the conclusion of the lemma holds for every ${\bf j}$ such that $|{\bf j}|<k$, and let us consider the case where ${\bf j} = k$. Using the explicit formula (\[formularecursiva\]), Lemma \[holder\_opera\] shows that the function $R_{\bf j_*}^i$ is $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous. Consider the continuous $\mathcal{G}erm_d$-valued function $$H_{<k}:x\mapsto Z+\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|<k}h^i_{\bf j}(x)Z^{\bf j}\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}.$$ An easy computation shows that $\tilde F(x) := H_{<k}(Tx)\circ F(x)\circ H_{<k}(x)^{-1}$ has the form $$\tilde F(x)(Z)
= Z+\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|=k}R_{\bf j}^i(x)Z^{\bf j}
+ \sum_{{|\bf j}|>k}\tilde a_{\bf j}^i(x)Z^{\bf j}\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}$$ for some Hölder-continuous functions $\tilde a_{\bf j}^i:X\to {\mathbb{C}}$. Moreover, for any $x\in X$ and $m\in {\mathbb{N}}$, one has $$\tilde F(T^{m-1}x)\circ \dots \circ \tilde F(x)(Z)
= Z+\left(\sum_{|{\bf j}|=k}\left(\sum_{v=0}^{m-1}R_{\bf j}^i(T^vx)\right)Z^{\bf j}
+ \mathcal{O}(|Z|^{k+1})\right)_{1\leq i\leq d}.$$ Since $\tilde F$ is conjugated to $F$, the POO($\tilde F$) holds. By the previous equality, this implies that for all $p\in X$ and $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $T^np=p$, one has $\sum_{v=0}^{n-1} R_{\bf j}^i(T^vx)=0$. Therefore, the POO($R_{\bf j}^i$) holds, which allows applying Livsic’s theorem to ensure the existence of an $\alpha$-Hölder-continuous solution to $(ec_{\bf j_*}^{i})$. Finally, by adding a constant if necessary, we may assume that this solution vanishes at $x_0$. $\quad_{\blacksquare}$\
To prove that the (up to now) formal map $H$ is a genuine local diffeomorphism (that is, each formal power series $Z \mapsto z_i+\sum_{|{\bf j}|>1}h_{\bf j}^i(x)Z^{\bf j}$ is convergent in a certain (uniform) neighborhood of the origin), we will need to estimate the growth of the $\alpha$-Hölder constant of the coefficients $h_{\bf j}^i$. Indeed, if we show that this growth is at most exponential, then Lemma \[lema777\] will apply, thus concluding the proof of the Main Theorem. To get the desired control, we will use the [*majorant series method*]{} introduced by Siegel in his treatement [@SIEG42] of the linearization theorem for holomorphic germs with Diophantine rotation number (see also [@STEN61] for the higher-dimensional case).
\[tamanodeh\] There exists $S>0$ such that $$[h_{\bf j}^i]_{\alpha}\leq g_{S, {\bf j}}^i$$ for every ${\bf j}, i$, where $h_{S, {\bf j}}^i$ is defined as in (\[recurrenciaS\]). Consequently, $\|h_{\bf j}^i\|$ grows at most exponentially.
[*Proof.*]{} Since $F$ takes values on some $\mathcal{H}_0(d, R)$ and is a $\alpha$-Hölder function, there exists $\kappa>0$ such that $$\|a^i_{\bf j}\|\leq \kappa^{|{\bf j}|}\quad \textrm{ and} \quad
\ [a^i_{\bf j}]_{\alpha}\leq \kappa^{|{\bf j}|}.$$ Assume that $[h_{\bf j}^i]_{\alpha} \leq g_{S, {\bf j}}^i$ for every ${\bf j} \preceq {\bf j_*}$. Since $h_{\bf j}^i$ vanishes at $x_0$ (except for $|\bf j|=1$, for which $h_{\bf j}^i\equiv 1$), we also have $\|h_{\bf j}^i\|\leq g_{S, {\bf j}}^i$ for every ${\bf j} \preceq {\bf j_*}$. Moreover, since $P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{H\}$ is an homogeneous polynomial in $\{h_{\tilde{\bf j}}^s\}^{1\leq s\leq d}_{\tilde {\bf j} < {\bf j_*}}$ with positive coefficients, $$\|P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{H\}\|\leq P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{\|H\|\}
\leq P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{G_S\}.$$ Except for $|\bf j|=1$ (for which $h_{\bf j}^i\equiv 1$), every $h^i_{\bf j}$ vanishes at $x_0$. Therefore, by Lemma \[holder\_opera\], $$\left[P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{H\}\right]_{\alpha}
\leq 2^{|\bf j|-1}P({\bf j_*},{\bf j})\{G_S\}.$$ The fundamental estimate of Corollary \[coro5\] then yields $$\begin{aligned}
[h^i_{\bf j_*}]_{\alpha}&\leq &K\left(\left[\sum_{{\bf j}
\leq {\bf j_*}}a^i_{\bf j}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}\right]_{\alpha}
+\left\|\sum_{{\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}a^i_{\bf j}P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}\right\|\right)\\
&\leq &
K\left(\sum_{{\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}\|a^i_{\bf j}\|[P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}]_{\alpha}+\sum_{{\bf j}
\leq {\bf j_*}}[a^i_{\bf j}]_{\alpha}\|P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}\|+\sum_{{\bf j}
\leq {\bf j_*}}\|a^i_{\bf j}\|\|P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{H\}\|\right)\\
&\leq&
\sum_{{\bf j}\leq {\bf j_*}}K\left((2\kappa)^{|{\bf j}|}
+2\kappa^{|{\bf j}|}\right)P({\bf j_*}, {\bf j})\{G_S\}\\
&<&
g^i_{S, {\bf j_*}},\end{aligned}$$ where the last inequality holds by taking $S \gg 2K\kappa$.$\quad_{\blacksquare}$\
[**Acknowledgments.**]{} Both authors were funded by the Math-AMSUD Project DySET. Mario Ponce was also funded by the Fondecyt Grant 11090003.
[dillo83]{} A multivariate Faa di Bruno formula with applications. [*Transactions of Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**348**]{}, no. [**2**]{} (1996), 503-520.
Livšic theorems for non-commutative groups including diffeomorphism groups and results on the existence of conformal structures for Anosov systems. [*Ergodic Theory and Dynam. Systems*]{} [**30**]{}, no. [**4**]{} (2010), 1055-110.
Livšic theorem for matrix cocycles. [*Annals of Math.*]{} [**173**]{}, no [**2**]{} (2011), 1025-1042.
Cohomology of dynamical systems. [*Math. USSR Izvestija*]{} [**6**]{} (1972), 1278-1301.
Towards a semi-local study of parabolic invariant curves for fibered holomorphic maps. To appear in [*Ergodic Theory and Dynam. Systems*]{}.
Iteration of analytic functions. [*Annals of Math.*]{} [**43**]{}, no [**2**]{} (1942), 607-612.
Infinite Lie groups and the formal aspects of Dynamical Systems. [*Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics*]{} [**10**]{}, no. [**3**]{} (1961), 451-474.
[Andrés Navas]{}
[Dpto de Matemática y C.C., USACH]{}
[Alameda 3363, Estación Central, Santiago, Chile]{}
[E-mail: [email protected]]{}\
[Mario Ponce]{}
[Facultad de Matemáticas, PUC]{}
[Casilla 306, Santiago 22, Chile]{}
[E-mail: [email protected]]{}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $X$ be an arbitrary hyperbolic geodesic metric space and let $\Gamma$ be a countable subgroup of the isometry group ${\rm Iso}(X)$ of $X$. We show that if $\Gamma$ is non-elementary and weakly acylindrical (this is a weak properness condition) then the second bounded cohomology groups $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$, $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ $(1< p <\infty)$ are infinite dimensional. Our result holds for example for any subgroup of the mapping class group of a non-exceptional surface of finite type not containing a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product.'
author:
- Ursula Hamenstädt
date: 'September 27, 2006'
title: Bounded cohomology and isometry groups of hyperbolic spaces
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
A *Banach module* for a countable group $\Gamma$ is a Banach space $E$ together with a homomorphism of $\Gamma$ into the group of linear isometries of $E$. For every such Banach module $E$ for $\Gamma$ and every $i\geq 1$, the group $\Gamma$ naturally acts on the vector space $L^\infty(\Gamma^i,E)$ of bounded functions $\Gamma^i\to E$. If we denote by $L^\infty(\Gamma^i,E)^\Gamma\subset L^\infty(\Gamma^i,E)$ the linear subspace of all $\Gamma$-invariant such functions, then the *second bounded cohomology group* $H_b^2(\Gamma,E)$ of $\Gamma$ with coefficients $E$ is defined as the second cohomology group of the complex $$0\to
L^\infty(\Gamma,E)^\Gamma \xrightarrow{d} L^\infty
(\Gamma^2,E)^\Gamma\xrightarrow{d} \dots$$ with the usual homogeneous coboundary operator $d$ (see [@M]). There is a natural homomorphism of $H_b^2(\Gamma,E)$ into the ordinary second cohomology group $H^2(\Gamma,E)$ of $\Gamma$ with coefficients $E$ which in general is neither injective nor surjective.
In this paper we are only interested in the case that $E=\mathbb{R}$ with the trivial $\Gamma$-action or that $E=\ell^p(\Gamma)$ for some $p\in (1,\infty)$ with the natural $\Gamma$-action by right translation which assigns to a $p$-summable function $f$ and an element $g\in \Gamma$ the function $gf:h\to f(hg)$.
Since every homomorphism $\rho$ of $\Gamma$ into a countable group $G$ induces a homomorphism $\rho^*:H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})\to
H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$, second bounded cohomology with real coefficients can be used to find obstructions to the existence of interesting homomorphisms $\Gamma\to G$. The underlying idea is to find conditions on $G$ and $\rho$ which ensure that the image of the map $\rho^*$ is “large” (e.g. infinite dimensional) and conclude that this imposes restrictions on the group $\Gamma$.
Two countable groups $\Gamma,G$ are called *measure equivalent* [@G93] if $\Gamma,G$ admit commuting measure preserving actions on a standard infinite measure Borel space with finite measure fundamental domains. Measure equivalence defines an equivalence relation for countable groups [@Fu99a]. Monod and Shalom [@MS05] showed that for countable groups, vanishing of the second bounded cohomology groups with coefficients in the regular representation is preserved under measure equivalence. Thus second bounded cohomology with coefficients in the regular representation provides an obstruction to the existence of a measure equivalence between two given countable groups.
For the application of these ideas it is necessary to obtain information on these bounded cohomology groups. The first and easiest result in this direction is due to B. Johnson (see [@I] for a discussion and references) who showed that the bounded cohomology of amenable groups with real coefficients is trivial. Later Brooks [@B81] found a combinatorial method for the construction of non-trivial real second bounded cohomology classes and used it to show that the second bounded cohomology group of a finitely generated free group is infinite dimensional.
Fujiwara [@F] investigated the second real bounded cohomology group of a group of isometries of a *hyperbolic* geodesic metric space. Such a space $X$ admits a geometric boundary $\partial X$. Each isometry of $X$ acts as a homeomorphism on $\partial X$. The *limit set* of a group $\Gamma$ of isometries of $X$ is the closed $\Gamma$-invariant subset of $\partial X$ of all accumulation points of a fixed $\Gamma$-orbit in $X$. The group $\Gamma$ is called *non-elementary* if its limit set contains at least 3 points; then the limit set of $\Gamma$ is in fact uncountable. Using a refinement and an extension of Brooks’ method, Fujiwara showed that for a countable non-elementary group $\Gamma$ of isometries of $X$ acting properly discontinuously on $X$ in a metric sense, the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional [@F]. Bestvina and Fujiwara extended this result further to countable subgroups of ${\rm Iso}(X)$ whose actions on $X$ satisfy some weaker properness assumption [@BF]. Their result is for example valid for non-elementary subgroups of the *mapping class group* of an oriented surface $S$ of finite type and negative Euler characteristic, i.e. for subgroups of the group of isotopy classes of orientation preserving diffeomorphisms of $S$ which are not virtually abelian. As a consequence, the second bounded cohomology group of every non-elementary subgroup of such a mapping class group is infinite dimensional.
On the other hand, by a result of Burger and Monod [@BM99; @BM02], for every irreducible lattice $\Gamma$ in a connected semi-simple Lie group with finite center, no compact factors and of rank at least 2 the kernel of the natural map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ vanishes. Together with the results of Fujiwara [@F] and Bestvina and Fujiwara [@BF] it follows easily that the image of every homomorphism of $\Gamma$ into a finitely generated word hyperbolic group or into the mapping class group of an oriented surface of finite type and negative Euler characteristic is finite [@BM02; @BF]. The latter result was earlier derived with different methods by Farb and Masur [@FM] building on the work of Kaimanovich and Masur [@KM].
The goal of this note is to present a new method for constructing nontrivial second bounded cohomology classes for a countable group $\Gamma$ from dynamical properties of suitable actions of $\Gamma$. We use it to give a common proof of extensions of the above mentioned results of Fujiwara [@F] and of Bestvina and Fujiwara [@BF] which among other things answers a question raised by Monod and Shalom [@MS; @MS05].
For the formulation of these results, call a countable group $\Gamma$ of isometries of a (not necessarily proper) hyperbolic geodesic metric space $X$ *weakly acylindrical* if for every point $x_0\in X$ and every $m>0$ there are numbers $R(x_0,m)>0,c(x_0,m)>0$ with the following property. If $x,y\in X$ are such that a geodesic $\gamma$ connecting $x$ to $y$ meets the $m$-neighborhood of $x_0$ and if $d(x,y)\geq R(x_0,m)$ then there are at most $c(x_0,m)$ elements $g\in \Gamma$ such that $d(x,gx)\leq m$ and $d(y,gy)\leq
m$ (compare with the definition of an acylindrical isometry group in [@B03]). We show in Section 4 (see [@F; @BF; @MMS] for earlier results).
[**Theorem A:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be a non-elementary weakly acylindrical countable group of isometries of an arbitrary hyperbolic geodesic metric space. Then the kernels of the maps $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ and $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ $
(1< p<\infty)$ are infinite dimensional.*]{}
As an easy corollary of Theorem A and a result of Bowditch [@B03] we obtain an extension of the result of Bestvina and Fujiwara [@BF]. For its formulation, we say that a group $\Gamma$ *virtually splits* as a direct product if $\Gamma$ has a finite index subgroup $\Gamma^\prime$ which splits as a direct product of two infinite groups. We show.
The following corollary is an immediate consequence of Corollary B and the work of Burger-Monod and Monod-Shalom [@BM99; @BM02; @MS05]. For its formulation, call a lattice $\Lambda$ in a product $G=G_1\times G_2$ of two locally compact $\sigma$-compact and non-compact topological groups *irreducible* if the projection of $\Lambda$ to each of the factors is dense.
[**Corollary C:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be a subgroup of the mapping class group of an oriented surface of finite type and negative Euler characteristic. Assume that $\Gamma$ does not contain a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product. Then $\Gamma$ is not measure equivalent to an irreducible lattice in a product of two locally compact $\sigma$-compact non-compact topological groups.*]{}
For lattices in semisimple Lie groups of higher rank, Corollary C follows from [@FM] and the beautiful work of Furman [@Fu99a]. The earlier result of Zimmer [@Z91] suffices to deduce Corollary C for the full mapping class group which admits a linear representation with infinite image. Recently, Kida [@K06] derived a much stronger rigidity result. Namely, he showed that for every countable group $\Lambda$ which is measure equivalent to the mapping class group ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ of a non-exceptional oriented surface of finite type, there is a homomorphism $\Lambda\to {{\mathcal{M}}}$ with finite kernel and finite index image.
The organization of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we introduce our method for the construction of second bounded cohomology classes in the concrete example of the fundamental group $\Gamma$ of a *convex cocompact* complete Riemannian manifold $M$ of bounded negative curvature. Such a manifold $M$ contains a compact convex subset ${{\mathcal{C}}}(M)$, the so-called *convex core*, as a strong deformation retract. The group $\Gamma$ is a word hyperbolic, and the convex core ${{\mathcal{C}}}(M)$ of $M$ is a $K(\Gamma,1)$-space. Therefore, if $\Gamma$ is *non-elementary*, i.e. if $\Gamma$ is not abelian, then the dimension of the cohomology group $H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is finite, and by Fujiwara’s result [@F], the group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional.
Inspired by a result of Barge and Ghys [@BG], we relate the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ to the *geodesic flow* $\Phi^t$ of $M$ which acts on the unit tangent bundle $T^1M$ of $M$. Since $M$ is convex cocompact, $T^1M$ admits a compact $\Phi^t$-invariant hyperbolic set $W$ which is the closure of the union of all closed orbits of $\Phi^t$. The restriction of $\Phi^t$ to $W$ is topologically transitive.
A *cocycle* for the action of $\Phi^t$ on $W$ is a continuous function $c:W\times \mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $c(v,s+t)=c(v,t)+c(\Phi^tv,s)$ for all $v\in W$ and all $s,t\in
\mathbb{R}$. Two cocycles $c,d$ are *cohomologous* if there is a continuous function $\psi:W\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\psi(\Phi^tv)+c(v,t)= d(v,t)+\psi(v)$. The collection of all cocycles which are cohomologous to a given cocycle $c$ is the *cohomology class* of $c$. The *flip* ${{\mathcal{F}}}:v\to -v$ acts on $W$ and on the space of cocycles for the geodesic flow preserving cohomology classes. The cohomology class of a cocycle $c$ is called *flip anti-invariant* if ${{\mathcal{F}}}(c)$ is cohomologous to $-c$. We denote by ${{\mathcal{D}}{\mathcal{C}}}(M)$ the vector space of all flip anti-invariant cohomology classes of cocycles for the geodesic flow on $W$ which are Hölder continuous, i.e. such that for a fixed number $t>0$ the function $v\to c(v,t)$ is Hölder continuous.
Every smooth closed 1-form on $M$ defines via integration along orbit segments of $\Phi^t$ a Hölder continuous cocycle for $\Phi^t$ which is anti-invariant under the flip. Two cocycles defined by closed one-forms in this way are cohomologous if and only if the one-forms define the same de Rham cohomology class on $M$. Thus $H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})=H^1(M,\mathbb{R})$ is naturally a subspace of ${{\mathcal{D}}{\mathcal{C}}}(M)$. We show in Section 2.
[**Theorem D:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be the fundamental group of a convex cocompact manifold $M$ of bounded negative curvature. Then the quotient space ${{\mathcal{D}}{\mathcal{C}}}(M)/H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ naturally embeds into ${\rm ker}(H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}))$.*]{}
Section 3 contains the main technical result of this paper. Embarking from the concrete construction in Section 2, we present an abstract dynamical criterion for infinite dimensional second bounded cohomology for a countable group $\Gamma$ acting as a group of homeomorphisms on a metric space of bounded diameter. The coefficients of these cohomology groups can be either $\mathbb{R}$ or $\ell^p(\Gamma)$ for some $p\in (1,\infty)$. Theorem 4.4 of Section 4 shows that our criterion can be applied to countable groups which admit a non-elementary weakly acylindrical isometric action on a hyperbolic geodesic metric space; this then yields Theorem A. Section 5 contains the proof of Corollary B and Corollary C as well as a short discussion of some applications which are due to Monod and Shalom.
Dynamical cocycles and bounded cohomology
=========================================
In this section we consider an $n$-dimensional convex cocompact Riemannian manifold $M$ of bounded negative curvature. Then $M=\tilde M/\Gamma$ where $\tilde M$ is a simply connected complete Riemannian manifold of bounded negative curvature and $\Gamma$ is a group of isometries acting properly discontinuously and freely on $\tilde M$. The manifold $\tilde M$ admits a natural compactification by adding the *geometric boundary* $\partial \tilde M$ which is a topological sphere of dimension $n-1$. Every isometry of $\tilde M$ acts on $\partial \tilde M$ as a homeomorphism. The *limit set* $\Lambda$ of $\Gamma$ is the set of accumulation points in $\partial
\tilde M$ of a fixed orbit $\Gamma x$ $(x\in \tilde M)$ of the action of $\Gamma$ on $\tilde M$. We always assume that the group $\Gamma$ is non-elementary, i.e. that its limit set contains as least 3 points. Then $\Lambda$ is the smallest nontrivial closed subset of $\partial\tilde M$ which is invariant under the action of $\Gamma$.
The *geodesic flow* $\Phi^t$ acts on the *unit tangent bundle* $T^1\tilde M$ of $\tilde M$ and on the unit tangent bundle $T^1M$ of $M$. Let $\tilde L\subset T^1\tilde M$ be the set of all unit tangents of all geodesics with both end-points in $\Lambda$. Then $\tilde L$ is invariant under the action of $\Phi^t$ and the action of $\Gamma$. The quotient $L=\tilde L/\Gamma$ is just the *non-wandering set* for the action of $\Phi^t$ on $T^1 M$. Since $M$ is convex cocompact by assumption, $L$ is a compact hyperbolic set for the geodesic flow $\Phi^t$ on $T^1M$. The sets $\tilde L$ and $L$ are moreover invariant under the *flip* ${{\mathcal{F}}}:v\to -v$ which maps a unit tangent vector to its negative. The Riemannian metric on $M$ induces a complete Riemannian metric and hence a complete distance function $d$ on $T^1M$.
A continuous real-valued *cocycle* for the action of $\Phi^t$ on $L$ is a continuous function $c:L\times \mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ with the property that $c(v,t+s)=c(v,t)+c(\Phi^t v,s)$ for all $v\in L$, all $s,t\in \mathbb{R}$. Every continuous function $f:L\to \mathbb{R}$ defines such a cocycle $c_f$ by $c_f(v,t)=\int_0^t f(\Phi^s v)ds$. Two cocycles $b,c$ are called *cohomologous* if there is a continuous function $\psi:L\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\psi(\Phi^t
v)+c(v,t)-\psi(v)=b(v,t)$. If $b, c$ are cocycles which are Hölder continuous with respect to the distance $d$ on $L$, i.e. if for fixed $t>0$ the maps $v\to b(v,t),v\to c(v,t)$ are Hölder continuous, then by Livshicz’ theorem, $b,c$ are cohomologous if and only if for every periodic point $v$ of the geodesic flow with period $\tau >0$ we have $b(v,\tau)=c(v,\tau)$ [@HK]. Every Hölder continuous cocycle is cohomologous to the cocycle of a Hölder continuous function $f$ (see e.g. [@H99]), and two Hölder functions $f,g$ on $L$ are *cohomologous*, i.e. their cocycles $c_f,c_g$ are cohomologous, if and only if we have $\int_{\gamma^\prime} f=\int_{\gamma^\prime}g$ for every closed geodesic $\gamma$ on $M$ (where $\gamma^\prime$ is the unit tangent field of $\gamma$).
The flip ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ acts on the space of cocycles preserving cohomology classes. We call the cohomology class of a cocycle $c$ *anti-invariant* under the flip ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ if ${{\mathcal{F}}}(c)$ is cohomologous to $-c$. If the cohomology class of a Hölder continuous cocycle $c$ is anti-invariant under the flip then there is a Hölder continuous function $f$ which is anti-invariant under the flip, i.e. which satisfies $f(v)=-f(-v)$ for all $v\in L$, such that the cocycle $c_f$ defined by $f$ is cohomologous to $c$ (compare [@H97]). Denote by ${{\mathcal{A}}}$ the vector space of all Hölder continuous functions $f$ on $L$ which are anti-invariant under the flip ${{\mathcal{F}}}$.
Since $L$ is a compact invariant hyperbolic topologically transitive set for the geodesic flow on $T^1M$, for every Hölder continuous function $f$ on $L$ and every number $\epsilon_0 >0$ which is smaller than half of the injectivity radius of $M$ there is a number $k>0$ only depending on the Hölder norm of $f$ with the following property. Let $v,w\in L$ and let $T>0$ be such that $d(\Phi^tv,\Phi^t w)\leq \epsilon_0$ for all $t\in
[0,T]$; then $\vert \int_0^Tf(\Phi^t
v)dt-\int_0^Tf(\Phi^t w)dt\vert \leq k$.
A *quasi-morphism* for $\Gamma$ is a function $\phi:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $$\Vert \phi\Vert_0=
\sup_{g,h\in \Gamma}\vert \phi(g)+\phi(h)-\phi(gh)\vert<\infty.$$ The set ${{\mathcal{Q}}}$ of all quasi-morphisms for $\Gamma$ naturally has the structure of a vector space. The function $\Vert \,\Vert_0:{{\mathcal{Q}}}\to
[0,\infty)$ which associates to a quasi-morphism $\phi$ its *defect* $\Vert \phi\Vert_0$ is a pseudo-norm which vanishes precisely on the subspace of *morphisms*.
[**Lemma 2.1:**]{} [*There is a linear map $\Psi:{{\mathcal{A}}}\to
{{\mathcal{Q}}}$. For every $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$, the defect $\Vert \Psi(f)\Vert_0$ of $\Psi(f)$ is bounded from above by a constant only depending on the curvature bounds of $M$ and the Hölder norm of $f$.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and extend $f$ to a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant function $F$ on $T^1M$. Such an extension can be constructed as follows. Choose a probability measure $\mu$ on $L$ for which there are constants $0<a<b$ such that the $\mu$-mass of a ball $B(v,r)$ of radius $r<1$ about a point $v\in L$ is contained in $[r^b,r^a]$; for example, the unique measure of maximal entropy for the geodesic flow on $L$ has this property. We view $\mu$ as a probability measure on $T^1M$ which is supported in $L$. Let $\tau:[0,\infty)\to
[0,1]$ be a smooth function which satisfies $\tau(t)=1$ for $t$ close to $0$ and $\tau[1,\infty)=0$. Via multiplying the restriction of $\mu$ to the metric ball $B(w,r)$ $(w\in T^1M)$ by the function $z\to \tau(d(z,w)/r)$ we may assume that the measures $\mu\vert B(w,r)$ depend continuously on $w\in T^1M,r>0$ in the weak$^*$-topology.
For $w\in T^1M$ let $\delta(w)\geq 0$ be the distance between $w$ and $L$. For $w\in T^1M -L$ define $$f_0(w)=\int_{B(w,2\delta(w))\cap L}f d\mu/\mu(B(w,2\delta(w)))$$ and let $f_0(w)=f(w)$ for $w\in L$. By assumption on the measures $\mu\vert B(w,r)$ and since $f$ is Hölder continuous, the function $f_0$ is locally Hölder continuous and its restriction to $L$ coincides with $f$. Thus we obtain a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant extension $F$ of $f$ to $T^1M$ by assigning to $w\in T^1M-L$ the value $F(w)=\frac{1}{2}(f_0(w)-f_0(-w))$. For every compact subset $K$ of $T^1M$ the Hölder norm of the restriction of $F$ to $K$ only depends on $K$ and on the Hölder norm of $f$. If $F,H$ are the extensions of $f,h$ constructed in this way and if $a,b\in \mathbb{R}$ then $aF+bH$ is the extension of $af+bh$.
Let again $\Lambda$ be the limit set of $\Gamma$. The closure ${\rm Conv}(\Lambda)\subset \tilde M$ of the convex hull of $\Lambda$ in $\tilde M$ is invariant under the action of $\Gamma$. The *convex core* ${{\mathcal{C}}}(M)={\rm Conv}(\Lambda)/\Gamma$ of $M$ is compact. Let $\tilde F$ be the lift of $F$ to $T^1\tilde M$ and choose a point $p\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$. For an element $g\in \Gamma$ define $\Psi(f)(g)$ to be the integral of $\tilde F$ over the tangent of the oriented geodesic joining $p$ to $g(p)$. We claim that $\Psi(f)$ is a quasi-morphism for $\Gamma$.
For the proof of this claim, recall that the curvature of $\tilde M$ is pinched between two negative constants and therefore by comparison, for every $\epsilon_0>0$ there is a number $k=k(\epsilon_0)>0$ only depending on $\epsilon_0$ and an upper curvature bound for $\tilde M$ with the following property. Let $T$ be a geodesic triangle in $\tilde M$ with vertices $A_1,A_2,A_3$ and denote by $a_i$ the side of $T$ connecting $A_{i-1}$ to $A_{i+1}$. Let $q_i\in a_i$ be the nearest point projection of the vertex $A_{i}$ to the side $a_i$ and let $\gamma_{i,+},\gamma_{i,-}$ be the oriented geodesic arc parametrized by arc length which connects $q_i=\gamma_{i,+}(0)$ to $A_{i+1}=\gamma_{i,+}(\tau_{i,+})$, $q_i=\gamma_{i,-}(0)$ to $A_{i-1}=\gamma_{i,-}(\tau_{i,-})$ (here indices are taken modulo 3). Then $t_i=\tau_{i+1,+}-\tau_{i,-}\in [-k,k]$ and moreover for every $t\in [k,\tau_{i,-}]$ the distance between $\gamma_{i,-}^\prime(t)\in T^1\tilde M$ and $\gamma_{i+1,+}^\prime(t+t_i)\in T^1\tilde M$ is at most $\epsilon_0$.
Now by assumption, the function $F$ is anti-invariant under the flip and locally Hölder continuous. Therefore our above discussion implies that the integral of $\tilde
F$ over the unit tangent field of a closed curve in ${\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$ which consists of three geodesic arcs forming a geodesic triangle is bounded from above in absolute value by a universal constant times the Hölder norm of the restriction of $F$ to the compact subset $T^1M\vert {{\mathcal{C}}}(M)$ of $T^1M$ of all unit vectors with foot point in the convex core ${{\mathcal{C}}}(M)={\rm Conv}(\Lambda)/\Gamma$. On the other hand, by invariance of $\tilde F$ under the action of $\Gamma$ and by anti-invariance of $\tilde F$ under the flip, for $g,h\in \Gamma$ the quantity $\vert \Psi(f)(g)+\Psi(f)(h)-\Psi(f)(gh)\vert$ is just the absolute value of the integral of $\tilde F$ over the unit tangent field of the oriented geodesic triangle in ${\rm Conv}(\Lambda)\subset \tilde M$ with vertices $p,g(p),g(h (p))$. Thus $\Psi(f)$ is indeed a quasi-morphism and the assignment $f\to
\Psi(f)$ defines a linear map $\Psi:{{\mathcal{A}}}\to {{\mathcal{Q}}}$. Moreover, the defect $\Vert \phi\Vert_0$ of $\phi$ is bounded from above by a constant only depending on the curvature bounds of $M$ and the Hölder norm of $f$. This shows the lemma.
Two quasi-morphisms $\phi,\psi$ for $\Gamma$ are called *equivalent* if $\phi-\psi$ is a bounded function. This is clearly an equivalence relation. If $\phi_1$ is equivalent to $\phi_2$ and $\psi_1$ is equivalent to $\psi_2$ then for all $a,b\in \mathbb{R}$ the quasi-morphism $a\phi_1+b\psi_1$ is equivalent to $a\phi_2+b\psi_2$ and hence the set ${{\mathcal{Q}}}B$ of equivalence classes of quasi-morphisms of $\Gamma$ has a natural structure of a vector space. It contains as a subspace the vector space $H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ of all equivalence classes of *morphisms* of $\Gamma$. There is an exact sequence $$0\to H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to {{\mathcal{Q}}}B\to
H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}) \to H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$$ and therefore the quotient space $\tilde {{\mathcal{Q}}}={{\mathcal{Q}}}B
/H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ can naturally be identified with the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ (see [@M]). In particular, an equivalence class of quasi-morphisms can be viewed as a cohomology class of $\Gamma$-invariant bounded cocycles $\phi\in
L^\infty(\Gamma^3,\mathbb{R})^\Gamma$. In this interpretation, the cocycle $\phi$ determined by the quasi-morphism $\psi$ associates to a triple $(g,h,u)\in \Gamma^3$ the value $\phi(g,h,u)=\psi(g^{-1}h)+\psi(h^{-1}u)-\psi(g^{-1}u)$.
For $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$, the definition of the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ in the proof of Lemma 2.1 depends on the choice of an extension of $f$ to a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant function on $T^1M$ and also on the choice of a basepoint $p\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$. The next lemma shows that the cohomology class of $\Psi(f)$ is independent of these choices.
[**Lemma 2.2:**]{} [*The cohomology class of the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ does not depend on the choice of the basepoint $p$ nor on the extension of $f$ to a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant function on $T^1M$.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and let $F$ be a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant extension of $f$ to $T^1M$. Denote by $\Psi(f)$ the quasi-morphism constructed in the proof of Lemma 2.1 using the extension $F$ of $f$ and the basepoint $p\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$. We first show that a different choice $q\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$ of a basepoint gives rise to a quasi-morphism which is equivalent to $\Psi(f)$ in our above sense. For this we follow [@BG]. Let $\tilde F$ be the lift of $F$ to $T^1\tilde M$. For $g\in \Gamma$ define $\rho(g)$ to be the integral of the function $\tilde F$ over the unit tangent field of the oriented geodesic quadrangle with vertices $q,g(q),g(p),p$. As in the proof of Lemma 2.1 we conclude that the function $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ is uniformly bounded. Since by invariance of $\tilde F$ under the action of $\Gamma$ the integral of $\tilde F$ over the oriented geodesic arc connecting $g(q)$ to $g(p)$ is independent of $g\in
\Gamma$ and, in particular, it coincides with the negative of the integral of $\tilde F$ over the oriented geodesic arc connecting $p$ to $q$, the quasi-morphism defined by $F$ and the basepoint $q$ just equals $\Psi(f)+\rho$. Thus changing the basepoint does not change the equivalence class of our quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$.
Now we may also replace the point $q\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$ by a point $\xi\in \Lambda$. Namely, for $g\in \Gamma$ define $\rho(g)$ to be the oriented integral of the function $\tilde F$ over the tangent lines of the ideal geodesic quadrangle with vertices $\xi,g(\xi),g(p),p$. As before, this function is uniformly bounded. By invariance of $\tilde F$ under the action of $\Gamma$ and the fact that $\tilde F$ is anti-invariant under the flip we obtain that the 2-cocycle for $\Gamma$ defined as above by the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)+\rho$ is just the cocycle $\eta\in
L^\infty(\Gamma^3,\mathbb{R})^\Gamma$ which assigns to a triple $(g,h,u)\in \Gamma^3$ the integral of $\tilde F$ over the unit tangents of the (possibly degenerate) oriented ideal triangle with vertices $g(\xi), h(\xi),u(\xi)$. Since these unit tangents are contained in the lift $\tilde L$ of the non-wandering set $L$ for the geodesic flow on $T^1M$, the cocycle $\eta$ only depends on $f$ but not on an extension of $f$ to $T^1M$. Thus the cohomology class defined by $\Psi(f)$ is independent of the extension as well.
In the sequel we denote for $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ by $\Theta(f)\in \tilde{{\mathcal{Q}}}\sim{\rm
ker}(H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}))$ the cohomology class of the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$. By Lemma 2.2, this class only depends on $f$. Moreover, the assignment $\Theta:{{\mathcal{A}}}\to \tilde Q$ is clearly linear. We next investigate the kernel of the map $\Theta$.
Since $\Gamma$ is convex cocompact by assumption, there is a natural correspondence between oriented closed geodesics on $M$ and conjugacy classes in $\Gamma$. For every homomorphism $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ and every $g\in \Gamma$, the value $\rho(g)$ of $\rho$ on $g$ only depends on the conjugacy class of $g$. Therefore such a homomorphism defines a function on the set of closed geodesics on $M$; we denote the value of $\rho$ on such a closed geodesic $\gamma$ by $\rho(\gamma)$. We have.
[**Lemma 2.3:**]{} [*$\Theta(f)=0$ if and only if there is a morphism $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\int_{\gamma^\prime} f =\rho(\gamma)$ for every closed geodesic $\gamma$ on $M$.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and assume that there is a morphism $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\int_{\gamma^\prime} f=\rho(\gamma)$ for every closed geodesic $\gamma$ on $M$. This morphism defines a class in $H^1(M,\mathbb{R})$ and therefore by the de Rham theorem, there is a smooth closed 1-form $\beta$ on $M$ which defines $\rho$ via integration. Let $\tilde \beta$ be the pull-back of $\beta$ to a closed $1$-form on $\tilde M$. Then $\tilde \beta$ is exact and hence the integral of $\tilde \beta$ over every piecewise smooth closed curve in $\tilde M$ vanishes.
By Livshicz’ theorem [@HK] and the choice of $\beta$, there is a Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant function $\psi:L\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\int_0^Tf(\Phi^t v) dt= \psi(\Phi^T v)+\int_0^T\beta(\Phi^t
v)dt-\psi(v)$ for every $v\in L$ and all $T>0$. As in the proof of Lemma 2.1 we extend $\psi$ to a locally Hölder continuous flip anti-invariant function on all of $T^1M$ which we denote by the same symbol. Let $\tilde \psi$ be the lift of $\psi$ to $T^1\tilde M$. Fix a point $p\in {\rm Conv}(\Lambda)$ and for $g\in \Gamma$ let $\gamma_g$ be the geodesic arc connecting $p=\gamma_p(0)$ to $g(p)=\gamma_p(T)$. Define $\alpha(g)=\tilde\psi(\gamma_g^\prime(T))+\int_0^T
\tilde\beta(\gamma_g^\prime(t))dt
-\tilde \psi(\gamma_g^\prime(0))$. By Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.2, $\alpha$ is a quasi-morphism for $\Gamma$ which defines the cohomology class $\Theta(f)$. On the other hand, $\alpha$ differs from the quasi-morphism defined by $\beta$ by a bounded function. Since the integral of $\tilde\beta$ over every piecewise smooth closed curve in $\tilde M$ vanishes, the cohomology class $\Theta(f)$ of the quasi-morphism $\alpha$ vanishes.
On the other hand, let $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and assume that there is no morphism $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ such that $\int_{\gamma^\prime}f=\rho(\gamma)$ for every closed geodesic $\gamma$ on $M$. We have to show that the cohomology class $\Theta(f)$ does not vanish. Using the exact sequence (4) above, this is the case if and only if a quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ representing $\Theta(f)$ is not equivalent to any morphism for $\Gamma$.
For this we argue as before. Namely, let $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ be any morphism for $\Gamma$ and let $\beta$ be a smooth closed 1-form on $M$ defining $\rho$. By assumption, there is a periodic point $v\in L$ of period $\tau>0$ for the geodesic flow $\Phi^t$ such that $\int_0^\tau
(f-\beta)(\Phi^tv)dt=c>0$. Let $\tilde v$ be a lift of $v$ to $\tilde L$ and let $p\in \tilde M$ be the foot-point of $\tilde
v$. Choose an extension of $f$ to a locally Hölder continuous function $F$ on $T^1M$ and let $\tilde F$ be the lift of $F$ to $T^1\tilde
M$. By definition, the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ induced by $F$ and the choice of the basepoint $p$ assigns to $g\in \Gamma$ the integral $\int_0^T \tilde F(\gamma_g^\prime(s))ds$ where $\gamma_g:[0,T]\to
\tilde M$ is the oriented geodesic arc connecting $p$ to $g(p)$. Moreover, this quasi-morphism represents the class $\Theta(f)$. Now let $\eta$ be the geodesic in $\tilde M$ which is tangent to $\tilde v$. By the choice of $\tilde v$ there is an element $h\in
\Gamma$ which preserves $\eta$ and whose restriction to $\eta$ is the translation $\eta(t)\to \eta(t+\tau)$ with translation length $\tau$. Hence we have $\Psi(f)(h^m)=m\int_0^\tau f(\Phi^t v)dt$ and $(\Psi(f)-\rho)(h^m)= mc$ for all $m\in \mathbb{Z}$. In particular, the function $\Psi(f)-\rho$ is unbounded and consequently $\Psi(f)$ is not equivalent to $\rho$. Since $\rho$ was arbitrary this means that the projection of $\Psi(f)$ into $\tilde {{\mathcal{Q}}}$ does not vanish.
Fix a number $\epsilon_0>0$ which is smaller than half of the injectivity radius of $M$ and for $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ define $\Vert
f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$ to be the infimum of the numbers $k>0$ with the property that $\vert \int_0^T f(\Phi^t v)dt-\int_0^T f(\Phi^t w)dt \vert
\leq k$ whenever $v,w\in L$ and $T>0$ are such that $d(\Phi^t v,\Phi^t w)\leq \epsilon_0$ for every $t\in [0,T]$. We have.
[**Lemma 2.4:**]{} [*$\Vert \,\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$ is a norm on ${{\mathcal{A}}}$.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} We observed above that $\Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}<\infty$ for every Hölder continuous function $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$. Moreover, we clearly have $\Vert a f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}= \vert a\vert \Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$ for all $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and all $a\in \mathbb{R}$ and $\Vert
f+g\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}\leq \Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}} +\Vert g\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}} $ by a simple application of the triangle inequality. Thus we are left with showing that $\Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}} =0$ only if $f\equiv 0$. For this assume that $0\not\equiv f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$. Since $f$ is anti-invariant under the flip by assumption, $f$ is not the constant function. Hence by continuity there are points $v,w\in W$ with $d(v,w)<\epsilon_0/2$ and numbers $\delta >0$, $T\in
(0,\epsilon_0)/2$ with $f(\Phi^tv)\geq f(\Phi^tw)+\delta$ for all $t\in [0,T]$. Then $\Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}} \geq \delta T$ by the definition of $\Vert\,\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$.
Call two Hölder functions $f,g\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ *weakly cohomologous* if $f-g$ is cohomologous to a closed one-form on $M$, viewed as a function on $T^1M$. The class of $f$ under the thus defined equivalence relation will be called the *weak cohomology class* of $f$. The set ${{\mathcal{H}}}$ of weak cohomology classes of Hölder functions is a vector space. For $\psi\in {{\mathcal{H}}}$ let $\Vert \psi\Vert $ be the infimum of the norms $\Vert f\Vert
_{{\mathcal{A}}}$ where $f$ runs through all functions in ${{\mathcal{A}}}$ which define the weak cohomology class $\psi$. Then $\Vert \,\Vert$ is a pseudo-norm on ${{\mathcal{H}}}$.
The *Gromov norm* $\Vert\,\Vert$ of an element $\alpha\in H_b^2(\Gamma, \mathbb{R})$ is the infimum of the supremums-norms over all bounded 2-cocycles for $\Gamma$ representing $\alpha$ [@G83] (here a bounded 2-cocycle is a bounded $\Gamma$-invariant function on $\Gamma^3$ contained in the kernel of the coboundary operator). If $\phi:\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ is a quasi-morphism then the Gromov norm of the cohomology class defined by $\phi$ is the infimum of the defects $\Vert\eta\Vert_0$ where $\eta$ runs through the collection of all quasi-morphisms with the property that $\eta-\phi$ is equivalent to a morphisms of $\Gamma$.
By Lemma 2.3, the map $\Theta$ factors through an injective linear map ${{\mathcal{H}}} \to \tilde Q={\rm ker}(H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}))$ which we denote again by $\Theta$. The following corollary summarizes our discussion and implies Theorem D from the introduction.
[**Corollary 2.5:**]{} [*The map $\Theta:({{\mathcal{H}}},
\Vert\,\Vert)\to (\tilde{{\mathcal{Q}}}, \Vert\,\Vert)$ is a continuous embedding.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} By Lemma 2.1, Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4 we only have to show continuity of $\Theta$. For this choose a point $\xi\in \Lambda$. Let $f\in {{\mathcal{A}}}$ and let $\tilde f$ be the lift of $f$ to $T^1\tilde M$. For $g,h,u\in \Gamma$ define $\alpha(g,h,u)$ to be the integral of $\tilde f$ over the unit tangents of the (possibly degenerate) oriented ideal triangle with vertices $g\xi,h\xi,u\xi$. By Lemma 2.3 and its proof, $\alpha$ is a cocycle which represents the class $\Theta(f)$. The considerations in the proof of Lemma 2.1 show that $\vert\alpha(g,h,u)\vert\leq
c\Vert f \Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$ for a universal constant $c>0$, in particular we have $\alpha\in L^\infty(\Gamma^3,\mathbb{R})^\Gamma$ and and the Gromov norm of the cohomology class defined by $\alpha$ is not bigger than $c\Vert f\Vert_{{\mathcal{A}}}$. From this continuity of the map $\Theta$ follows.
A dynamical criterion for infinite dimensional second bounded cohomology
========================================================================
This section contains the main technical result of this note. We consider an arbitrary countable group $\Gamma$ which acts by homeomorphisms on a metric space $(X,d)$ of finite diameter without isolated points. Our goal is to construct bounded cohomology classes for $\Gamma$ using dynamical properties of the action of $\Gamma$ on $X$ as in Section 2. In the application we have in mind, the space $X$ is the Gromov boundary of a hyperbolic geodesic metric space and $\Gamma$ is a group of isometries acting on $X$ as a group of homeomorphisms.
We begin with describing some properness condition for the action of a countable group $\Gamma$ by homeomorphisms of $(X,d)$. Namely, the metric $d$ on our space $X$ induces a metric on the space $X^3$ of triples of points in $X$ which we denote again by $d$; this metric is given by $d((x_1,x_2,x_3),(y_1,y_2,y_3))=\sum_{i=1}^3 d(x_i,y_i)$. Let $\Delta\subset X^3$ be the closed subset of all triples for which at least two points in the triple coincide. The diagonal action of $\Gamma$ on $X^3$ preserves the open set $X^3-\Delta$ of triples of pairwise distinct points in $X$.
[**Definition:**]{} The action of $\Gamma$ on $X^3-\Delta$ is called *metrically proper* if for every $\nu\in (0,\frac{1}{2})$ there are constants $m(\nu)>0$, $R(\nu)>-\log \nu/4$ such that for any two open disjoint sets $U,V\subset X$ of distance at least $\nu$ and of diameter at most $e^{-R(\nu)}$ the following is satisfied.
1. Let $W\subset X$ be a set of diameter at most $e^{-R(\nu)}$ whose distance to $U\cup V$ is at least $\nu$. Write $C=U\times V\times W\subset X^3-\Delta$; then for all $k\in \mathbb{Z}$ and every fixed pair of points $x_0\not=y_0\in X$ with $d(x_0,y_0)\geq \nu$ there are at most $m(\nu)$ elements $g\in \Gamma$ with $$\begin{aligned}
g(C)\cap & \{(x,y,z)\in X^3-\Delta\mid x=x_0,y=y_0,
\notag \\
e^{-k} \leq & \min\{d(z,x_0),d(z,y_0)\}\leq
e^{-k+1} \}\not=\emptyset. \notag\end{aligned}$$
2. Let $U^\prime,V^\prime\subset X$ be open disjoint sets of distance at least $\nu$ and of diameter at most $e^{-R(\nu)}$. Let $Z\subset X$ (or $Z^\prime \subset X$) be the set of all points whose distance to $U\cup V$ (or to $U^\prime\cup V^\prime$) is bigger than $\nu$. Then there are at most $m(\nu)$ elements $g\in \Gamma$ with $$g(U\times V\times Z)\cap U^\prime\times V^\prime\times
Z^\prime\not=\emptyset.
\notag$$
If the action of $\Gamma$ on $X^3-\Delta$ is metrically proper, then every point in $X^3-\Delta$ has a neighborhood $N$ in $X^3-\Delta$ such that $g(N)\cap N\not=
\emptyset$ only for finitely many $g\in \Gamma$. Namely, for a point $(x,y,z)\in X^3-\Delta$ choose $\nu>0$ sufficiently small that $\min\{d(x,y),d(x,z),d(z,y)\}\geq 2\nu$. For this number $\nu$ let $R(\nu)>0$ be as in the definition of a metrically proper action and let $N$ be the open $e^{-R(\nu)}$-neighborhood of $(x,y,z)$ in $X^3$; then $N\cap gN\not=\emptyset$ only for finitely many $g\in \Gamma$ by the second part of our above definition. Since $X$ does not have isolated points this implies that the quotient $(X^3-\Delta)/\Gamma$ is a metrizable Hausdorff space.
For every $g\in \Gamma$, the fixed point set ${\rm Fix}(g)$ for the action of $g$ on $X$ is a closed subset of $X$. The boundary $A(g)$ of the open subset $X^3-{\rm Fix}(g)^3$ of $X^3$ is a closed (possibly empty) nowhere dense subset of $X^3$. By the above observation, every point $(x,y,z)\in X^3-\Delta$ admits a neighborhood $N$ which intersects only finitely many of the sets $A(g)$ $(g\in \Gamma)$. Since $X$ does not have isolated points, the set $X^3-\Delta-\cup_{g\in \Gamma}A(g)$ is open and dense in $X^3-\Delta$. The restriction of the natural projection $$\pi:T=X^3-\Delta\to Y=(X^3-\Delta)/\Gamma$$ to the open dense set $X^3-\Delta-\cup_{g\in \Gamma}A(g)$ is a local homeomorphism.
The involution $\iota:X^3\to X^3$ defined by $\iota(a,b,c)=(b,a,c)$ is an isometry with respect to the metric $d$ on $X^3$ induced from the metric on $X$, and its fixed point set is contained in the closed set $\Delta\subset X^3$. Thus the restriction of $\iota$ to $T$ acts freely, and it commutes with the diagonal action of $\Gamma$. In particular, $\iota$ naturally acts on $Y$ as a continuous involution and the quotient $Z=Y/\iota$ is a metrizable Hausdorff space. There is an open dense subset of $T$ such that the restriction of the natural projection $\pi_0:T\to Z$ to this set is a local homeomorphism.
For $x\in X$ and $\epsilon >0$ denote by $B(x,\epsilon)\subset X$ the open ball of radius $\epsilon$ about $x$. We next recall the well known notion of north-south dynamics for a homeomorphism of $X$.
[**Definition:**]{} A homeomorphism $g$ of $X$ has *north-south dynamics* with respect to an attracting fixed point $a\in X$ and a repelling fixed point $b\in X-\{a\}$ if the following is satisfied.
1. For every $\epsilon
>0$ there is a number $m>0$ such that $g^m
(X-B(b,\epsilon))\subset B(a,\epsilon)$ and $g^{-m}
(X-B(a,\epsilon))\subset B(b,\epsilon)$.
2. There is a number $\delta >0$ such that $\cup_{m\in
\mathbb{Z}}g^m(X-B(a,\delta)-B(b,\delta))=X-\{a,b\}$.
We call $a$ the *attracting* and $b$ the *repelling* fixed point of $g$, and $(a,b)$ is the *ordered* pair of fixed points for $g$.
The next definition formalizes the idea that the dynamics of each element of a group $G$ of homeomorphisms of $(X,d)$ is uniformly similar to north-south-dynamics on a metrically large scale.
[**Definition:**]{} The action of an arbitrary group $G$ on a metric space $(X,d)$ of finite diameter is called *weakly hyperbolic* if for every $\epsilon >0$ there is a number $b=b(\epsilon)\in (0,1)$ with the following property. Let $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)\geq 2\epsilon$ and let $g\in G$ be such that $d(gx,gy)\geq 2\epsilon$. Let $z\in X-\{x,y\}$ be such that $\min\{d(gz,gx),d(gz,gy)\}\geq \epsilon$; then $d(gw,gx)\leq
d(z,y)^{b}/b$ for every $w\in X$ with $d(w,x)\leq
\epsilon$.
Let again $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits an action on a metric space $(X,d)$ of finite diameter without isolated points by homeomorphisms such that the diagonal action on $T=X^3-\Delta$ is metrically proper. Using the above notations, let $C\subset T$ be an open set whose closure $\overline{C}$ has positive distance to $\Delta$ and is mapped by the projection $\pi_0:T\to Z=Y/\iota$ homeomorphically into $Z$. This means that for every $g\in \Gamma$, either $g$ fixes $\overline{C}\cup \iota \overline{C}$ pointwise or $g(\overline{C}\cup \iota\overline{C})\cap
(\overline{C}\cup \iota\overline{C})=\emptyset.$ We assume that $C$ is of the form $C=U\times V\times W$ where $U,V,W\subset X$ are open and pairwise of positive distance; say that the distance between any two of these sets is not smaller than a number $4\nu>0$. For $R(\nu)>0$ as in the definition of a metrically proper action we also assume that the diameter of $C$ is smaller than $e^{-R(\nu)}$. Let ${{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ be the vector space of all Hölder continuous functions $f:T\to \mathbb{R}$ supported in $C$. This means that for every $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ there is some $\alpha\in
(0,1)$ and some $q>0$ such that $\vert f(x)-f(y)\vert\leq q
d(x,y)^\alpha$ for all $x,y\in C$.
The following proposition is the analogue of Lemma 2.1. For its formulation, denote by ${{\mathcal{Q}}}$ the vector space of all quasi-morphisms of $\Gamma$.
[**Lemma 3.1:**]{} [*Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space of finite diameter without isolated points. Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits a weakly hyperbolic action by homeomorphisms of $X$ such that the action of $\Gamma$ on $T=X^3-\Delta$ is metrically proper. Then for every open set $C\subset T$ whose closure projects homeomorphically into $Z=(T/\Gamma)/\iota$ there is a linear map $\Psi:{{\mathcal{H}}}_C\to {{\mathcal{Q}}}$.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Using the above notations, write $C=U\times V\times W$ where $U,V,W\subset X$ are open and pairwise of distance at least $4\nu>0$. Assume that the diameter of $C$ is at most $e^{-R(\nu)}$. The product structure of $T$ defines a natural foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ on $T$ by requiring that the leaf of ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ through $(a,b,c)\in T$ equals the set $F(a,b)=\{(a,b,d)\mid d\in X-\{a,b\}\}$. Thus a leaf of ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ is determined by two distinct points in $X$, and the leaf $F(a,b)$ determined by $a\not= b\in X$ can naturally be identified with $X-\{a,b\}$. The foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ is invariant under the action of $\Gamma$ and hence it projects to a foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}_0$ on $Y=T/\Gamma$.
Let $\mu_W$ be a Borel probability measure on $W$ which is positive on open sets. Choose a nontrivial Hölder continuous function $\psi:X\times X\to [0,1]$ supported in $U\times V$ and let $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ be the family of $\Gamma$-invariant $\iota$-invariant Borel measures on the leaves of ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ which is determined by the requirement that for every $(u,v)\in U\times V$ the restriction of $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ to $F(u,v)\cap C \sim (u,v)\times W$ equals $\psi(u,v)\mu_W$.
We divide the proof of our lemma into two steps. As a notational convention, for $x\in X$ and $\epsilon >0$ denote as before by $B(x,\epsilon)$ the open $\epsilon$-ball about $x$.
[*Step 1:*]{}
In our first step we construct for a given Hölder continuous function $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ supported in $C$ a function $\Psi(f):\Gamma\to
\mathbb{R}$. For this recall that by our choice of $C$, every $g\in \Gamma$ either fixes $\overline{C}\cup
\iota\overline{C}$ pointwise or we have $g(\overline{C}\cup \iota
\overline{C})\cap (\overline{C}\cup \iota\overline{C})=\emptyset$. Therefore every function $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ uniquely determines a continuous $\Gamma$-invariant $\iota$ anti-invariant function $\tilde f$ on $T$ which is supported in $\cup_{g\in \Gamma}g(C\cup \iota C)$ and whose restriction to $C$ coincides with $f$. This means that $\tilde f(\iota x)=-\tilde f(x)$ for all $x\in T$, $\tilde f(gx)=\tilde f(x)$ for all $g\in \Gamma$ and that moreover the restriction of $\tilde f$ to $C$ coincides with $f$. We claim that for all $x\not=y\in X$ and any neighborhood $A$ of $x$, $B$ of $y$ we have $\int_{F(x,y)-A-B}\vert \tilde f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}<\infty$ where as before, we identify the leaf $F(x,y)$ of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ with the set $X-\{x,y\}$.
For this consider first the case that $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$ where $\nu>0$ is as above determined by the choice of the set $C$. Let $k_0\geq 1$ be the smallest integer which is not smaller than $-\log \nu$. If $z\in X$ is such that $d(x,z)\leq e^{-k_0}$ then $d(x,z)=\min\{d(x,z),d(y,z)\}$ and hence by the first requirement in the definition of a metrically proper action, for every $k\geq k_0$ the number of elements $g\in \Gamma$ with the property that $g(C\cup \iota C) \cap (F(x,y)\cap
(B(x,e^{-k})-B(x,e^{-k-1})))\not=\emptyset$ is bounded from above by a constant $m(\nu)>0$ only depending on $\nu$ but not on $k$ and $(x,y)$. Since $\tilde f$ is invariant under the action of $\Gamma$ and supported in $\cup_{g\in \Gamma}g(C\cup \iota C)$ and since the measures $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ are invariant under the action of $\Gamma$ this implies that $$\int_{F(x,y)\cap (B(x,e^{-k})-B(x,e^{-k-1}))}\vert
\tilde f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\leq
m(\nu)\sup\{\vert f(z)\vert\mid
z\in C\}$$ for every $k\geq k_0$. The same estimate also holds for the integral\
$\int_{F(x,y)\cap (B(y,e^{-k})-B(y,e^{-k-1}))}\vert \tilde
f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ provided that $k\geq k_0$.
Similarly, since the diameter of $X$ is finite the set $F(x,y)-B(x,e^{-k_0})-B(y,e^{-k_0})$ is the union of finitely many subsets of the form $$\{z\mid e^{-k_0+m-1}\leq \min\{d(z,x),d(z,y)\}
\leq e^{-k_0+m}\}\quad (m\geq 1).$$ Using once more the definition of a metrically proper action we conclude that the number of elements $g\in \Gamma$ such that $g(C\cup
\iota C)\cap (F(x,y)-B(x,e^{-k_0})-B(y,e^{-k_0}))\not=\emptyset$ is bounded from above by a constant only depending on $\nu$. In particular, the value of the integral $\int_{F(x,y)-B(x,e^{-k_0})-B(y,e^{-k_0})}\vert \tilde f\vert
d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ is bounded from above by a universal multiple of the supremums norm of $f$. Together we conclude that for every neighborhood $A$ of $x$, $B$ of $y$ the integral $\int_{F(x,y)-A-B}\vert \tilde f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ exists, i.e. our claim holds true whenever $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$.
Now let $x\not=y\in X$ be arbitrary points such that the support of $\tilde f$ intersects the leaf $F(x,y)$. Since $\tilde f$ is supported in $\cup_{g\in \Gamma} g(C\cup \iota C)$, there is then an element $g\in \Gamma$ with $d(gx,gy)\geq 2\nu$. By invariance of $\tilde f$ and $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ under the action of $\Gamma$, for every neighborhood $A$ of $x$, $B$ of $y$ we have $$\int_{F(x,y)-A-B}\vert \tilde f\vert
d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}= \int_{F(gx,gy)-gA-gB}\vert \tilde f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$$ where $gA,gB$ is a neighborhood of $gx,gy$. Thus indeed $\int_{F(x,y)-A-B}\vert f\vert d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}
<\infty$ for any two points $x\not= y\in X$ and any neighborhoods $A$ of $x$, $B$ of $y$ which shows our above claim.
Recall that $C=U\times V\times W$ for open disjoint subsets $U,V,W$ of $X$. Fix a point $x\in U$ and let $A\subset U$ be a small closed metric ball centered at $x$. For $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ and $g\in \Gamma$ such that $gx\not= x$ define $$\label{integral}
\Psi(f)(g)=\int_{F(x,gx)-A-g(A)}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$$ and if $gx=x$ then define $\Psi(f)(g)=0$. By our above consideration, the integral (\[integral\]) exists and hence it defines a function $\Psi(f):\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$. Moreover, the assignment $\Psi:f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C\to \Psi(f)$ is a linear map from the vector space ${{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ into the vector space of all functions on $\Gamma$.
[*Step 2:*]{}
In a second step, we show that for every $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ the function $\Psi(f):\Gamma\to \mathbb{R}$ is a quasi-morphism, i.e. that we have $\sup_{g,h}\{\vert \Psi(f)(g)+\Psi(f)(h)-\Psi(f)(gh)\vert\} <\infty$. Observe that by invariance under $\Gamma$, for $g,h\in
\Gamma$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\Psi(f)(g)+\Psi(f)(h)-\Psi(f)(gh)= &
\int_{F(x,gx)-A-gA}\tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}} \\ +
\int_{F(gx,ghx)-gA-ghA}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}- &
\int_{F(x,ghx)-ghA-A} \tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}.\notag\end{aligned}$$ Since $f$ is anti-invariant under the involution $\iota$ it is therefore enough to show that there is a number $c(\nu,f)$ only depending on $\nu$ and the Hölder norm of $f$ with the following property. Let $(x_1,x_2,x_3)\in T$ and let $A_i$ be any neighborhood of $x_i$ in $X$ $(i=1,2,3)$; then $$\vert \int_{F(x_1,x_2)-A_1-A_2}\tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}} +
\int_{F(x_2,x_3)-A_2-A_3}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}} +
\int_{F(x_3,x_1)-A_3-A_1} \tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert <c(\nu,f).$$
For this recall that for $g,h\in \Gamma$ the sets $g\overline{C} , h\overline{C},g(\overline{\iota C}),
h(\overline{\iota C})$ either coincide or are disjoint. Moreover, if $\tilde f\vert F(y,z)\not\equiv
0$ for some $y\not=z\in X$ then there is some $g\in \Gamma$ such that $d(gy,gz)\geq 2\nu$. Define ${{\mathcal{G}}}=\{g\in \Gamma\mid \max_{i,j\leq 3}d(gx_i,gx_j)\geq
2\nu\}$ and $${{\mathcal{G}}}_0=\{g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}\mid
\min\{d(gx_i,gx_j)\mid i\not=j\in \{1,2,3\}
\}\geq \nu\}$$ and for $i=1,2,3$ define $${{\mathcal{G}}}_i=\{g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}\mid
d(gx_i,gx_{i+1})<\nu\}$$ (indices are taken modulo 3). By the triangle inequality and the definition of the set ${{\mathcal{G}}}$, the sets ${{\mathcal{G}}}_i (i=0,\dots,3)$ are pairwise disjoint and their union equals ${{\mathcal{G}}}$.
If $g\in \Gamma$ is such that $(C\cup \iota C)\cap
gF(x_i,x_{i+1})\not= \emptyset$ then $d(gx_i,gx_{i+1})\geq 2\nu$ and therefore $g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_0$ if $\min\{d(gx_{i-1},gx_i),
d(gx_{i-1},gx_{i+1})\}
\geq \nu,\, g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_{i-1}$ if $d(gx_{i-1},gx_{i})<\nu$ and $g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_{i+1}$ otherwise (where indices are again taken modulo 3). Thus by invariance of $\tilde f$ and $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ under the action of $\Gamma$ and by the fact that an element $g\in \Gamma$ either fixes $C$ pointwise or is such that $g C\cap C=\emptyset$ it is enough to show that there is a number $c_1(\nu,f)>0$ only depending on $\nu$ and the Hölder norm of $f$ such that for $i=0,\dots,3$ we have $$\label{sum}
\sum_{g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_{i}}\vert \sum_{j=1}^3
\int_{g(F(x_j,x_{j+1})-A_j-A_{j+1})
\cap (C\cup \iota C)}
\tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert \leq c_1(\nu,f).$$
We first establish the estimate (\[sum\]) for $i=0$. The case ${{\mathcal{G}}}_0=\emptyset$ is trivial, so assume that there is some $h\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_0$ with the additional property that $h(F(x_j,x_{j+1})-A_j-A_{j+1})\cap C
\not=\emptyset$ for some $j\in \{1,2,3\}$. Recall that $C=U\times V\times W$ where the diameter of the sets $U,V,W$ is at most $e^{-R(\nu)}<\nu/4$. Let $Z\subset X$ be the set of all points whose distance to $U\cup V$ is at least $\nu$. Then $h(x_j,x_{j+1},x_{j+2})\in
U\times V\times Z$ and therefore if $u\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_0$ is another element with $u(F(x_j,x_{j+1})-A_j-A_{j+1})
\cap C\not=\emptyset$ then $uh^{-1}(U\times V\times Z)
\cap U\times V\times Z\not=\emptyset$. Using the second property in the definition of a metrically proper action we conclude that the number of elements $u\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_0 $ with this property is bounded from above by a constant only depending on $\nu$. The same argument also applies to elements $g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_0$ with $g(F(x_j,x_{j+1})-A_j-A_{j+1})\cap \iota C\not=
\emptyset$ for some $j\in\{1,2,3\}$. As a consequence, for $i=0$ the number of nonzero terms in the sum (\[sum\]) is bounded from above by a universal constant and the estimate (\[sum\]) holds true for $i=0$. Thus by symmetry in $i\in \{1,2,3\}$ and by invariance under the action of $\Gamma$ it now suffices to show the estimate (\[sum\]) for $i=3$.
By definition, for $g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_3$ we have $d(gx_1,gx_3)<\nu$ and therefore $gF(x_1,x_3)\cap
(C\cup \iota C) =\emptyset$. This means that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{doublesum}
\sum_{g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_3}\vert \sum_{j=1}^3
\int_{g(F(x_j,x_{j+1})-A_j-A_{j+1})
\cap (C\cup \iota C)} & \tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert \\
=\sum_{g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_3}\vert
\int_{g(F(x_1,x_2)-A_2-A_3)\cap (C\cup \iota C)}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}
+ & \int_{g(F(x_2,x_3)-A_3-A_1)\cap (C\cup \iota C)}
\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert. \notag\end{aligned}$$
By assumption, the action of $\Gamma$ on $X$ is weakly hyperbolic. Thus there is a constant $b>0$ depending on $\nu$ such that for all $(x,y)\in X\times X$ with $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$, for all $k\geq -\log \nu$ and for all $z\in X$ with $d(z,x)\leq \nu$ we have $d(gz,gx)\leq e^{-kb}/b$ whenever $g\in \Gamma$ is such that $(C\cup \iota C)\cap g(F(x,y)\cap B(y,e^{-k}))\not=\emptyset$. In particular, for every $w\in W$ the distance between $(gx,gy,w)$ and $(gz,gy,w)=\iota(gy,gz,w)$ is at most $e^{-kb}/b$.
Now $\tilde f$ is a $\Gamma$-invariant $\iota$-anti-invariant function on $T$ which is supported in $\cup_{g\in \Gamma}g(C\cup \iota C)$ and whose restriction $f$ to $C$ satisfies $\vert f(v)-f(w)\vert \leq qd(v,w)^\alpha$ for some $\alpha >0,q>0$ and for all $v,w\in C$. Moreover, $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ is a $\iota$-invariant $\Gamma$-invariant family of measures on the leaves of ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ whose restriction to $C$ is of the form $\psi\mu_W$ for a Hölder continuous function $\psi$ supported in $U\times V$. As a consequence of our above discussion on the effect of weak hyperbolicity we conclude that there is a number $\beta >0$ depending only on $\nu$ and the Hölder norm of $f$ with the following property. Let $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$; if for some $k\geq -\log \nu$ the element $g\in \Gamma$ is such that $(C\cup \iota C)\cap
g(F(x,y)\cap (B(y,e^{-k})-B(y,e^{-k-1})))\not=\emptyset$ then for every $z\in X$ with $d(z,x)\leq \nu$ and every neighborhood $A$ of $y$ we have $$\label{intsum}\vert \int_{g(F(x,y)-A)\cap
(C\cup \iota C)}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}+
\int_{g(F(y,z)-A)\cap (C\cup \iota C)}\tilde f
d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert \leq
e^{-k\beta}/\beta.$$
By the first property in the definition of a metrically proper action there is a constant $c>0$ only depending on $\nu$ such that for all $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$ and every $k\geq -\log \nu$ there are at most $c$ elements $g\in \Gamma$ with $(C\cup \iota C)\cap g(F(x,y)\cap (B(y,e^{-k})-B(y,e^{-k-1})))\not=
\emptyset$. Together with the estimate (\[intsum\]) we conclude that there is a constant $c_2(\nu,f)>0$ which only depends on $\nu$ and on the Hölder norm of $f$ with the following property. For $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)\geq 2\nu$, every $z\in X-\{x,y\}$ with $d(x,z)\leq \nu$ and every neighborhood $A$ of $y$ we have $$\label{extended}
\sum_{\{g\in \Gamma\mid d(gx,gz)<\nu\}}
\vert \int_{g((F(x,y)-A)\cup (F(y,z)-A))\cap (C\cup \iota C)}
\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\vert <c_2(\nu,f).$$ Now if $g\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_3$ is such that $gF(x_1,x_2)\cap (C\cup \iota C)\not=\emptyset$ then with $y_i=gx_i$ we have $d(y_1,y_3)<\nu, d(y_1,y_2)\geq 2\nu$. For every other $h\in {{\mathcal{G}}}_3$ with $h F(x_1,x_2)\cap (C\cup \iota C)\not=\emptyset$ we obtain $d(hg^{-1}y_1,hg^{-1}y_2)\geq 2\nu$ and $d(hg^{-1}y_1,hg^{-1}y_3)\leq \nu$. By invariance of $\tilde f$ and $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ under the action of $\Gamma$, inequality (\[sum\]) above now follows from the estimate (\[extended\]) and the equation (\[doublesum\]).
As a consequence, for every $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ the function $\Psi(f)$ on $\Gamma$ is indeed a quasi-morphism. By construction, the assignment $f\to \Psi(f)$ is moreover linear. This completes the proof of the lemma.
In Lemma 3.1 we constructed a linear map $\Psi$ from the vector space ${{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ onto a vector space $\Psi({{\mathcal{H}}}_C)\subset {{\mathcal{Q}}}$ of quasi-morphisms for the group $\Gamma$. It follows from our construction that for a suitable choice of our set $C$ the vector space $\Psi({{\mathcal{H}}}_C)$ is infinite dimensional. As in Section 2, the map $\Psi$ then induces via composition with the natural projection a linear map $\Theta:{{\mathcal{H}}}_C\to H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$. However, a priori the image of $\Theta$ may be trivial or finite dimensional. To establish that the subspace of $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ obtained in this way as the sets $C$ vary, we use an additional assumption on $\Gamma$ which is motivated by the work [@BF] of Bestvina and Fujiwara. For this recall that a homeomorphism $g$ of $X$ which acts with north-south dynamics has an attracting fixed point $a\in X$ and a repelling fixed point $b\in X-\{a\}$. We call $(a,b)$ the *ordered* pair of fixed points for $g$. We show.
[**Proposition 3.2:**]{}
*In the situation described in Lemma 3.1, assume in addition that the group $\Gamma$ contains a free subgroup $G$ with two generators and the following properties.*
1. Every $e\not=g\in G$ acts with north-south dynamics on $X$.
2. There are infinitely many $g_i\in G$ $(i>0)$ such that the $\Gamma$-orbits of the ordered pairs of fixed points of the elements $g_i,g_j^{-1}$ $(i,j>0)$ are pairwise disjoint.
Then the images of the spaces ${{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ under the map $\Theta$ for suitable choices of $C\subset T$ span an infinite dimensional subspace of $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$.
[*Proof:*]{} Continue to use the assumptions and notations from Lemma 3.1 and its proof. We have to show that the bounded cohomology classes $\Theta(f)$ $(f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C)$ defined by the quasi-morphisms $\Psi(f)$ constructed in Lemma 3.1 for suitable choices of $C$ span an infinite dimensional subspace of the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$. For this let $G$ be the free subgroup of $\Gamma$ with two generators as in the statement of our proposition.
Let $g,h\in G-\{e\}$ be such that the $\Gamma$-orbit of the ordered pair $(a,b)$ of fixed points for $g$ is distinct from the $\Gamma$-orbit of the ordered pair $(a^\prime,b^\prime)$ of fixed points for $h$. Then the leaves $F(a,b),
F(a^\prime,b^\prime)$ of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ project to distinct leaves $L,L^\prime$ of the induced foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}_0$ on $Y=T/\Gamma$. We claim that the closures of these leaves do not intersect. For this denote as before by $\pi:T\to Y$ the natural projection. Let $\epsilon_0 >0$ be sufficiently small that $d(\{a,b\},\{a^\prime,b^\prime\})\geq
2\epsilon_0$. Since $g,h$ act on $X$ with north-south dynamics and fixed points $a,b$ and $a^\prime,b^\prime$, there is a number $\epsilon <\epsilon_0$ with the property that the projection $\pi$ maps the set $\{(a,b,x)\mid d(x,\{a,b\})\geq \epsilon\}$ onto $L$ and that $\pi$ maps $\{(a^\prime,b^\prime,y)\mid d(y,\{a^\prime,b^\prime\})
\geq \epsilon\}$ onto $L^\prime$.
Assume to the contrary that the closures of the leaves $L,L^\prime$ contain a common point. By our above observation, this implies that there is a sequence $(g_i)\subset \Gamma$ of pairwise distinct elements and there are sequences $(x_i)\subset X,
(y_i)\subset X$ such that $$d(x_i,\{a,b\})\geq \epsilon, d(y_i,\{a^\prime,b^\prime\})
\geq \epsilon\quad \hbox{\rm for all }\, i$$ and that $d(g_i(a,b,x_i),(a^\prime, b^\prime,y_i))\to 0$. In particular, for every $\delta >0$ there are infinitely many distinct elements $u\in \Gamma$ such that $d(a^\prime,ua)< \delta,d(b^\prime,ub)<
\delta$ and that $u(X-B(a,\epsilon)-B(b,\epsilon))\cap
X-B(a^\prime,\epsilon)-B(b^\prime,\epsilon)\not=\emptyset$. However this contradicts the second requirement in the definition of a metrically proper action. As a consequence, the closures of the leaves $L,L^\prime$ in $Y$ are disjoint.
Let $g\in G$ and let $a$ be the attracting and $b$ be the repelling fixed point of $g$. Choose the set $C=U\times V\times W\subset T$ as in Lemma 3.1 and its proof in such a way that $a\in U,b\in V$. This is possible since the action of $\Gamma$ on $X$ is metrically proper and hence the stabilizer of $\{a,b\}$ in $\Gamma$ acts freely on an open subset of $X-\{a,b\}$. Let $x\in U-\{a\}$ and choose a closed neighborhood $A\subset U-\{a\}$ of $x$ for the construction of the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$. Since $g$ acts on $X$ with north-south dynamics there is a closed subset $D$ of $X-\{a,b\}$ with dense interior whose distance to $\{a,b\}$ is positive and which is a fundamental domain for the action on $X-\{a,b\}$ of the cyclic subgroup of $G$ generated by $g$. For the measures $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ on the leaves of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ as in the proof of Lemma 3.1 we may assume that the support of $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ intersects $F(a,b)$ and that the $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$-mass of the boundary of $D$ viewed as a subset of $F(a,b)$ vanishes. Let $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ and let $\tilde f$ be the $\Gamma$-invariant $\iota$-anti-invariant function on $T$ defined by $f$ as in the proof of Lemma 3.1. By the discussion in Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 3.1, the integral $\int_D\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ exists. Let $\Psi(f)$ be the quasi-morphism of $\Gamma$ defined by $f$ as in (8) of Lemma 3.1. We claim that $$\lim_{k\to \infty}\Psi(f)(g^k)/k=\int_D\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}.$$
To show our claim, observe that as $k\to \infty$ the diameter of the sets $g^kA$ tends to $0$ and $g^kx\to a\in X-A$. Choose a small closed ball $B\subset V$ about $b$. By the consideration in the proof of Lemma 3.1, for sufficiently large $k$ the absolute value of the difference $$\int_{F(g^kx,b)-g^kA-B}\tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}-
\int_{F(g^kx,x)-g^kA-A}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$$ is bounded from above by a constant not depending on $k$. As a consequence, it is enough to show that $$\int_{F(g^kx,b)-g^kA-B}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}/k
\to \int_D \tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}} \quad (k\to\infty),$$ and this in turn is equivalent to $$\int_{F(x,b)-A-g^{-k}B}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}/k
\to \int_D \tilde f d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}\quad (k\to\infty).$$
Choose in particular $B=\{b\}\cup_{j\leq 0}g^jD$. Then $B-g^{-k}B=\cup_{j =0}^{k-1}
g^{-j} D$ for every $k>0$. Thus for every small ball $E\subset X-B$ about the attracting fixed point $a$ for $g$ we have $$\lim_{k\to \infty}
\int_{F(x,b)-A-g^{-k}B}\tilde f
d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}/k=\lim_{k\to\infty}
\int_{F(a,b)-E-g^{-k}B}\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}/k
=\int_D\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}.$$ This shows our above claim.
Let again $g\in G$ with attracting fixed point $a\in X$, repelling fixed point $b\in X-\{a\}$ and assume that the ordered pair $(a,b)$ is not contained in the $\Gamma$-orbit of the ordered pair $\iota(a,b)=(b,a)$. By our above consideration, the closure of the projection of the leaf $F(a,b)$ to $Y$ is disjoint from the closure of the projection of $\iota F(a,b)=F(b,a)$. As before, let $D\subset F(a,b)$ be a closed fundamental domain for the action on $X-\{a,b\}\sim F(a,b)$ of the cyclic group generated by $g$. By the second requirement in the definition of a metrically proper action, there are only finitely many $h\in \Gamma$ with $hD\cap D\not=\emptyset$. Denote by $\pi:T\to Y$ the canonical projection. The measures $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ project to a family of measures on the leaves of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}_0=\pi{{\mathcal{F}}}$ on $Y$. For $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ the function $\tilde f$ projects to a function $f_0$ on $Y$. Since $hD\cap D\not=\emptyset$ for only finitely many $h\in \Gamma$, the integral $\int_D\tilde fd\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ is a positive bounded multiple of the integral $\int_{\pi F(a,b)}f_0d\mu_0$. By our above consideration, the closure $L$ of the projection of the leaf $F(a,b)$ to $Y$ is disjoint from the closure of its image $F(b,a)$ under the involution $\iota$ and therefore for any given number $q\in \mathbb{R}$ there is a Hölder function $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ such that the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ defined as above by $f$ satisfies $\lim_{k\to \infty} \Psi(f)(g^k)/k=q$.
By our assumption, there are infinitely many elements $g_i\in G$ $(i>0)$ which act on $X$ with north-south dynamics and such that the ordered pairs of fixed points of $g_i,g_j^{-1}$ are pairwise contained in distinct $\Gamma$-orbit on $X$. In particular, for $i\not=j$ the closures of the projections to $Y$ of the leaves of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ which are determined by the fixed points of $g_i,g_j$ are disjoint. Now for any finite set $\{h_1,\dots, h_m\}\subset \{g_i\mid
i>0\}\subset G$ choose the set $C$ as above in such a way that it intersects each of the leaves of ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ determined by the ordered pair of fixed points of $h_i$; this can always be achieved by allowing for our construction a set $C$ which consists of finitely many components satisfying each our above assumptions. Our above discussion shows that for an arbitrarily chosen collection $\{q_1,\dots,q_m\}\subset \mathbb{R}$ of real numbers there is a suitable choice of the function $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ so that the quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$ for $\Gamma$ defined by $f$ satisfies $\lim_{k\to \infty}\Psi(f)(h_i^k)/k=q_i$ for $1\leq i\leq k$.
For $f\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ the cohomology class $\Theta(f)\in H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ vanishes if and only if there is a homomorphism $\eta\in H^1(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ such that $\sup_{g\in \Gamma}\vert \Psi(f)(g)-\eta(g)\vert <\infty$ (compare the discussion in Section 2). This homomorphism then restricts to a homomorphism of the group $G$. Now $G$ is a free group with two generators and hence we have $H^1(G,\mathbb{R})=\mathbb{R}^2$. More precisely, if $u_1,u_2$ are such free generators for $G$ then every homomorphism $\eta:G\to \mathbb{R}$ is determined by its value on $u_1,u_2$. In particular, for any finite subset $\{h_1,\dots,h_m\}\subset G$ there are two elements in this collection, say the elements $h_1,h_2$, such that for every quasi-morphism $\eta$ for $G$ which is equivalent to a homomorphism and every $j\in \{3,\dots,m\}$ the quantity $\lim_{k\to\infty}\eta(h_j^k)/k$ is uniquely determined by $\lim_{k\to\infty}\eta(h_i^k)/k$ $(i=1,2)$. Together with the above observation that for any finite subset $\{h_1,\dots,h_m\}$ of $\{g_i\mid i> 0\}$ we can find a quasi-morphism for $\Gamma$ for which these limits assume arbitrarily prescribed values we conclude that there are infinitely many quasi-morphisms for $\Gamma$ whose restrictions to $G$ define linearly independent elements of $H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$. This shows that the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional and completes the proof of the proposition.
[**Remark:**]{} Our above proof also shows the following. Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits a weakly hyperbolic action by homeomorphisms of a metric space $X$ of finite diameter such that the action of $\Gamma$ on $T=X^3-\Delta$ is metrically proper. Let $g_i\in \Gamma$ be elements which act with north-south dynamics on $X$ with ordered pairs of fixed points $(a_i,b_i)$ $(i=1,\dots,k)$. If the $\Gamma$-orbits of $(a_i,b_i),(b_j,a_j)$ $(i,j\leq k)$ are all disjoint then for every tuple $(q_1,\dots,q_k)\in
\mathbb{R}^k$ there is a quasi-morphism $\phi$ for $\Gamma$ with $\lim_{\ell\to \infty}
\phi(g_i^\ell)/\ell=q_i$ for every $i\leq k$.
The following theorem is the main technical result of this note. For its formulation, recall that the free group $G$ with two generators is the fundamental group of a convex cocompact hyperbolic surface whose limit set $B$ is just the *Gromov boundary* of $G$.
[**Theorem 3.3:**]{}
*Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space of finite diameter without isolated points. Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits a weakly hyperbolic action by homeomorphisms of $X$. Assume that $\Gamma$ contains a free subgroup $G$ with two generators and the following properties.*
1. Every $e\not=g\in G$ acts with north-south dynamics on $X$.
2. There are infinitely many $g_i\in G$ $(i>0)$ such that the $\Gamma$-orbits of the ordered pairs of fixed points of the elements $g_i,g_j^{-1}$ $(i,j>0)$ are pairwise disjoint.
3. There is a $G$-equivariant continuous embedding of the Gromov boundary of $G$ into $X$.
If the action of $\Gamma$ on the space of triples of pairwise distinct points in $X$ is metrically proper then for every $p\in (1,\infty)$ the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional.
[*Proof:*]{} Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group acting by homeomorphisms on a metric space $(X,d)$ of finite diameter without isolated points. Assume that the action of $\Gamma$ is weakly hyperbolic and that the diagonal action of $\Gamma$ on the space $T=X^3-\Delta$ of triples of pairwise distinct points in $X$ is metrically proper. Write $Y=T/\Gamma$ and denote as before by $\iota:T\to T$ the natural involution which exchanges the first two points in a triple. Let $G$ be a free subgroup of $\Gamma$ with two generators as in the statement of the theorem. In particular, we assume that there is a continuous $G$-equivariant embedding of the Gromov boundary $B$ of $G$ into $X$. We have to show that for every $p\in (1,\infty)$ the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to
H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional.
Denote by $\Vert \,\Vert_p$ the norm of the Banach space $\ell^p(\Gamma)$. We assume that $\Gamma$ acts on $\ell^p(\Gamma)$ by right translation, i.e. for every $g\in \Gamma$ and every function $\psi\in \ell^p(\Gamma)$ we have $(g\psi)(h)=\psi(hg)$. Define an *$\ell^p(\Gamma)$-valued quasi-morphism* for $\Gamma$ to be a map $\eta:\Gamma\to \ell^p(\Gamma)$ such that $$\sup_{g,h\in \Gamma}\Vert \eta(g)+g\eta(h)
-\eta(gh)\Vert_p<\infty.$$ Two such quasi-morphisms $\eta,\eta^\prime$ are called equivalent if $\eta-\eta^\prime$ is bounded as a function from $\Gamma$ to $\ell^p(\Gamma)$, i.e. if there is a number $c>0$ such that $\Vert (\eta-\eta^\prime)(g)\Vert_p\leq c$ for all $g\in \Gamma$.
By Corollary 7.4.7 in [@M], the cohomology group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ coincides with the second cohomology group of the complex $$0\to L^\infty(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))^\Gamma\xrightarrow{d}
L^\infty(\Gamma^2,\ell^p(\Gamma))^\Gamma
\xrightarrow{d} L^\infty(\Gamma^3,\ell^p(\Gamma))^\Gamma\to \dots$$ with the usual homogeneous coboundary operator $d$. Let $\psi:\Gamma^2\to \ell^p(\Gamma)$ be any (unbounded) $\Gamma$-equivariant map; this means that $\psi(hg_1,hg_2)=h(\psi(g_1,g_2))$ for all $g_1,g_2,h\in \Gamma$. If the image $d\psi$ of $\psi$ under the coboundary operator $d$ is *bounded*, then as in the case of real coefficients, the map $\psi$ defines a class in the kernel of the natural map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$. Let $e$ be the unit element in $\Gamma$ and define a map $\phi:\Gamma\to \ell^p(\Gamma)$ by $\phi(v)=\psi(e,v)$. Then for $g,h,u\in \Gamma$ we have $d\psi(g,h,u)=\psi(h,u)-\psi(g,u)+\psi(g,h)=h\phi(h^{-1}u)-
g\phi(g^{-1}u)+g\phi(g^{-1}h)=g(\phi(g^{-1}h)+g^{-1}h\phi(h^{-1}u)-
\phi(g^{-1}u))$. Since $\Gamma$ acts isometrically on $\ell^p(\Gamma)$, we conclude that $d\psi$ is bounded if and only if $\phi$ defines an $\ell^p(\Gamma)$-valued quasi-morphism for $\Gamma$. Now by equivariance, $\psi$ is uniquely determined by $\phi$ and therefore every equivalence class of an $\ell^p(\Gamma)$-valued quasi-morphism gives rise to a cohomology class in the kernel of the natural map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$. This cohomology class vanishes if and only if there is a map $\eta:\Gamma\to \ell^p(\Gamma)$ which satisfies $\eta(gh)=\eta(g)+g\eta(h)$ for all $g,h\in \Gamma$ and such that $\phi-\eta$ is bounded.
Let again $T$ be the space of triples of pairwise distinct points in $X$. The group $\Gamma$ and the involution $\iota$ act on $T$, and these actions commute; we denote as before by $Z$ the corresponding quotient. As above, let $C\subset T$ be a set of positive distance to $\Delta$ and sufficiently small diameter which is mapped homeomorphically into the quotient $Z$.
Let $\hat T=T\times
\Gamma$ and define $\hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ to be the vector space of all functions $f:\hat{T}\to \mathbb{R}$ supported in $C\times \Gamma$ with the following property. For $g\in \Gamma$ write $f_g(x)=f(x,g)$; we view $f_g$ as a function $C\to \mathbb{R}$. We require that there is some $\alpha\in
(0,1)$ such that the Hölder-$\alpha$-norms $\Vert
f_g\Vert_\alpha$ of the functions $f_g$ $(g\in \Gamma)$ on $C$ satisfy $\sum_{g\in \Gamma}\Vert f_g\Vert_\alpha^p<\infty$. Then for each $y\in C$ the function $f_y:g\to f(y,g)$ is contained in $\ell^p(\Gamma)$ and therefore the assignment $y\in C\to f_y$ defines a (Hölder continuous) map of $C$ into $\ell^p(\Gamma)$. The set of all such functions naturally has the structure of an infinite dimensional vector space. Extend the function $f\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ to a function $\hat f$ on $\hat T$ which is anti-invariant under the involution $\iota:(\zeta,g)=(\iota\zeta,g)$ and satisfies $\hat f(gz,u)=f(z,ug)$ for all $z\in T$, all $g,u\in \Gamma$.
As in the proof of Lemma 3.1 above, assume that $C=U\times V\times W$ for open subsets $U,V,W$ of positive distance and sufficiently small diameter. Recall from the proof of Lemma 3.1 the definition of the foliation ${{\mathcal{F}}}$ of $T$ and the measures $\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}$. Choose a small closed ball $A\subset U$, a point $x\in A$ and for $g\in \Gamma$ define a function $\Psi(f)(g):\Gamma\to\mathbb{R}$ by $$\Psi(f)(g)(u)=\int_{F(x,gx)-A-gA}\hat f(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y).$$ It follows from our choice of $f$ and the consideration in Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 3.1 that $\Psi(f)(g)\in \ell^p(\Gamma)$. On the other hand, by the definition of the function $\hat f$ we have $$\int_{F(gx,ghx)-gA-ghA}\hat f(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)=
\int_{F(x,hx)-A-hA}\hat f(y,ug)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)=\Psi(f)(h)(ug)$$ and consequently the estimates in Step 2 of the proof of Lemma 3.1 show that the map $\Psi(f)$ is an $\ell^p(\Gamma)$-valued quasi-morphism for $\Gamma$. In other words, as in the case of real coefficients we obtain a linear map $\Theta$ from the vector space $\hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ into the kernel of the natural map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ which assigns to a function $f\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ the cohomology class of the $\ell^p(\Gamma)$-valued quasi-morphism $\Psi(f)$.
Our goal is to show that the image of the map $\Theta$ is infinite dimensional. For this let $G<\Gamma$ be the free group with two generators as in the statement of the theorem. Then every function $u\in \ell^p(\Gamma)$ restricts to a function $Ru\in \ell^p(G)$, and for $g\in G$ we have $R(gu)=g(Ru)$. Thus for every $f\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ the map $\Psi(f):\Gamma\to \ell^p(\Gamma)$ restricts to an $\ell^p(G)$-valued quasi-morphism $R\Psi(f):G\to \ell^p(G)$ which defines a cohomology class $R\Theta(f)\in H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$. If the cohomology class $\Theta(f)$ vanishes then the same is true for the cohomology class $R\Theta(f)$. Thus it is enough to show that the subspace $\{R\Theta(f)\mid f\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}\}$ of $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$ is infinite dimensional.
For this let $B$ be the Gromov boundary of the free group $G$; this boundary is a Cantor set on which the group $G$ acts as a group of homeomorphisms with north-south dynamics. Assume that there is a $G$-equivariant continuous embedding $\rho_0:B\to X$. If we denote by $BT$ the space of triples of pairwise distinct points in $B$ then the map $\rho_0$ induces a continuous $G$-equivariant embedding $\rho:BT\to T$. In the sequel we identify $BT$ with its image under $\rho$, i.e. we suppress the map $\rho$ in our notations. Let $f\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$; for a triple $(x_1,x_2,x_3)\in BT$ and $u\in G$ define $$\begin{aligned}
\nu(f)(x_1,x_2,x_3)(u)= &
\int_{F(x_1,x_2)}\hat f(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)\\+
\int_{F(x_2,x_3)}\hat f(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y) &
+\int_{F(x_3,x_1)}\hat f(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)\notag\end{aligned}$$ (this integral is viewed as a limit of finite integrals over the complements in the leaves $F(x_i,x_j)$ of smaller and smaller neighborhoods of the points $x_i$ $(i=1,2,3)$, and its existence follows as above from the continuity properties of the function $\hat f$). By our choice of $f$, for every $(x_1,x_2,x_3)\in BT$ the function $u\in G\to \nu(f)(x_1,x_2,x_3)(u)$ is contained in $\ell^p(G)$. More precisely, the map $(x_1,x_2,x_3)\in BT\to \nu(f)(x_1,x_2,x_3) \in
\ell^p(\Gamma)$ is a continuous *cocycle* for the action of $G$ on $B$, i.e. it is continuous and equivariant under the action of $G$, it satisfies $\nu\circ\sigma=({\rm sgn}(\sigma))\nu$ for every permutation $\sigma$ of the three variables and the cocycle identity $$\nu(f)(x_2,x_3,x_4)-\nu(f)(x_1,x_3,x_4)+\nu(f)(x_1,x_2,x_4)-
\nu(f)(x_1,x_2,x_3)=0.$$ In particular, for any fixed point $x\in B$ we conclude as in Section 2 that the assignment $(g_1,g_2,g_3)\to \nu(f)(g_1x,g_2x,g_3x)$ $(g_i\in G)$ defines a $G$-equivariant cocycle with values in $\ell^p(G)$ whose cohomology class coincides with $R\Theta(f)$.
Now by a result of Adams [@A94] (see also [@Ka03] for a more precise result), if $\sigma$ is the measure class of the measure of maximal entropy for the geodesic flow of any convex cocompact hyperbolic manifold whose fundamental group is a free group with 2 generators, viewed as a $G$-invariant measure class on the Gromov boundary $B$ of $G$, then $(B,\sigma)$ is a *strong boundary* for $G$. This means that the action of $G$ on $(B,\sigma)$ is amenable and *doubly ergodic* with respect to any separable Banach coefficient module, i.e. for every separable Banach $G$-space $E$, every measurable $G$-equivariant map $(B\times B,\sigma\times \sigma)\to E$ is constant almost everywhere. As a consequence, every continuous $G$-equivariant cocycle $BT\to \ell^p(G)$ which does not vanish identically defines a *non-vanishing* class in $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$ (see the discussion in Section 7 of [@M]). Thus for every $f\in
\hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ such that $\nu(f)\not=0$ the class $R\Theta(f)$ does not vanish and hence the same is true for the class $\Theta(f)$. In other words, to show that indeed $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional we only have to find for every $m>0$ a collection of functions $f_i\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ $(1\leq i\leq m)$ such that the cocycles $\nu(f_i)$ are linearly independent.
For this recall that by Proposition 3.2 and its proof, the subspace of $H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$ defined by the cohomology classes $\Theta_G(f)\in H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$ of the quasi-morphisms $\Psi(\alpha)$ where $\alpha\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ for a suitable choice of $C\subset T$ is infinite dimensional (note that now we use here the notations from Lemma 3.1 for the map $\Psi$). On the other hand, for every $\alpha\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ the cohomology class $\Theta_G(\alpha)
\in H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$ coincides with the class defined by the continuous $\mathbb{R}$-valued cocycle $\nu_0(\alpha):BT\to \mathbb{R}$ given by $$\begin{aligned}
\nu_0(\alpha)(x_1,x_2,x_3)= &
\int_{F(x_1,x_2)}\tilde \alpha(y)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)\\+
\int_{F(x_2,x_3)}\tilde \alpha(y)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y) &
+\int_{F(x_3,x_1)}\tilde \alpha(y)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y).\notag\end{aligned}$$ Now let $C\subset T$ and let $\alpha_1,\dots, \alpha_m\in {{\mathcal{H}}}_C$ be such that the cocycles $\nu_0(\alpha_i)$ are linearly independent; such functions exist by Proposition 3.2 and its proof. For every $i\leq m$ define a function $ f_i\in \hat{{\mathcal{H}}}$ by $f_i(y,e)=\alpha_i(y)$ and $f_i(y,g)\equiv 0$ for $g\not=e$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\nu_0(\alpha_i)(x_1,x_2,x_3)= &
\int_{F(x_1,x_2)}\sum_{u\in G}\hat f_i(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)\\+
\int_{F(x_2,x_3)}\sum_{u\in G}\hat f_i(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y) &
+\int_{F(x_3,x_1)}\sum_{u\in G}\hat f_i(y,u)d\mu_{{\mathcal{F}}}(y)\end{aligned}$$ and therefore since the cocycles $\nu_0(\alpha_i)$ are linearly independent the same is true for the cocycles $\nu(f_i)$. As a consequence, the kernel of the map $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))\to
H^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is indeed infinite dimensional.
Groups acting isometrically on hyperbolic geodesic metric spaces
================================================================
In this section we consider countable groups which admit a weakly acylindrical isometric action on an arbitrary Gromov hyperbolic geodesic metric space $X$. We show that the assumptions in Theorem 3.3 are satisfied for the action of such a group $\Gamma$ on the *Gromov boundary* $\partial X$ of $X$. From this we deduce Theorem A from the introduction.
First recall that the Gromov boundary of a hyperbolic geodesic metric space $X$ is defined as follows. For a fixed point $x_0\in X$, define the *Gromov product* $(y,z)_{x_0}$ based at $x_0$ of two points $y,z\in X$ by $$(y,z)_{x_0}=\frac{1}{2}\bigl(d(y,x_0)+d(z,x_0)-d(y,z)\bigr).$$ Call two sequences $(y_i),(z_j)\subset X$ *equivalent* if $(y_i,z_i)_{x_0}\to \infty$ $(i\to \infty)$. By hyperbolicity of $X$, this notion of equivalence defines an equivalence relation for the collection of all sequences $(y_i)\subset X$ with the additional property that $(y_i,y_j)_{x_0}\to \infty$ $(i,j\to\infty)$ [@BH]. The boundary $\partial X$ of $X$ is the set of equivalence classes of this relation.
The Gromov product $(\,,\,)_{x_0}$ for pairs of points in $X$ can be extended to a product on $\partial X$ by defining $$(\xi,\eta)_{x_0}= \sup
\liminf_{i,j\to\infty}(y_i,z_j)_{x_0}$$ where the supremum is taken over all sequences $(y_i),(z_j)\subset X$ whose equivalence classes define the points $\xi,\eta\in
\partial X$. For a suitable number $\chi>0$ only depending on the hyperbolicity constant of $X$ there is a distance $\delta=\delta_{x_0}$ of bounded diameter on $\partial X$ with the property that the distance $\delta(\xi,\eta)$ between two points $\xi,\eta\in \partial X$ is comparable to $e^{-\chi(\xi,\eta)_{x_0}}$ (see 7.3 of [@GH]). More precisely, there is a constant $\theta>0$ such that $$\label{dist}
e^{-\chi\theta} e^{-\chi(\xi,\eta)_{x_0}}\leq \delta(\xi,\eta)\leq
e^{-\chi(\xi,\eta)_{x_0}}$$ for all $\xi,\eta\in
\partial X$. In the sequel we always assume that $\partial X$ is equipped with such a distance $\delta$.
There is a natural topology on $X\cup \partial X$ which restricts to the given topology on $X$ and to the topology on $\partial X$ induced by the metric $\delta$. With respect to this topology, a sequence $(y_i)\subset X$ converges to $\xi\in
\partial X$ if and only if we have $(y_i,y_j)_{x_0}\to \infty$ and the equivalence class of $(y_i)$ defines $\xi$. If $X$ is proper, then $X\cup \partial X$ is compact. Every isometry of $X$ acts naturally on $X\cup
\partial X$ as a homeomorphism. We denote by ${\rm Iso}(X)$ the isometry group of $X$.
Since we do *not* assume that $X$ is proper, for a given pair of distinct points $\xi\not=\eta\in \partial X$ there may not exist a geodesic $\gamma$ in $X$ connecting $\xi$ to $\eta$, i.e. such that $\gamma(t)$ converges to $\xi$ as $t\to-\infty$ and that $\gamma(t)$ converges to $\eta$ as $t\to \infty$. However, there is a number $L>1$ only depending on the hyperbolicity constant for $X$ such that any two points in $\partial X$ can be connected by an *$L$-quasi-geodesic*. Recall that for $L\geq 1$, an *$L$-quasi-geodesic* in $X$ is a map $\gamma:(a,b)\to X$ for $-\infty\leq a<b\leq \infty$ such that $$-L+\vert s-t\vert/L\leq d(\gamma(s),\gamma(t))\leq
L\vert s-t\vert +L$$ for all $s,t\in (a,b)$. Note that an $L$-quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ need not be continuous. However, from every $L$-quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ we can construct a continuous $4L$-quasi-geodesic $\tilde
\gamma$ whose *Hausdorff distance* to $\gamma$ is bounded from above by $4L$ by replacing for each $i\geq 0$ the arc $\gamma[i,i+1]$ by a geodesic arc $\tilde \gamma[i,i+1]$ with the same endpoints. In other words, via changing our constant $L$ we may assume that for any two distinct points $\xi\not=\eta \in\partial X$ there is a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic $\gamma$ connecting $\xi$ to $\eta$; we then write $\gamma(-\infty)=\xi,\gamma(\infty)=\eta$ (see [@GH] 5.25 and 7.6; compare also the discussion in [@H04]).
Recall from Section 3 the definition of a weakly hyperbolic action of a group $G$ on a metric space of bounded diameter. We show.
[**Lemma 4.1:**]{} [*Let $X$ be an arbitrary hyperbolic geodesic metric space. Then the action of the isometry group ${\rm Iso}(X)$ on $\partial X$ is weakly hyperbolic.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} The boundary $\partial X$ of a hyperbolic geodesic metric space is a metric space of bounded diameter where the metric $\delta$ is constructed from the Gromov product $(\,
,\,)_{x_0}$ at a fixed point $x_0\in X$. There are numbers $\chi>0, \theta>0$ such that inequality (\[dist\]) above holds for our distance $\delta$.
Our goal is to show that for every $\nu>0$ there is a constant $\Theta=\Theta(\nu)>0$ with the following property. Let $a,b\in
\partial X$ with $\delta(a,b)\geq 2\nu$. Let $g\in {\rm Iso}(X)$ be such that $\delta(ga,gb)\geq 2\nu$; if $v\in \partial
X-\{a,b\}$ is such that $\min\{\delta(g v,g a),\delta(g v,g
b)\}\geq \nu$ then $\delta(g w,gb)\leq \Theta \delta(v,a)$ for every $w\in \partial X$ with $\delta(w,b)\leq \nu$. Note that since the diameter of $\partial X$ is finite, this inequality is automatically satisfied for a suitable choice of $\Theta$ whenever $\delta(v,a)$ is bounded from below by a universal constant. Thus it is enough to show the claim under the additional assumption that $\delta(v,a)\leq \epsilon$ for some fixed $\epsilon >0$ which will be determined later on.
Let $T\subset (\partial X)^3$ be the set of all triples of pairwise distinct points in $\partial X$. A triple $(a,b,c)\in T$ determines (non-uniquely) an ideal $L$-quasi-geodesic triangle with vertices $a,b,c$. The Hausdorff distance between any two such $L$-quasi-geodesic triangles with the same vertices in $\partial X$ is bounded by a universal constant. There is a number $p_0>0$ such that for every $p\geq p_0$ and every triple $(a,b,c)\in T$ the closed set $K(a,b,c;p)\subset X$ of all points in $X$ whose distance to each side of an $L$-quasi-geodesic triangle with vertices $a,b,c$ is at most $p$ is non-empty. The diameter of this set is uniformly bounded by a constant only depending on $p$ and the hyperbolicity constant for $X$.
By the definition of the Gromov product and hyperbolicity, there is a number $m_1>0$ with the following property. Let $(a,b,c)\in T$ and let $\zeta$ be a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $b$ to $a$. Then $\min\{(a,c)_{\zeta(0)}, (b,c)_{\zeta(0)}\}\leq m_1$ and if $(b,c)_{\zeta(0)}\leq (a,c)_{\zeta(0)}$ then we have $\zeta(\tau)\in K(a,b,c;m_1)$ for every $\tau\geq 0$ such that $d(\zeta(0),\zeta(\tau))= (a,c)_{\zeta(0)}$.
Now let $\nu\in (0,1)$ and let $a,b\in \partial X$ be such that $\delta(a,b)\geq 2\nu$. By hyperbolicity and inequality (\[dist\]) above, there is a constant $m_0=m_0(\nu)>0$ such that every continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting two points $a\not=b\in \partial X$ with $\delta(a,b)\geq \nu$ intersects the ball $B(x_0,m_0)$. Let $\gamma$ be a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $b=\gamma(-\infty)$ to $a=\gamma(\infty)$ which is parametrized in such a way that $\gamma(0)\in B(x_0,m_0)$. Let $\theta >0,\chi>0$ be as in inequality (\[dist\]), let $R_0=
\chi(m_0+m_1+\theta)$ and let $v\in
\partial X-\{a,b\}$ be such that $\delta(a,v)\leq e^{-R_0}$; then $\delta(a,v)=e^{-R}$ for some $R\geq R_0$. By inequality (\[dist\]) we have $R/\chi-\theta\leq (a,v)_{x_0}\leq R/\chi$ and hence $$R/\chi-\theta-m_0\leq (a,v)_{\gamma(0)}\leq R/\chi+m_0$$ since $d(x_0,\gamma(0))\leq m_0$. From the assumption on $R$ we obtain that $(a,v)_{\gamma(0)}\geq m_1$ and hence $\gamma(\tau)\in K(a,b,v;m_1)$ for all $\tau
\geq 0$ such that $d(\gamma(0),\gamma(\tau))=
(a,v)_{\gamma(0)}$.
Let $g\in {\rm Iso}(X)$ be such that $\delta(ga,gb)\geq 2\nu$ and $\min\{\delta(ga,gv),\delta(gb,gv)\}\geq \nu$. Then the $L$-quasi-geodesic $g\gamma$ intersects $B(x_0,m_0)$ and the same if true for any $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $ga$ to $gv$ or connecting $gb$ to $gv$ and consequently $x_0\in K(ga,gb,gv;m_0)$. If as before $\tau>0$ is such that $d(\gamma(0),\gamma(\tau))=(a,v)_{\gamma(0)}$ then $\gamma(\tau)\in
K(a,b,v;m_1)$ and therefore $$\{x_0,g\gamma(\tau)\}\subset
K(ga,gb,gv;m_0+m_1) =gK(a,b,v;m_0+m_1).$$ Now the diameter of the set $K(ga,gb,gv;m_0+m_1)$ is bounded from above by a constant $m_2=m_2(\nu)>0$ only depending on $\nu$ and hence $d(g\gamma(\tau),x_0)\leq m_2$.
Let $w\in \partial X$ be such that $\delta(w,b)\leq \nu$. Then $\delta(w,a)\geq \nu$ and by inequality (\[dist\]) above, the Gromov product $(w,a)_{x_0}$ is bounded from above by a universal constant and the same is true for $(w,a)_{\gamma(0)}$. In particular, the $L$-quasi-geodesic ray $\gamma[0,\infty)$ connecting $\gamma(0)$ to $a$ is contained in a uniformly bounded neighborhood of any $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $w$ to $a$. With $\tau>0$ as above we have $\vert d(\gamma(\tau),\gamma(0))-R/\chi\vert
\leq m_0+\theta$ and hence by the definition of the Gromov product and hyperbolicity, the quantity $(b,w)_{\gamma(\tau)}-R/\chi=
(gb,gw)_{g\gamma(\tau)}- R/\chi$ is bounded from below by a universal constant. But $d(g\gamma(\tau),x_0)\leq m_2$ and hence we have $$\vert (gb,gw)_{g\gamma(\tau)}-(gb,gw)_{x_0}\vert =\vert
(b,w)_{\gamma(\tau)}-(gb,gw)_{x_0}\vert \leq m_2.$$ Using once more the estimate (\[dist\]) we conclude that there is a number $\Theta>1$ only depending on $\nu$ such that $\delta(gb,gw)\leq
\Theta e^{-R}=\Theta\delta(a,v)$. This shows that the action of ${\rm Iso}(X)$ on $\partial X$ is weakly hyperbolic.
As in the introduction, we call an isometric action on $X$ of a countable group $\Gamma$ *weakly acylindrical* if for every point $x_0\in X$ and every $m>0$ there are numbers $R(x_0,m)>0$ and $c(x_0,m)>0$ with the following property. If $x,y\in X$ with $d(x,y)\geq R(x_0,m)$ are such that a geodesic $\gamma$ connecting $x$ to $y$ meets the $m$-neighborhood of $x_0$ then there are at most $c(x_0,m)$ elements $g\in \Gamma$ such that $d(x,gx)\leq m$ and $d(y,gy)\leq m$. We have.
[**Lemma 4.2:**]{} [*Let $X$ be a hyperbolic geodesic metric space and let $\Gamma$ be a countable subgroup of ${\rm Iso}(X)$ whose action on $X$ is weakly acylindrical; then the action of $\Gamma$ on the space or triples of pairwise distinct points in $\partial X$ is metrically proper.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $X$ be a hyperbolic geodesic metric space and let $\Gamma$ be a countable subgroup of ${\rm Iso}(X)$ whose action on $X$ is weakly acylindrical. Then $\Gamma$ acts as a group of homeomorphisms on the Gromov boundary $\partial X$ of $X$. Recall that $\partial X$ is a metric space of bounded diameter where the metric $\delta$ is constructed from the Gromov product $(\, ,\,)_{x_0}$ at a fixed point $x_0\in X$ and it satisfies the estimate (\[dist\]) from the beginning of this section for some $\chi >0,\theta >0$ and all $\xi\not=\eta\in
\partial X$. We have to show that the action of $\Gamma$ on the space $T$ of triples of pairwise distinct points in $\partial X$ is metrically proper.
For this let $\nu>0$ be fixed. There are numbers $L\geq 1,
m_0=m_0(\nu)>0$ such that any two points $x\not=y \in \partial X$ can be connected by a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic, and if $\delta(x,y)\geq \nu$ then this quasi-geodesic intersects the ball $B(x_0,m_0)$.
By hyperbolicity, the Hausdorff distance between any two $L$-quasi-geodesics connecting the same points in $\partial X$ is bounded from above by a universal constant. Moreover, there is a universal constant $m_1=m_1(\nu)>m_0$ with the following property. Let $a\not=b, x\not=y
\in \partial X$ and assume that $\delta(a,b)\geq 2\nu$ and that for some $R>-\log \nu/2$ we have $\delta(a,x)\leq e^{-R},
\delta(b,y)\leq e^{-R}$. Let $\gamma$ be a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $b=\gamma(-\infty)$ to $a=\gamma(\infty)$ and let $\eta$ be a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $y=\eta(-\infty)$ to $x=\eta(\infty)$; then $\gamma, \eta$ intersect the ball $B(x_0,m_0)$, and the intersection of $\gamma$ with the ball $B(x_0,R/\chi)$ is contained in the $m_1$-neighborhood of $\eta$.
As in the proof of Lemma 4.1, for $p>0$ and a triple $(u,v,w)\in
T$ of pairwise distinct points in $\partial X$ let $K(u,v,w;p)\subset X$ be the set of all points whose distance to each side of an $L$-quasi-geodesic triangle with vertices $u,v,w$ is at most $p$. By the arguments in the proof of Lemma 4.1 there is a constant $m_2>m_1$ with the following property. Let $x,y\in \partial X$ with $d(x,y)\geq\nu$. If $z\in \partial X$ and $k\geq -\log \nu/2$ are such that $e^{-k}\leq \delta(x,z)\leq e^{-k+1}$ then the distance between $x_0$ and $K(x,y,z;m_0)$ is contained in the interval $[k/\chi-m_2,k/\chi+m_2]$. The diameter of the sets $K(x^\prime,y^\prime,z^\prime;m_0)$ is bounded from above by a universal constant $\rho>0$ only depending on $m_0$ and the hyperbolicity constant of $X$.
Let $(a,b,c)\in (\partial X)^3$ be a triple of points whose pairwise distance is at least $2\nu$. Let $R\geq -\log \nu/2$ be a number to be determined later, let $U(a),U(b),U(c)$ be the open $e^{-R}$-neighborhood of $a,b,c$ in $\partial X$ and let $x\in U(a),y\in U(b),z\in U(c)$. Let $a^\prime,b^\prime\in
\partial X$ be such that $\delta(a^\prime,b^\prime)\geq 2\nu$ and assume that there is some $g\in \Gamma$ such that $gx=a^\prime,
gy=b^\prime$ and $\delta(gz,a^\prime)\in [e^{-k},e^{-k+1}]$ for some $k\geq R$. Then $g$ maps a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic $\eta$ connecting $y$ to $x$ with $\eta(0)\in K(x,y,z;m_0)$ to a continuous $L$-quasi-geodesic $g\eta$ connecting $b^\prime$ to $a^\prime$. Since $g(\eta(0))\in K(a^\prime,b^\prime,gz;m_0)$ we have $$\label{distance}
\vert d(g\eta(0),x_0)-k/\chi\vert \leq m_2+\rho.$$
Now let $x^\prime\in U(a),y^\prime\in U(b),
z^\prime\in U(c)$ and let $g^\prime\in \Gamma$ be such that $g^\prime x^\prime=a^\prime=gx,
g^\prime y^\prime=b^\prime=gy$ and $\delta(g^\prime z^\prime,a^\prime)\in [e^{-k},e^{-k+1}]$. Let $\eta^\prime$ be continuous $L$-quasi-geodesics connecting $y^\prime$ to $x^\prime$, with $\eta^\prime(0)\in B(x_0,m_0)$. As above, let $\gamma$ be a continous $L$-quasi-geodesic connecting $b$ to $a$ with $\gamma(0)\in B(x_0,m_0)$ and let $\sigma<0$ be such that $d(x_0,\gamma(\sigma))=R/\chi$. Then there are numbers $\tau<0,\tau^\prime<0$ such that $d(\eta(\tau),\gamma(\sigma))\leq m_1,
d(\eta^\prime(\tau^\prime),\gamma(\sigma))\leq m_1$ and therefore $d(\eta(\tau),\eta^\prime(\tau^\prime))\leq 2m_1.$ In particular, we have $$\vert d(\eta(0),\eta(\tau))-d(\eta^\prime(0),
\eta^\prime(\tau^\prime))\vert \leq 2m_0+2m_1$$ The images of $\eta,\eta^\prime$ under $g,g^\prime$ are continuous $L$-quasi-geodesics connecting $b^\prime$ to $a^\prime$. The estimate (\[distance\]) is valid for $g^\prime$ as well and hence by hyperbolicity, the distances $d(g\eta(0),
g^\prime(\eta^\prime(0))),$ $d(g(\eta(\tau)),g^\prime(\eta^\prime(\tau^\prime)))$ are bounded from above by a universal constant $m_3>2m_2$. Together we conclude that $$d(g^{-1}g^\prime(\eta(0)),\eta(0))\leq 2m_3,\quad
d(g^{-1}g^\prime(\eta(\tau)),
\eta(\tau))\leq 2m_3.$$
Now if $R_0=R(x_0,2m_3)$ is as in the definition of a weakly acylindrical action, then for $R\geq \chi R_0$ and any $k\geq R$ the number of elements $g,g^\prime\in \Gamma$ with this property is bounded from above by for a universal constant independent of $R$ and $k$. This shows that the action of $\Gamma$ on $\partial X$ satisfies the first property in the definition of a metrically proper action.
The second property in the definition of a metrically proper action follows from exactly the same argument. Namely, using our above notation, there is a number $\kappa >m_0(\nu)$ only depending on $\nu$ such that if $Z\subset\partial X$ is the set of all points whose distance to $U(a),U(b)$ is at least $\nu$ then there is a number $\tau_0>0$ such that for any $x\in U(a),y\in
U(b)$ and $z\in Z$ the set $K(x,y,z)$ is contained in the ball of radius $\kappa>0$ about $x_0$. In other words, for any element $g,h\in \Gamma$ which map a triple $(x,y,z)\in U(a)\times
U(b)\times Z$ to a triple of points whose pairwise distance is bounded from below by $\nu$, the distance between $x_0$ and $gx_0$ is at most $\kappa$. Our above consideration then shows that we can find a number $\tilde R(\nu)>0$ depending on $\nu$ and some $\tilde m(\nu)>0$ such that the second requirement in the definition of a metrically proper action holds with these constants and for the action of $\Gamma$ on $\partial X$.
Recall from Section 3 the definition of a homeomorphism with north-south dynamics of a metric space of finite diameter. The statement of the next simple lemma is well known in the case that the hyperbolic space $X$ is proper; we include a short proof for the sake of completeness since we did not find a suitable reference for the general case.
[**Lemma 4.3:**]{} [*Let $X$ be a hyperbolic geodesic metric space and let $g$ be an isometry of $X$ such that for some $x\in X$ the map $k\to g^kx$ is a quasi-isometric embedding of the integers into $X$. Then $g$ acts on $\partial X$ with north-south dynamics.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $g$ be an isometry of the hyperbolic geodesic metric space $X$ with the property that for some $x\in X$ the map $k\to g^k x$ is a quasi-isometric embedding of the integers into $X$. Then the sequence $(g^kx)_{k\geq 0}\subset X$ converges to a point $a\in \partial X$, and the sequence $(g^{-k}x)_{k\geq 0}\subset X$ converges to a point $b\in \partial X-\{a\}$. The limit set of the infinite cyclic group $G$ generated by $g$ consists of the two points $a\not= b\in \partial X$, and these are fixed points for the action of $G$ on $\partial X$.
By hyperbolicity there is a number $m>0$ such that for every $\xi\in \partial X-\{a,b\}$ the closed set $K(a,b,\xi;m)\subset X$ of all points in $X$ whose distance to each side of an $L$-quasi-geodesic triangle with vertices $a,b,\xi$ is at most $m$ is non-empty and its diameter $K(a,b,\xi;m)$ is bounded independently of $\xi$. Since the assignment $k\to g^k(x)$ is a quasi-isometric embedding of the integers into $X$, we may assume by possibly enlarging $m$ that each of the sets $K(a,b,\xi;m)$ intersects $Q=\{g^k(x)\mid
k\in \mathbb{Z}\}$. Thus there is a number $\ell >0$ and for every $\xi\in \partial X-\{a,b\}$ there is some $\kappa(\xi)\in\mathbb{Z}$ such that the set $\{g^\kappa(x)\mid \kappa(\xi)\leq \kappa\leq
\kappa(\xi)+\ell\}$ contains the intersection of $K(a,b,\xi;m)$ with $Q$. Then $\vert \kappa(g^j\xi)-\kappa(\xi)-j\vert \leq \ell$ for all $j\in \mathbb{Z}$ and hence the set $D=\{\xi\in \partial X-\{a,b\}\mid
0\leq \kappa(\xi)\leq \ell\}$ does not contain $a,b$ in its closure and it satisfies $\cup_{j\in \mathbb{Z}}g^jD=\partial X-\{a,b\}$. Moroever, for every neighborhood $U$ of $a$, $V$ of $b$ there is a number $j>0$ such that $g^j(X-V)\subset U,g^{-j}(X-U)\subset V$. Hence the isometry $g$ acts with north-south dynamics on $\partial X$. This shows the lemma.
Call an isometry of $X$ *hyperbolic* if it acts on $\partial X$ with north-south dynamics with respect to some fixed points $a\not= b$. The following corollary is immediate from Lemma 4.1, Lemma 4.2 and the remark after Proposition 3.2 in Section 3. We refer to [@PR04] for a similar result for the group $SL(2,\mathbb{Z})$.
[**Corollary 4.4:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits a weakly acylindrical isometric action on a hyperbolic geodesic metric space. Let $g_1,\dots,g_k\in \Gamma$ be hyperbolic elements with ordered pairs of fixed points $(a_i,b_i)$. If the $\Gamma$-orbits of $(a_i,b_i),(b_i,a_i)$ are pairwise disjoint then for every $(q_1,\dots,q_k)\in \mathbb{R}^k$ there is a quasi-morphism $\phi$ for $\Gamma$ with $\lim_{\ell\to\infty}\phi(g_i^\ell)/\ell=q_i$ for every $i\leq k$.*]{}
The *limit set* of an isometric action of a group $\Gamma$ on $X$ is the set of accumulation points in $\partial X$ of an orbit $\Gamma x$ $(x\in X)$ of $\Gamma$; it does not depend on the orbit. A subgroup $\Gamma$ of ${\rm Iso}(X)$ is called *elementary* if its limit set contains at most 2 points. The next result is Theorem A from the introduction.
[**Theorem 4.5:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be a countable group which admits a non-elementary weakly acylindrical isometric action on a Gromov hyperbolic geodesic metric space $X$; then the kernels of the natural homomorphisms $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})\to
H^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}), H_b^2(\Gamma, \ell^p(\Gamma))\to
H^2(\Gamma, \ell^p(\Gamma))$ $(1< p<\infty)$ are infinite dimensional.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Let $X$ be a hyperbolic geodesic metric space and let $\Gamma$ be a countable non-elementary weakly acylindrical subgroup of the isometry group of $X$. By assumption, the limit set $\Lambda$ of $\Gamma$ contains at least 3 points. Then this limit set is a $\Gamma$-invariant closed subset of $\partial X$ without isolated points (see [@GH]). Our goal is to show that the action of $\Gamma$ on $\Lambda$ satisfies the assumptions in Theorem 3.3.
By Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 4.2, the action of $\Gamma$ on $\Lambda$ is weakly hyperbolic and the action of $\Gamma$ on the space of triples of pairwise distinct points in $\Lambda$ is metrically proper. Using Lemma 4.3 it is enough to show that $\Gamma$ contains a free subgroup $G$ with two generators which has the following additional properties.
1. For some $x\in X$ the orbit map $g\in G\to gx\in X$ is a quasi-isometric embedding of $G$ into $X$.
2. There are infinitely many $g_i\in G$ $(i\geq 0)$ such that the ordered pairs of fixed points of $g_i,g_j^{-1}$ are contained in pairwise distinct orbits of the action of $\Gamma$ on $\Lambda\times \Lambda$.
Note that the first property guarantees that there is a continuous $G$-equivariant embedding of the Gromov boundary $B$ of $G$ into $\Lambda$.
The existence of a free group $G$ with two generators and with property (1) above is immediate from the ping-pong lemma and our requirement that the group $\Gamma$ is non-elementary (compare [@GH]).
Now let $e\not= g\in G$ and let $(a,b)$ be the ordered pair of fixed points of the action of $g$ on $\partial X$. Choose a closed subset of $\partial X$ which is contained in $X-\{a,b\}$ and is a fundamental domain $D$ for the action on $\partial X-\{a,b\}$ of the infinite cyclic subgroup of $G$ generated by $g$. Assume that there is a sequence $(a_i,b_i)\in
\partial X\times \partial X$ contained in the $\Gamma$-orbit of $(a,b)$ with $(a_i,b_i)\to (a,b)$. Let $\delta$ be a Gromov distance on $\partial X$ and write $\nu=\min\{\delta(a,b),\delta(\{a,b\},D)\}/4$. Let $R(\nu)>0$ be as in the definition of a metrically proper action for $\Gamma$ and let $U,V$ be the open $e^{-R(\nu)}$-neighborhood of $a,b$. For sufficiently large $i$ we have $a_i\in U,
b_i\in V$. By our assumption, there are $h_i\in \Gamma$ such that $h_ia_i=a,h_ib_i=b$. Then $h_i^{-1}gh_i$ is a hyperbolic isometry with fixed points $a_i,b_i$. Since a hyperbolic isometry fixes *precisely* two points in $\partial X$, the elements $h_i$ are pairwise distinct and the same is true for their compositions with an arbitrary power of $g$. Namely, otherwise there are $i\not=j$ and $\ell\in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $g^\ell=h_ih_j^{-1}$ which contradicts the fact that $(a,b)$ are fixed points for $g$, $(a_i,b_i)\not=(a_j,b_j)$ and that $h_i$ is a homeomorphism. However, by the choice of $D$ there is for each $i>0$ some $k(i)\in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $g^{k(i)}h_i D\cap D\not=\emptyset$ and hence $g^{k(i)}h_i(U\times V\times D)\cap
U\times V\times D\not=\emptyset$ for all sufficiently large $i$. This contradicts our assumption that the action of $\Gamma$ on the space of triples of pairwise distinct points in $\partial X$ is metrically proper.
As a consequence, for every ordered pair $(a,b)$ of fixed points of an element $e\not=g\in G$ the $\Gamma$-orbit of $(a,b)$ is a *discrete* subset of $\partial X\times \partial X-\Delta$ (note that this fact has already been established in the proof of Proposition 3.2). Since on the other hand the sets of pairs of fixed points for the elements of $G$ are *dense* in $B\times B-\Delta$, there are infinitely many such pairs $(a_i,b_i)$ which are pairwise contained in distinct orbits under the action of $\Gamma$. Our argument also implies that we may in addition require that the ordered pairs $(a_i,b_i)$ are not contained in the $\Gamma$-orbit of $(b_j,a_j)$ for any $j$.
We use this fact to show that we can find infinitely many $g_i\in G$ with the property that the $\Gamma$-orbits of the ordered pairs of fixed points $(a_i,b_i),
(b_j,a_j)$ of $g_i,g_j^{-1}$ are all disjoint (see the argument in [@BF]). Namely, choose two independent elements $g_1,g_2\in G$ which generate a free subgroup with the property that the ordered pairs of fixed points $(a_1,b_1),(b_1,a_1)$ of $g_1,g_1^{-1}$ are not contained in the $\Gamma$-orbit of the ordered pair of fixed points $(b_2,a_2)$ of $g_2^{-1}$. We may assume that the group generated by $g_1,g_2$ equals $G$ and that there is an $L$-quasi-isometric $G$-equivariant embedding $\rho$ of the Cayley graph $CG$ of $G$ into $X$ which induces an equivariant embedding of the Gromov boundary $B$ of $G$ into $\partial X$. Identify $CG$ with its image under our embedding. For $0<<n_1<<m_1<<n_2<<m_2$ consider the element $f=g_1^{n_1}g_2^{m_1}g_1^{n_2}g_2^{m_2}\in G$. If $\gamma$ is the axis of $f$ in $CG$ and if $h\in \Gamma$ maps the ordered pair $(a,b)$ of fixed points for $f$ to $(b,a)$, then it maps the inverse $\rho(\gamma)^{-1}$ of $\rho(\gamma)$ into a uniformly bounded neighborhood of $\rho(\gamma)$. Now a fundamental domain for the action of $f$ on its axis $\gamma$ is composed of four arcs $\gamma_1,\dots,\gamma_4$ where $\gamma_1$ is the geodesic arc in $CG$ connecting $e$ to $g_1^{n_1}$, $\gamma_2$ is the translate under $g_1^{n_1}$ of the geodesic arc connecting $e$ to $g_2^{m_1}$ etc. As a consequence, there is a subsegment of the axis of a conjugate of $g_1$ in $G$ whose length tends to infinity as $n_1\to \infty$ and which is mapped by $h$ into a uniformly bounded neigborhood of a subsegment of the axis of a conjugate of $g_2^{-1}$ (see [@BF]). For sufficiently large $n_1$ this violates our observation that the $\Gamma$-orbits of $(a_i,b_1),(b_2,a_2)$ are discrete and disjoint.
As a consequence, property (2) above holds for $G$ as well (compare also the discussion in [@BF]). Thus our theorem is a consequence of Theorem 3.1.
Applications
============
This section is devoted to a discussion of applications of our Theorem A from the introduction. We begin with the proof of Corollary B from the introduction. For this let $S$ be an oriented surface of genus $g\geq 0$ with $m\geq 0$ punctures. We assume that $S$ is *non-exceptional*, i.e. that $3g-3+m\geq 2$. The *complex of curves* ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ for $S$ is the simplicial complex whose vertices are free homotopy classes of *essential simple closed curves* on $S$, i.e. simple closed curves which are neither contractible nor freely homotopic into a puncture of $S$. The simplices in ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ are spanned by collections of such curves which can be realized disjointly. Since $S$ is non-exceptional by assumption, the complex of curves is connected. If we equip each simplex in ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ with the standard euclidean metric of side-length one, then we obtain a length metric on ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$, and this length metric defines on ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ the structure of a hyperbolic geodesic metric space. However, ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ is not locally finite and hence this geodesic metric space is not locally compact (for all this see [@MM; @B02; @H05]). A description of its Gromov boundary is contained in [@K99; @H04].
The *mapping class group* ${{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,m}$ of $S$ is the group of isotopy classes of orientation preserving homeomorphisms of $S$. It acts as a group of isometries on the complex of curves ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ of $S$. Bowditch [@B03] showed that this action is weakly acylindrical. Thus we can apply Theorem 4.5 and deduce Corollary B from the introduction which extends the result of Bestvina and Fujiwara [@BF].
[**Proposition 5.1:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be an arbitrary subgroup of ${{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,m}$ which is not virtually abelian; then the group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional. If moreover $\Gamma$ does not contain a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product of two infinite groups then for every $(1< p<\infty)$ the group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional as well.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} Recall from [@MP] the classification of subgroups $\Gamma$ of ${{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,m}$. There are 4 cases.
1. $\Gamma$ contains two independent *pseudo-Anosov* elements.
2. The limit set of the action of $\Gamma$ on ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ consists of precisely two points $a\not=b$.
3. $\Gamma$ is finite.
4. $\Gamma$ preserves a nontrivial system of pairwise disjoint essential simple closed mutually not freely homotopic curves on $S$.
The action of the mapping class group on ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ is weakly acylindrical [@B03] and hence the same is true for the action of an arbitrary subgroup $\Gamma$ of ${{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,m}$. If $\Gamma$ is as in case (1) above then the limit set of $\Gamma$ contains at least 3 points and therefore $\Gamma$ is a non-elementary subgroup of the isometry group of ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$. By Theorem 4.5, the groups $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R}), H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ are infinite dimensional for every $p\in (1,\infty)$.
In the case (2) above, each element of $\Gamma$ maps a quasi-geodesic connecting $a$ to $b$ into a uniformly bounded neighborhood of itself. Since the action of $\Gamma$ on ${{\mathcal{C}}}(S)$ is weakly acylindrical, the group $\Gamma$ is virtually cyclic (compare the discussion in [@BF]).
In the case (4) there is a maximal system ${{\mathcal{S}}}$ of pairwise disjoint essential simple closed mutually not freely homotopic curves preserved by $\Gamma$. If we cut $S$ open along ${{\mathcal{S}}}$ and replace each boundary circle of the resulting bordered surface by a puncture then we obtain a possibly disconnected surface $S^\prime$ of finite type and of bigger Euler characteristic. There is a natural homomorphism of $\Gamma$ onto a subgroup $\Gamma^\prime$ of the mapping class group of $S^\prime$. Its kernel $K$ is a free abelian group generated by Dehn twists about the curves of our curve system. Thus by Theorem 12.4.2 of [@M] (see also Corollary 3.6 of [@MS05]), the natural map $H_b^2(\Gamma^\prime,\mathbb{R})\to
H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is an isomorphism.
Let $S_1^\prime,\dots, S_p^\prime$ be the connected components of $S^\prime$. An element $g\in \Gamma^\prime$ permutes the components of $S^\prime$. This means that there is a homomorphism $\kappa$ of $\Gamma^\prime$ into the group of permutations of $\{1,\dots,p\}$ whose kernel is the normal subgroup $G$ of $\Gamma$ of all elements which fix each component $S_i^\prime$. Thus there is an exact sequence $$0\to G\to \Gamma^\prime\to Q\to 0$$ where $Q$ is a finite group. This sequence induces an exact sequence [@M] $$\dots\to H_b^2(Q,\mathbb{R})\to H_b^2(\Gamma^\prime,\mathbb{R})
\to H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})\to H_b^3(Q,\mathbb{R})\to\dots$$ Since the group $Q$ is finite, its bounded cohomology with real coefficients is finite dimensional and therefore we conclude that $H_b^2(\Gamma^\prime,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional if and only if this is the case for $H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$.
For $i\leq p$ denote by $G_i$ the projection of $G$ to a subgroup of the mapping class group of $S_i^\prime$. If $G_i$ preserves a non-trivial system ${{\mathcal{S}}}_i$ of pairwise disjoint essential simple closed not mutually freely homotopic curves on $S_i^\prime$ then the $\Gamma^\prime$-translates of this system is a $\Gamma^\prime$-invariant curve system on $S^\prime$ which lifts to a $\Gamma$-invariant curve system on $S$ strictly containing ${{\mathcal{S}}}$. This contradicts the maximality of the system ${{\mathcal{S}}}$.
An exceptional component $S_i^\prime$ of $S^\prime$ either is a thrice punctured sphere with finite mapping class group, or $S_i^\prime$ is a once punctured torus or a forth punctured sphere with word hyperbolic mapping class group. Therefore either $\Gamma^\prime$ and hence $\Gamma$ is virtually abelian or after reordering, the group $G_1$ admits a weakly acylindrical action as a non-elementary group of isometries on a hyperbolic geodesic metric space. In particular, if $\Gamma$ is not virtually abelian then the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(G_1,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional.
Let $R$ be the kernel of the homomorphism $G\to G_1$. Then we have an exact sequence $$\label{exactsequence}
0\to R\to G\to G_1\to 0.$$ Since necessarily $H_b^1(R,\mathbb{R})=0$ (see [@M]) we obtain from the induced exact sequence of bounded cohomology groups that $H_b^2(G,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional if this is the case for $H_b^2(G_1,\mathbb{R})$. In other words, either $\Gamma$ is virtually abelian or the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\mathbb{R})$ is infinite dimensional.
We are left with investigating the groups $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$. Using our above notations, note first that if the kernel $K$ of the natural projection $\pi:\Gamma\to \Gamma^\prime$ is nontrivial, then the normal subgroup $\pi^{-1}(G)$ of $\Gamma$ splits as a direct product. Thus as before, we may assume that $\Gamma=\Gamma^\prime$. Then $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional if this is the case for $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$. Namely, if the centralizer $Z_\Gamma(G)$ of $G$ in $\Gamma$ is infinite then the center of $G$ is infinite and hence either $G$ is virtually abelian or $G$ splits as a direct product of two infinite groups. Thus we may assume that $Z_\Gamma(G)$ is finite. Then every function $f\in \ell^p(G)$ which is invariant under the action of the finite center of $G$ defines a function in the $G$-module $\ell^p(\Gamma)^{Z_\Gamma(G)}$ of $Z_\Gamma(G)$-invariant points in $\ell^p(\Gamma)$ which vanishes outside of $GZ_\Gamma(G)$. It follows that the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(\Gamma)^{Z_\Gamma(G)})$ is infinite dimensional. The finite group $Q$ admits an isometric action on $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(\Gamma)^{Z_\Gamma(G)})$ induced from the action of $Q$ on $G$ by conjugation (Corollary 8.7.3 of [@M]). Unsing the explicit form of this action we conclude that the subspace of $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(\Gamma)^{Z_\Gamma(G)})$ of elements which are fixed by $Q$ is infinite dimensional if this is the case for $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$. On the other hand, since the group $G$ is infinite by assumption, there is no nonzero $G$-invariant vector in $\ell^p(\Gamma)$ and hence by the Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence for bounded cohomology (Theorem 12.0.3 of [@M]), the second bounded cohomology $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional if this is the case for $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$.
Let $N_j$ be the kernel of the projection of $G$ onto a subgroup of the mapping class group of $S^\prime-S_j^\prime$. Then $N_j$ consists of mapping classes which act trivially on $S_i$ for all $i\not=j$. For $i\not=j$, the groups $N_i,N_j$ only intersect in the identity and commute. Thus if the groups $N_i,N_j$ are infinite for some $i\not= j$, then $G$ contains a normal subgroup which is the direct product of two infinite groups. The smallest normal subgroup of $\Gamma$ containing $N_i,N_j$ contains the direct product of $N_i,N_j$ as a subgroup of finite index, i.e. this normal subgroup virtually splits as a direct product. Thus for the purpose of our proposition we may assume after reordering that $N_i$ is finite for all $i>1$.
Consider first the case that $N_1$ is infinite. Denote as before by $R$ the kernel of the natural projection $G\to G_1$ into the mapping class group of $S_1^\prime$. The subgroup of $G$ generated by $N_1,R$ is normal and the direct product of $N_1$ and $R$. Hence as above, if $\Gamma$ does not contain a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product of two infinite groups then $R$ is finite, and the quotient group $G/R$ can naturally be identified with the group $G_1$.
Assume that this holds true. By Theorem 4.5 and our assumption that $G$ is not virtually abelian, the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(G_1,\ell^p(G_1))$ is infinite dimensional for every $p\in (1,\infty)$. Now the group $R$ is finite and therefore averaging over the orbits of the action of $R$ shows that $\ell^p(G_1)$ as a $G_1$-module can naturally be identified with the $G_1$-module $\ell^p(G)^R$ of all $R$-invariant points in $\ell^p(G)$. As a consequence, the group $H_b^2(G_1,\ell^p(G)^R)$ is infinite dimensional, and therefore from the Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence (Theorem 12.0.3 of [@M]) we deduce that the same is true for $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$. As a consequence, if $N_1$ is infinite and if $\Gamma$ does not contain a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product then $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$ is infinite dimensional as claimed.
Finally we have to consider the case that $N_1$ is finite, i.e. that the kernel of the natural projection of $G$ to a subgroup of the mapping class group of $S_2^\prime\cup\dots\cup S_p^\prime$ is finite. By our above consideration, for every $p\in (1,\infty)$ the group $H_b^2(G,\ell^p(G))$ is infinite dimensional if this is the case for $H_b^2(G/N_1,\ell^p(G/N_1))$. Since $\Gamma$ contains a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product if this is the case for $G/N_1$, an application of the above consideration to the group $G/N_1$ yields inductively the following. Either $\Gamma$ contains a normal subgroup which virtually splits as a direct product or $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^p(\Gamma))$ is infinite dimensional. This shows the proposition.
Following [@MS05], we denote by ${{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$ the class of countable groups which admit a non-elementary weakly acylindrical isometric action on some hyperbolic metric space. Examples of such groups include.
1. Word hyperbolic groups which are not virtually abelian.
2. Any subgroup of the mapping class group of an oriented surface of finite type and negative Euler characteristic not preserving any essential multicurve, e.g. the Torelli group.
3. Any countable group which admits a non-elementary isometric action on a (not necessarily locally finite) tree which is proper on the edges.
Our class also contains a large family of *relatively hyperbolic groups*; in fact, it seems that all geometrically finite relatively hyperbolic groups in the sense of Bowditch (see [@Y04] for a detailed discussion of those groups) are contained in ${{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$.
For a locally compact $\sigma$-compact topological group $G$ define a *lattice* in $G$ to be a *discrete* subgroup $\Gamma$ of $G$ such that $G/\Gamma$ admits a *finite* $G$-invariant measure. If $G=G_1\times G_2$ is any nontrivial direct product with locally compact $\sigma$-compact and non-compact factors then we call a lattice $\Gamma$ in $G$ *irreducible* if the projection of $\Gamma$ into each of the factors is dense. The following lemma is part vi) of Proposition 7.13 in [@MS05] and follows from the work of Burger and Monod [@BM02].
[**Lemma 5.2:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be an irreducible lattice in a product $G=G_1\times G_2$ of locally compact $\sigma$-compact non-compact groups; then $H_b^2(\Gamma,
\ell^2(\Gamma))=0$.*]{}
We use Lemma 5.2 and the results of Monod and Shalom [@MS05] to show.
[**Corollary 5.3:**]{} [*A group $\Gamma\in {{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$ is not measure equivalent to any finitely generated irreducible lattice in either a simple Lie group of higher rank or in a product of two locally compact $\sigma$-compact and non-compact topological groups.*]{}
[*Proof:*]{} By Theorem 4.5, for every $\Gamma\in {{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$ the group $H_b^2(\Gamma,\ell^2(\Gamma))$ is nontrivial. Then Corollary 7.8 of [@MS05] shows that $H_b^2(\Lambda,\ell^2(\Lambda))\not=\{0\}$ for every countable group $\Lambda$ which is measure equivalent to $\Gamma$.
Now by Lemma 5.2, if $\Lambda$ is an irreducible lattice in a product $G_1\times G_2$ of locally compact $\sigma$-compact non-compact groups then $H_b^2(\Lambda,\ell^2(\Lambda))=\{0\}$. If $\Lambda$ is a lattice in a simple Lie group of non-compact type and higher rank then the vanishing of the second bounded cohomology group $H_b^2(\Lambda,\ell^2(\Lambda))$ is due to Monod and Shalom (Theorem 1.4 in [@MS]). Thus in both cases, the group $\Lambda$ is not measure equivalent to $\Gamma$. (Note however that for lattices $\Lambda$ in simple Lie groups of higher rank a much stronger result is due to Furman [@Fu99a; @Fu99b]: Every countable group which is measure equivalent to $\Lambda$ is commensurable to $\Lambda$.)
Corollary C from the introduction now is immediate from Corollary 5.3 and Proposition 5.1.
We conclude the paper with two additional applications of the work of Monod and Shalom [@MS05].
[**Corollary 5.4:**]{} [*A countable group containing an infinite amenable normal subgroup is not measure equivalent to a group in ${{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$.*]{}
Another consequence is Monod and Shalom’s striking rigidity result for actions of products (Theorem 1.8 of [@MS05]).
[**Corollary 5.5:**]{} [*Let $\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2$ be torsion free groups in ${{\mathcal{C}}}_{\rm geom}$, $\Gamma=\Gamma_1\times
\Gamma_2$ and let $(X,\mu)$ be an irreducible probability $\Gamma$-space. Let $\Lambda$ be any torsion free countable group and let $(Y,\nu)$ be any mildly mixing probability $\Lambda$-space. If the $\Gamma$-action and the $\Lambda$-action are orbit equivalent, then both groups as well as the actions are commensurable.*]{}
There is also a version of Theorem A for closed groups of isometries of proper hyperbolic spaces and their continuous bounded cohomology [@H05b].
[**Acknowledgement:**]{} I am very grateful to Yehuda Shalom for pointing out an error in an earlier version of this paper and for additional valuable suggestions. I also thank the anonymus referee for useful comments.
[MMS04]{}
Adams, S., [*Boundary amenability for word hyperbolic groups and an application to smooth dynamics of simple groups*]{}, Topology 33 (1994), 765–783.
Barge, J., Ghys, E., [*Surfaces et cohomologie bornée*]{}, Invent. Math. 92 (1988), 509–526.
Bestvina, M., Fujiwara, K., [*Bounded cohomology of subgroups of mapping class groups*]{}, Geometry & Topology 6 (2002), 69–89.
Bowditch, B., [*Intersection numbers and the hyperbolicity of the curve complex*]{}, preprint 2002, to appear in J. reine angew. Math.
Bowditch, B., [*Tight geodesics in the curve complex*]{}, preprint 2003.
Bridson, M., Haefliger, A., [*Metric spaces of non-positive curvature*]{}, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 1999.
Brooks, R., [*Some remarks on bounded cohomology*]{}, in “Riemann surfaces and related topics: Proceedings of the 1978 Stony Brook conference”, Ann. Math. Stud. 97 (1981), Princeton University Press, 55–63.
Burger, M., Monod, N., [*Bounded cohomology of lattices in higher rank Lie groups*]{}, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 1 (1999), 199–235.
Burger, M., Monod, N., [*Continuous bounded cohomology and applications to rigidity theory*]{}, Geom. Funct. Anal. 12 (2002), 219–280.
Farb, B., Masur, H., [*Superrigidity and mapping class groups*]{}, Topology 37 (1998), 1169–1176.
Fujiwara, K., [*The second bounded cohomology of a group acting on a Gromov hyperbolic space*]{}, Proc. London Math. Soc. 76 (1998), 70–94.
Furman, A., [*Gromov’s measure equivalence and rigidity of higher rank lattices*]{}, Ann. of Math. 150 (1999), 1059–1081.
Furman, A. [*Orbit equivalence rigidity*]{}, Ann. of Math. 150 (1999), 1083–1108.
Ghys, E., de la Harpe, P., [*Sur les groupes hyperboliques d’après Mikhael Gromov,*]{} Birkhäuser, Boston 1990.
Gromov, M., [*Volume and bounded cohomology*]{}, Inst. Hautes Etudes Scie. Publ. Math. 1983, 5–99.
Gromov, M., [*Asymptotic invariants of infinite groups*]{}, London Math. Soc. Lecture Notes, Cambridge Univ. Press 1993.
Hamenstädt, U., [*Cocycles, Hausdorff measures and cross ratios*]{}, Erg. Th. & Dyn. Sys. 17 (1997), 1061–1081.
Hamenstädt, U., [*Cocycles, symplectic structures and intersection*]{}, Geom. Funct. Anal. 9 (1999), 90–140.
Hamenstädt, U., [*Geometry of the complex of curves and of Teichmüller space*]{}, arXiv:math.GT/0502256.
Hamenstädt, U., [*Isometry groups of proper hyperbolic spaces*]{}, arXiv:math.GR/0507608.
Hamenstädt, U., [*Train tracks and the Gromov boundary of the complex of curves*]{}, in “Spaces of Kleinian groups”, Y. Minsky, A. Sakuma, C. Series, eds., Lond. Math. Soc. Lec. Notes 329, 187–207.
Hasselblatt, B., Katok, A., [*Introduction to the modern theory of dynamical systems*]{}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1995.
Ivanov, N. V., [*Foundations of the theory of bounded cohomology,*]{} J. Soviet Math. 37 (1987), 1090–1115.
Kaimanovich, V., [*Double ergodicity of the Poisson boundary and applications to bounded cohomology*]{}, GAFA 13 (2003), 852–861.
Kaimanovich, V., Masur, H., [*The Poisson boundary of the mapping class group*]{}, Invent. Math. 125 (1996), 221–264.
Kida, Y, [*Measure equivalence rigidity for the mapping class group*]{}, arXiv:math.GR/0607600.
Klarreich, E., [*The boundary at infinity of the curve complex and the relative Teichmüller space*]{}, preprint 1999.
Masur, H., Minsky, Y., [*Geometry of the complex of curves I: Hyperbolicity*]{}, Invent. Math. 138 (1999), 103–149.
McCarthy, J., Papadopoulos, A., [*Dynamics on Thurston’s sphere of projective measured foliations*]{}, Comm. Math. Helv. 64 (1989), 133–166.
Mineyev, I., Monod, N., Shalom, Y., [*Ideal bicombings for hyperbolic groups and applications*]{}, Topology 43 (2004), 1319–1344.
Monod, N., [*Continuous bounded cohomology of locally compact groups*]{}, Lecture Notes in Math. 1758, Springer 2001.
Monod, N., Shalom, Y., [*Cocycle superrigidity and bounded cohomology for negatively curved spaces*]{}, J. Diff. Geom. 67 (2004), 395–456.
Monod, N., Shalom, Y., [*Orbit equivalence rigidity and bounded cohomology*]{}, to appear in Ann. Math.
L. Polterovich, Z. Rudnik, [*Stable mixing for cat maps and quasi-morphisms of the modular group*]{}, Erg. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 24 (2004), 609–619.
Yaman, A., [*A topological characterization of relatively hyperbolic groups*]{}, J. reine angew. Math. 566 (2004), 41–89.
Zimmer, R., [*Ergodic theory and semisimple groups*]{}, Birkhäuser, Boston 1984.
Zimmer, R, [*Groups generating transversals to semisimple Lie group actions*]{}, Israel J. Math. 73 (1991), 151–159.
MATHEMATISCHES INSTITUT DER UNIVERSITÄT BONN\
BERINGSTRAE 1\
53115 BONN, GERMANY
[*e-mail address*]{}: [email protected]
[^1]: [*e-mail address:*]{} [email protected]\
Partially supported by Sonderforschungsbereich 611
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Increased data gathering capacity, together with the spread of data analytics techniques, has prompterd an unprecedented concentration of information related to the individuals’ preferences in the hands of a few gatekeepers. In the present paper, we show how platforms’ performances still appear astonishing in relation to some unexplored data and networks properties, capable to enhance the platforms’ capacity to implement steering practices by means of an increased ability to estimate individuals’ preferences. To this end, we rely on network science whose analytical tools allow data representations capable of highlighting relationships between subjects and/or items, extracting a great amount of information. We therefore propose a measure called Network Information Patrimony, considering the amount of information available within the system and we look into how platforms could exploit data stemming from connected profiles within a network, with a view to obtaining competitive advantages. Our measure takes into account the quality of the connections among nodes as the one of a hypothetical user in relation to its neighbourhood, detecting how users with a good neighbourhood – hence of a superior connections set – obtain better information. We tested our measures on Amazons’ instances, obtaining evidence which confirm the relevance of information extracted from nodes’ neighbourhood in order to steer targeted users.'
author:
- Jacopo Arpetti
- Antonio Iovanella
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
date: 'Received: date / Accepted: date'
title: Towards more effective consumer steering via network analysis
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
Among the revolutions featuring the last century, the most important one, which marked every economic sector, impacting on every aspect of our daily life, is the Web revolution. Nowadays, starting with its 2.0 version, the Web has made individuals no longer mere users of information available on the internet, but rather – with the advent of internet platforms and mobile apps offering access to a wide array of services such as search engines, maps, and music or video on demand [@CouncilofEconomicAdvisers-CEA2015] – true data forgers, often of a significantly personal nature [@jentzsch2017secondary]. In this context, data sharing increases to a global reach [@Acquisti2016], blurring the distinction between the digital and the physical world, between online and offline.
Thanks to the increased data gathering capacity and the spreading deployment of data analytics techniques, a huge amount of information related to individuals’ preferences – of which no trace was previously left in the real world [@Pagallo2014] – is today in the hands of a few gatekeepers. This allows them to potentially influence and steer individuals’ purchase choices, as well as to charge – in case they are e-commerce platforms – different prices to different customers [pp. 445, @Acquisti2016; @CouncilofEconomicAdvisers-CEA2015; @kshetri2014big], who are clustered via different techniques.
As a matter of fact, the more data platforms manage to gather, the more effective their attempt will be to shift from a third price discrimination degree (different prices are charged to different socio-demographic groups) to a perfect discrimination, that is the condition in which it is possible to set different prices for different individuals or to nudge the same consumers towards the purchase of a certain good o service based on their price sensitivity [@shiller2014first; @kramer2017digital; @regner2017privacy]. It happen indeed to be addressed by product recommendations based on one’s past online purchases, to be targeted by real-time advertisements reflecting past browsing behaviour, or to be the recipient of tailored search results stemming from individual queries [@Levin2011]. As a matter of fact, platforms collect data, the more they can move towards perfect discrimination. The proof of the progressively enhanced platforms’ capacity to implement discriminatory practices lies with their increased ability to estimate individuals’ preferences [@lu2012recommender; @lu2015recommender].
The aim of the present paper is to look into whether, by using network representations and exploiting network properties, platforms could use data acquired from customers to design even more efficient price discrimination practices, or to better nudge and steer consumers towards their purchases. It appears indeed that, by letting information flow throughout the entire network, and thus taking into account the preferences of nodes which are closer to the targeted one (i.e. its [*alters*]{}), it would be possible for platforms to capture a wider amount of information compared to a situation where individuals are divided into clusters as it currently generally happens. As a matter of fact, considering the whole network and not just its subsets (thought clustering techniques, thereby items and/or subjects are divided into clusters, being considered as a portion of the entire universe) it is reasonable to think that the correspondingly greater amount of information, collected in the entire universe, could lead to better profiling results.
The theoretical proposal offered in the present paper is mainly based on the concept of [*network value*]{}[^1], which has been used in order to estimate the information available within the system, as well as the way how platforms exploit data stemming from connected profiles in a network.
The stemming of information availability from the network connection patterns, is taken into consideration starting from the observation that a single node is not only affected by its alters (i.e. its neighbours) but also by the alters of its alters [@cerqueti2018new]. We therefore make use of some related network measures, and in so doing we provide several brand-new measures, shifting from the concept of value to the concept of information patrimony, both at the node and network levels.
The aim of the present paper is not to provide a methodology aimed to set different prices for different users, but rather to shed some light on how network systems could potentially provide a greater amount of information than expected.
The paper is organised as follows: Section \[recsystems\] offers an overview of the evolution of profiling techniques. Section \[networkprop\] provides a review of network properties and their impact on profiling techniques. Section \[theory\] is devoted to the outline of certain relevant notations about network theory. Section \[NIP\] introduces and discusses our proposal and the related interpretation. Section \[example\] shows some explanatory simulations. The final section offers some conclusive remarks and proposes directions for future research.
The evolution of clustering-based profiling techniques and related limitations {#recsystems}
==============================================================================
Since the mid-90s e-commerce platforms begun exploiting input provided by customers in order to generate a list of items to be recommended to them [@Kamishima2011]. A technical way through which platforms improve their own algorithms in order to identify individual preferences is represented by [*Collaborative Filtering*]{} techniques ($CF$)[^2]. The aim of platforms is indeed to determine the preferences of individuals not only on the basis of data produced by some targeted ones, but also by using information derived by users related to him by the same purchase choices and preferences. In this regard, already back in 2010, in a special issue of The Economist, reference was made to the fact that Amazon and Netflix were using a statistical technique called [*collaborative filtering*]{} in order to make recommendations to users based on what other users like [@TheEconomist2010]. Algorithms aggregate items from similar customers, then eliminate items that a user has already purchased, recommending the remaining items to the same subject[^3].
By profiling consumers through their digital footprints[^4], firms can predict individuals’ demand as well as their price point sensitivity, ultimately altering the balance of power in their price and value negotiations [@Gertz2002]. Furthermore, sorting out the recommendation puzzle – deciding what to suggest to whom – can allow platforms to implement incisive forms of price discrimination[^5].
One of the most effective ways to find out which item should be offered in relation to the user’s needs is grounded on algorithms trained to group or classify together similar objects or similar individuals via collaborative filtering. The goal of algorithms used by platforms, is essentially to lead the decisions made by users, suggesting them a certain good instead of another[^6] in relation to their price sensitivity.
Clustering and classification algorithms (such as those used by CF, like $k$-Means Clustering and $k$-Nearest Neighbours algorithm, $k$-NN[^7]) show though several limitations. As a matter of fact, even if their computational complexity is known to be polynomial in the size of the number of points, such algorithms suffer from major unsolved problems [@xu2005survey; @firdaus2015survey]. These latter are mainly related to sparsity of data, high redundancy, inherent noise, sensitivity to the outliers, clusters dimensional heterogeneity; furthermore, there is no metric to assess the quality of the results [@sarwar2001item; @nguyen2007improving]. In addition to the aforementioned scalabilty and spartisy, recommendation system suffer from the so-called “cold-start" problem [@nguyen2007improving; @castillejo2012social; @konstas2009social; @lam2010system].
Although some authors have tried to sort out such matters via combining data form social network websites (ie information gathered via their explicit social network) and recommendation systems [@konstas2009social; @liu2010use], the aforementioned problems still remain unsolved [@castillejo2012social].
Network properties applied to profiling tecniques {#networkprop}
=================================================
As shown by Google search engine, networks’ properties might be crucial in resolving recommendation systems limitations [@page1999pagerank; @castillejo2012social]. Indeed, platforms may rely on an alternative data representation – that is, the network representation of the relationships between nodes representing items offered by the platforms and/or users – based on the [*network science*]{} (NS) paradigm [@barabasi2013network]. As matter of fact, a formal network representation (i.e. a mathematical representation) allows to organise users or objects as connected via links that make explicit predefined relationships. It is therefore possible to use network science tools and, in particular, those inherited from [*Social Network Analysis[^8]*]{} [e.g. @scott2011sage] to build a scheme describing preferences’ patterns featuring connections between items and/or users. According to the literature, such representation has become the preferential tool used to study complex systems [@wang2003complex].
The use of Network Science may improve the quality of recommendations made to consumers via the combination of metadata stemming from the users’ activities – hence referred to the targeted node – with those gathered from the nodes’ neighbourhood and by exploit via networks’ properties (see paragraph 4).
In this regard, we consider that an underlying network expressing the item-user relationship is always potentially available to platforms, since these latter can rely on two types of networks: an explicit one (used by Facebook and any other social networks whereby network are built and inter-connected) and an implicit one, where the established connections among users are build on their interests or, in general, on their online behaviour [@zhou2014social].
Thanks to network science it is indeed possible to understand the relations between items[^9], not by measuring the distance ($k$-NN) between individuals or goods and/or services within a cluster, but by considering the totality of connections between nodes (which may represent both items and users) in the entire network (e.g. see @birke2013social and @lu2015recommender and references therein). The user-user CF method, for example, implies that it is possible profile individuals by inferring the data they ceded so to put them in a group of subjects with similar characteristics, in order to proceed to $k$-NN measurements and find out what the nearest neighbours are. In the case of CF, clusters are created in order to reflect the platform’s needs on the background of the users’ (or items’) characteristics: applied to consumption forecasts, both behaviour predictions and item suggestions are “bent” by the use of Big Data, which allow the platform to modify the structure of the network through a continuous remodelling of the relevant clusters. Conversely, NS techniques allow the network structure to remain rigid, while data flow in a unique cluster (the entire network) and information stems from the measurement of connections in an immutable structure.
Network analysis and its properties – along with the data analysis made by any other recommendations system, although with a different computational effort – can be used by platforms in order to manage some of the factors influencing the purchase decisions by individuals plunged in the internet context[^10], as well as a range of other elements that come into play as regards such choices. In such sense, due to the high level of information asymmetry [@Akerlof1970; @tsai2011effect; @mavlanova2012signaling] associated to the deep consumers’ unawareness of how digital footprints remain on the web[^11], networks properties can be used to perform profiling and grouping practices, to the point that a seller could decide to offer a certain item instead of another, hiding the existence of perfect substitute goods, nudging individuals to the purchase of a more expensive but equivalent item on the basis of a connections analysis (hence an analysis of the connections between the goods purchased by the individual and those connected to them) aimed at estimating the users’ price sensitivity [@mikians2012detecting; @mattioli2012orbitz][^12].
When asked how e-commerce websites could implement price “personalisation” in relation to each consumer so to squeezing their surplus, @Hannak2014 [pp. 306] answered that two practices had been conceived by those players: price discrimination – customising prices for some users – \[...\] (and) price steering – changing the order of search results to highlight specific products.
Network science may ensure a more effective implementation of these practices because evaluations made by the platforms on what item to show or not, would be carried out in relation to the whole universe of items available to all users and not only to those addressed – at a given time – to a certain group of individuals. In this context it is therefore appropriate investigating how the use of NS could lead to an evolution of profiling practices grounded on the collection of habits and preferences, in the light the unprecedented capacity of online platforms to collect digital footprints left by individuals [@fuller2018privacy; @acquisti2008identity], even considering constraints such as clustering limitation. In such sense, due to the presence of some constraints, it is improper to assert – contrary to what claimed by a wide part of the literature (Council of Economic Advisers - CEA, 2015) – that we are assisting to a shift from third-degree price discrimination to totally personalised prices just because of the increased availability of behavioural data. There are indeed at least three obstacles – in addition to the fact that platforms do not implement similar strategies due to reputation motivation as reported in @CouncilofEconomicAdvisers-CEA2015 – standing between perfect price discrimination and the forms of discrimination that platforms currently implement [@Ezrachi2016 pp. 96-99]: Lack of data[^13]; Irrationality[^14]; Sufficient sample size[^15]. In the light of such obstacles, platforms must put in place practical solutions so that preferences can be detected and reserve prices – which are not directly deducible – approximated [@Shiller2015] [@Ezrachi2016 pp. 96][^16]. Starting from the purchase behaviour patterns charactering each group to which individuals have been allocated to, platforms predict consumers’ desires and “their next moves”, prompting further consumption through the suggestion of specific products or services that have proven to be popular among the choices made by individuals. Such items, identified through the behaviours of consumers clustered in homogenous groups (pooled e.g. by preferences, behavioural patterns, purchase history and price reservations) are selected based on the corresponding utility levels express by individuals or, when items are bundled (or complementary), via the utility level related to one of them, influencing the utility of the other [@Zhao2016].
What is then the role of NS in the light of the platforms’ profiling practices carried out in order to detect users’ preferences and to nudge them to consumption? Although the White House report on Big Data and differential pricing states that steering practices do not make use of information concerning potential buyers at the individual level, and this is the reason why those practices should not be considered any longer as prevailing[^17] [@CouncilofEconomicAdvisers-CEA2015], that does not mean that steering practices[^18] are not still used (see @mikians2012detecting).
Although the primary goal of the present contribution is not the exploration of how the increased observation of the individuals’ purchase choices and expressed preferences (hence the greater amount of data which platforms possess on them) could lead to more performing steering, nudging and price discrimination practices, we show how social network science has became crucial in predicting consumers consumption patterns in the light of networks features which can be better understood through some measures that we propose below.
Methodological prerequisites {#theory}
============================
The next sections are devoted to the conceptualisation of our proposal and we therefore provide further below some preliminary notations, for the convenience of the reader.
The classical mathematical abstraction of a network is a graph $G = (V,E)$, where $V$ is the set of $n$ nodes (or vertices) and $E$ is the set of $m$ links (or edges) outlining the relationships among the nodes. For instance, taking into account the network of users in an online marketplace, nodes will be made up of individuals linked among them by the purchased items. Conversely, should, for the same online marketplace, be considered the network of items, nodes will represent goods or services linked together because bundled or, in an alternative setting, purchased by the same user. In this regard, Figure \[fig:1\] provides a basic example of a users’ graph relating to a generic online marketplace with $6$ nodes corresponding to as many individuals, linked among them by $8$ identical purchase choices (namely the purchase of the same goods or services) represented by as many links. In such setting, information spans from node to node, within the network, via the links’ pattern [@bakshy2012role; @galati2019framework].
It is worth mentioning that, according to the literature, both the word “network” and “graph” can be used interchangeably. While the first is generally associated to real systems, such as the WWW or networks of individuals, “graph” is mainly used to analyse the mathematical representation of a network [pag. 45, @barabasi2016network].
We refer to a node by an index $i$, meaning that we allow a one-to-one correspondence between an index in $\{1, \ldots, N\}$ and a node in $V$. The set $E$ can be conceptualised through the adjacency matrix $A = (a_{ij})_{i, j=1, \ldots, N}$, whose generic element $a_{ij}$ is equivalent to $1$ – if the link between $i$ and $j$ exists – or, otherwise, to $0$.
In this paper, we examine undirected and unweighted networks, thus $a_{ij} = a_{ji}$, for each $i, j = 1, \ldots, N$. In other words, considering the previous graph in Figure \[fig:1\], the index represents the identification number of a generic user, while the adjacency matrix is a table used to gather the relations between all purchase choices expressed by users in a given moment, identifying a formal relationships between them.
In graphs, a usual measure is given by the number of relationships owned by a user. In the case of Figure \[fig:1\], user $1$ has three relationships, namely with users $2, 3$ and $4$. For a generic user $i$, such relations are expressed as a measure called [*degree*]{}, with symbol $d_i$, while the nodes linked to node $i$ are called the [*neighbour*]{} of $i$ (in symbols, $N(i)$). It is clear, that $d_i$ is an integer being zero when the user has no established relations.
All the degrees can be gathered in a vector, whose elements are ordered in a non-decreasing mode. This vector, called [*degree sequence*]{} with symbol $D_G$, is – in our example – $D_G = \{4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2\}$. On the basis of such sequence, it is possible to compute the traditional average value $\langle d\rangle$, as well as the average of the squared values $\langle d^2\rangle$, that are – in our example – respectively, $\langle d\rangle = 2.67,$ and $\langle d^2\rangle = 7.67$.
In order to study networked systems properties, it is possible to exploit a method allowing the creation of a random network by using a given degree sequence. To this end, one of the most common and used tool is the [*configuration model*]{} [@newman2018networks]. This latter, defined as a generalised random network model whit a given degree sequence, is build up by means of a simple algorithm [e.g. pag. 139, @barabasi2016network].
Configuration model can also be generated considering degree sequences stemming from a given distribution. Thanks to such feature, it is possible to generate specific networks taking into account, e.g, Poisson’s or Power-Law distributions, which are the widely used degree configurations in network science.
The purpose of the configuration model is that of leveraging some of its known properties in order to obtain general results suitable for building a new theoretical framework[^19].
Considering the configuration model properties, we therefore suppose that a platform may generate its own network (thus, the corresponding graph) starting from a database containing a given number of users (therefore, the length of the degree sequence) and their relative purchase choices (hence, the elements within the degree sequence).
In the light of such elements, we suppose that an enterprise, and in particular a platform, can always build up its own network considering consumers’ data as well as data related to items offered to them. In this regard, a network can be: (i) explicitly available, when the enterprise delivers multi-users products or services (e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and MySpace); (ii) not explicitly available, since the firm delivers single user products or services (e.g. Amazon, Last.FM, Outbrain and Color)[^20].
Among the properties offered by the configuration model, we used – for our purposes – that of the [*average degree of a neighbour*]{}, represented with symbol $k_{nn}$. For a generic node of the network, it holds that [@catanzaro2005generation]:
$$\label{neighbor}
k_{nn} = \frac{\langle d^2\rangle}{\langle d\rangle}$$
The average degree of a neighbour is widely used to study dependencies between neighbours nodes’ degrees in a network, affirming that, considering a node $i$, $k_{nn}$ is independent from the node’s degree but exclusively dependent on the global network’s characteristics $\langle d\rangle$ and $\langle d^2\rangle$. Besides being easily computable, such measures provide an overall view of the network, making $k_{nn}$ a simple and powerful global measure of it.
Generally, $k_{nn}$ turns out to be greater than the average degree of a node. As a matter fact, considering ${\langle d^2\rangle}/{\langle d\rangle} - {\langle d\rangle} = ({\langle d^2\rangle} - {\langle d\rangle}^2)/{\langle d\rangle} = \sigma^2/{\langle d\rangle} > 0$, since: (i) the variance is non-negative unless the network shows the same degree for all its nodes; (ii) $\langle d\rangle$ is greater than zero unless all the nodes have zero degree. This holds that ${\langle d^2\rangle}/{\langle d\rangle} > {\langle d\rangle}$, showing a result known as the [*friendship paradox*]{}, according to which your friends have more friends than you do [@feld1991your]. Such bias is due to an over-representation of high-degree nodes in comparison with low-degree ones during the calculation.
Please note that Formula (\[neighbor\]) refers to the general case of uncorrelated degree sequences [@barabasi2016network; @newman2018networks]. Networks generally show a degree-degree correlation which can display a positive degree correlation in the case of social networks or a negative one, for instance, in the case of networks related to technological and innovation research projects. In such context, the average degree of a neighbour of node $i$ is computed as [@pastor2001dynamical]:
$$\label{knni}
k_{nn,i} = \frac{1}{d_i}\sum_{j}d_ja_{ij}$$
A further measure can be expressed considering sets of nodes for identical degree. In this case, the average degree of a neighbour for nodes with degree equal to $k$, is defined as:
$$\label{knnd}
k_{nn}(k) = \frac{\sum_{i:d_i= d}k_{nn,i} }{\sum_{i:d_i= d}1}$$
Considering the example shown in Figure \[fig:1\], Equation \[neighbor\] brings to $k_{nn} = 2.9$, Equation \[knni\] brings to $k_{nn, 1} = 3.0$, $k_{nn, 2} = 3.0$, $k_{nn, 3} = 3.5$, $k_{nn, 4} = 2.5$, $k_{nn, 5} = 2.5$ and $k_{nn, 6} = 3.0$, while Equation \[knnd\] to $k_{nn}(2) = 3.0$ for the set of nodes of degree 2, $k_{nn}(3) = 3.0$ for the set of nodes of degree 3 and $k_{nn}(4) = 2.5$ for the set of nodes of degree 4.
$k_{nn}(k)$ nature highlights two distinctive structural network properties with reference to the presence of degree correlation. If $k_{nn}(k)$ is an increasing function of $k$, such setting identifies [*assortative mixing*]{}, showing that high-degree nodes are preferentially connected to high-degree nodes, while the low ones to low ones. On the other hand, a decreasing trend of $k_{nn}(k)$ identifies [*disassortative mixing*]{} showing nodes with high connections having neighbours with lower ones.
Neighbours’ Information patrimony {#NIP}
=================================
\[sec:cms\]
In this section, we introduce our definition of Neighbours’ Information Patrimony ($NIP$).
To this purpose, we start from the concept of “network value” which has been mostly defined on the basis of Metcalfe’s law. Comparing the weight of a single node with the entire network, our definition allows the estimation of such node’s “network share” by using information related to those nodes to which it is connected. Such approach intends to build on the fact that, generally, each node possesses data [also called [*metadata*]{}, e.g. see @Peele1602548] through which the enterprise can infer collective information about clients (e.g. geographical localisations, preferences, gender, etc.) to be used, for instance, to implement price discrimination practices.
In this regard, we propose to consider the network’s neighbourhood of a node as a proxy of the similarities among clients, as network clustering techniques do [@cerqueti2018new]. In other words, links between nodes attest a certain level of preferences and/or similar tastes, thus making it possible to extend the chain of relationship from the node’s neighbours to the “neighbours of its neighbours” (the “alters of the alters”), shifting the network share of a node from its singularity to its linked environment and, then, to the whole collective patterns of interactions.
Our model builds on the assumption that, if an enterprise intends to gather information about users with similar preferences, it may avoid burdensome techniques (such as cluster analysis or density algorithm), thanks to network properties. In the light of such properties, also knowing a single node-related information, it is possible to acquire data on the neighbour nodes, hence about users with similar characteristics.
We start from the Metcalfe’s law which affirms that the value $\mathcal{V}$ of a network $G$ is proportional to the square of the nodes’ number, i.e. $\mathcal{V} \propto n^2$ [@gilder1993metcalfe]. Stemming from the ethernet network context, the Metcalfe’s law definition, considers all nodes as mutually linked[^21]. In general terms, networks are not densely connected, hence estimating the value of a network as $n(n - 1)$ seems to be unrealistic.
In our setting, considering how available information to the enterprise (or the platform) is given by the amounts of connections set present in a network, it is reasonable to think that all users are not mutually connected, nor are items, or users’ preferences in terms of goods or services. By means of the well known “handshaking lemma” [e.g. @bollobas2013modern p. 4], we obtain that the sum of all network’s degrees is equal to twice the numbers of links, i.e. $\sum_{i \in V} d_i = 2m$. With this setting, we can assume that the object shared in the network is the information patrimony $IP$, thus gathering all the comments so far we obtain the value of $IP$ for the generic node $i$ as:
$$\label{nsi}
IP_i = \frac{d_i}{2m}$$
It is worth noting that we are reducing the market extension to its real dimension and in case of a complete network $m = n(n-1)/2$, thus the denominator of Equation (\[nsi\]) becomes again proportional to $n^2$, as postulated by the original definition of Metcalfe’s law.
Summarising, we are tailoring Metcalfe Law’s with a view to estimating the current value of a network, such as $\mathcal{V} \propto 2m$ and the value $\mathcal{V} \propto n^2$ remain still valid for a complete network.
Uncorrelated networks
---------------------
It is now possibile to introduce the collective effects of alters and we therefore define the [*Neighbours’ Information Patrimony*]{} $NIP_i$ of node $i$ as the sum of its information patrimony with the information patrimonies of all its alters, i.e. the nodes $j$ in its neighbourhood $N(i)$. In formula:
$$\label{CMS1}
NIP_i = IP_i + \sum_{j \in N(i)}IP_j = \frac{d_i}{2m} + \sum_{j \in N(i)}IP_j = \frac{d_i}{2m} + \frac{1}{2m}\sum_{j \in N(i)}d_j$$
In Equation (\[CMS1\]) we approximate the information patrimony of $N(i)$ as $\sum_{j \in N(i)}d_j \simeq d_i \cdot k_{nn}$, that is $d_i$ time the average degree of a neighbour:
$$NIP_i \simeq \frac{d_i}{2m} + \frac{d_i}{2m} k_{nn} = \frac{d_i}{2m}(1 + k_{nn})$$
Finally, using Equation (\[neighbor\]) for $k_{nn}$ we obtain:
$$\label{CMS}
NIP_i = \frac{d_i}{2m}\bigg(1 + \frac{\langle d^2\rangle}{\langle d\rangle}\bigg)$$
In Equation (\[CMS\]) we state that the neighbour information patrimony of a node $i$ is given by the value of its information patrimony, multiplied for a value which captures the level of connectedness given as an overall measure of the whole network. This represents a peculiar measure concerning the entire network $N$, defining what the information is worth within it. We call such measure $NIP_N$:
$$\label{netv}
NIP_N = \bigg(1 + \frac{\langle d^2\rangle}{\langle d\rangle}\bigg)$$
Since ${\langle d^2\rangle}/{\langle d\rangle} > 0$ and, excluding network with all nodes with the same degree, we have that $NIP_N > 1$.
Please also note that in a complete network – where all nodes are connected to one another – the number of links equals $n(n-1)/2$, and for every node we obtain that $IP_i = 1/n$, while $NIP_i = 1$. Such results mean that if each node of a network is mutually connected to the others, then it possesses the whole network information patrimony[^22].
Correlated networks
-------------------
As a general case, taking into consideration equation (\[CMS1\]) we approximate the network sharing of $N(i)$ as $\sum_{j \in N(i)}d_j \simeq d_i \cdot k_{nn, i}$, that is equal to $d_i$ time the average degree of a neighbour of node $i$. Thus, the [*Network Information Patrimony*]{} is:
$$\label{cnei}
NIP_i \simeq \frac{d_i}{2m} + \frac{d_i}{2m} k_{nn} = \frac{d_i}{2m}(1 + k_{nn, i})$$
When we move to sets of nodes for identical degree, we have to consider Equation (\[knnd\]) instead of Equation (\[neighbor\]) and Equation (\[CMS1\]) which becomes:
$$\label{cne1}
NIP_i(d) \simeq \frac{d_i}{2m} + \frac{d_i}{2m} k_{nn}(d_i) = \frac{d_i}{2m}\bigg(1 + k_{nn}(d_i)\bigg)$$
Discussion and implication of the network information patrimony
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the previous section we introduced three new measures for a given network; one referred to uncorrelated ones (Eq. \[CMS\]) and two to correlated networks (Eq. \[cnei\] and Eq. \[cne1\]). In both cases, we started from the concept of the market share of a node $i$, taking into consideration the average degree of neighbours as a proxy capable to capture the meso-scale connectiveness effects.
Considering a network, the degree correlation is a phenomenon capable to detect the tendency between nodes with similar degree to associate with each other. In a social networks environment, such tendency is called homophily or assortative mixing [@newman2018networks]. A network exhibits assortative mixing if nodes with a high number of connections tend to link with large degree nodes; on the contrary, we are in presence of disassortative mixing when nodes with high connections have neighbours with lower ones. This latter is a frequent feature in many technological networks [@newman2002assortative; @d2012robustness].
Network assortativity is computed through the Pearson correlation coefficient $r$ between two nodes connected by a link with positive $r$ with a value in the range $0 \leq r \leq 1$; while in case of network disassortativity, $r$ is negative with a value between $−1 \leq r < 0$ [@newman2003structure].
When a network is not correlated[^23], the value of $IP_N$ is just a multiplier for the market share of a node $i$, which is identical for each node. Although such element constitutes a unique measure of a network, the fact that it highlights the connectiveness’ degree is of little interest, since we are considering the centrality degree[^24] where each value is multiplied by a constant.
As soon as a network exhibits a correlation degree, both $NIP_i$ and $NIP_i(d)$ become meaningful measures. While the former captures the relationship between the degree of node $i$ and the average degree of its neighbours ($NIP_i$ is therefore a measure which magnifies – or shrinks – the information patrimony of a node $i$ on the basis of its neighbours’ quality), the latter considers the average of all nodes’ neighbours degree $d$ (it therefore measures the network effect of those nodes with a degree $d$). $NIP_i$ should be applied in order to detect network’s effect of node $i$, while $NIP_i(d)$ would capture the aggregated network effect of the $d$ degree nodes.
Since $NIP_i(d)$ is the average value of all $NIP_i$ of $d$ degree nodes, it could be of interest to explore the scattering around such average value. In such sense, a node with a $NIP_i$ below the average suggests that its neighbours’ “value” (to be considered as the amount of information that can be mined from its neighborhood) has a limited effect on its network effect. On the contrary, if $NIP_i$ is above the average value, it means that the considered node benefits from the “value” of the neighbours surrounding it. It is indeed admissible, as we will show in the next section, that a node $i$ with degree $d$ can assume values of $NIP_i$ greater than any nodes of degree $d + 1$ (or, under particular circumstances, even greater).
Such observations lead us to conclude that $NIP_i$ and $NIP_i(d)$ are second-order measures [@cerqueti2018investigating; @rotundo2014network], being strongly affected by the presence of peculiar arrangements in the neighbourhood. This represents the main difference with the classical degree centrality measure, that is a first-order measure because it is independent of the network topology.
Finally, note that the sum of all the market share $IP_i$ trivially sum to $1$, while the sum of $NIP_i$ or $NIP_i(d)$ brings to a sum greater than $1$ since we are considering the neighbourhood effects on each node.
Examples {#example}
========
We herein propose two brief examples. While the first one is based on a synthetic network, the second one considers some real instances based on the [*Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought*]{} feature of the Amazon website [@leskovec2007dynamics].
Let us consider the network as in Figure \[visualization\], which is composed of three groups of nodes (e.g. users or products) linked in order to simulate three different users’ agglomeration (e.g. a communities), in turn mutually connected among them through links. With $n= 18$ and $m = 37$, we can easily compute the network information patrimony of nodes by means of Equations \[cnei\] and \[cne1\], as shown in the right panel of Figure \[visualization\][^25].
One of the interesting results deducible from the observation of the blue curve in Figure \[visualization\], which is the $NIP_i(d)$, is that: for a fixed degree, the scattering of the different values of $NIP_i$ highlights nodes under-performing with respect to $NIP_i(d)$; while other over-perform it (e.g., for degree 3, node R is close to $NIP_i(3)$, while node Q is under-performing and H is over-performing). Note also that node H over-performs node O which has degree 4, meaning that the network patrimony derived from the node H neighbourhood has a greater “value” compared to the network patrimony of node O, and this beyond its degree.
This is a general phenomenon which brings us to formulate the following hypothesis: since nodes with higher network patrimony are connected with nodes with high degree, they benefit from a greater amount of information. In such sense, nodes with $NIP_i$ higher than expected lead us to conclude that they should be basically considered of higher interest for a recommendation system, compared to nodes with $NIP_i$ lower than expected. In other words, $NIP$ permits to discriminate users on the basis of a collective effect based on their neighbourhood.
In a second example, we consider the set of instances drawn from the Amazon web site in four different moments in $2003$. Instances are built hypothesising that a product (node) $i$ is co-purchased with product (node) $j$, then the graph contains a link from $i$ to $j$.
Table \[tab:1\] summarises basic metrics of such instances[^26], the density[^27] and the value for $\langle d\rangle$, $\langle d^2\rangle$, variance, assortativity and $NIP_N$. Since the networks are almost neutral (i.e. $r$ is close to $0$), the calculation of $NIP_N$ is correct and it can be noted how it boosts the magnitude of the information patrimony of each node, even if the network contains very few links, since the density of all instances is of the order of $10^{-5}$.
[lllllllll]{} Network & $n$ & $m$ & $\delta$ & ${\langle d\rangle}$ & ${\langle d^2\rangle}$ & $\sigma^2$ & $r$ & $NIP_N$\
amazon0302 & 262,111 & 1,234,877 & $1.79 \cdot 10^{-5}$ & 9.422 & 123.823 & 35.03 & 0.003 & 14.141\
amazon0312 & 400,727 & 3,200,440 & $1.99 \cdot 10^{-5}$ &15.973 & 505.859 & 250.71 & -0.044 & 32.670\
amazon0505 & 410,236 & 3,356,824 & $1.99 \cdot 10^{-5}$ &16.365 & 533.438 & 265.61 & -0.043 & 33.595\
amazon0601 & 403,394 & 3,387,388 & $2.08 \cdot 10^{-5}$ &16.794 & 542.731 & 260.68 & -0.043 & 33.317\
Figure \[fig:degree\] shows that [*amazon0601*]{} network instance has a degree distribution shape close to a lognormal, indicating the presence of hub nodes. In Figure \[fig:amaz\] we display the distribution of $NIP_i$ and how such values positively correlate with the node degree. Consequently, the majority of nodes with low degree values displays a low network information patrimony. In spite of this, we note a quite strong scattering of the values of $NIP_i$, as shown in the inset of Figure \[fig:amaz\], with some nodes displaying a $NIP_i$ higher than expected, and others displaying a lower one.
It is also possible to observe that within a class of nodes grouped by the same degree there are some showing different $NIPs$ and – more surprisingly – by comparing those classes, it is possible to detect how nodes with a lower degree can have a higher $NIP_i$ than those with a higher degree. In such sense, the red point in the inset in Figure \[fig:amaz\] (which corresponds to a node with degree $d = 44$ and $NIP_i = 192.61$) outperforms in terms of network patrimony, showing a $NIP_i$ greater than those of nodes with twice its degree.
Discussions and conclusions
===========================
Building on network science’s properties, networks representations can provide significant competitive advantages to those companies which are currently using data without being aware of the gains potentially stemming from an exploitation of such asset. To explain how companies could benefit from the opportunity to extract much more information than it is reasonable to imagine, we used network science and its formal structure moving from a local vision grounded on clustering and classification analysis, to a global one. Network science properties are indeed useful in order to explain complex systems dynamics, as well as to understand how information flows in a network and how much of it can be extrapolated taking into account a targeted node with respect to its neighbourhood. We therefore exploited networks properties, in order to understand how a platform may use data in order to boost its predictive capabilities in terms of individuals’ purchasing capacity and potentially consumers’ steering practices. Such advantage, exploited by platforms relying on a network, can be estimated by measuring the set of their connections as a whole – that means the links between consumers and/or items within the examined network. In this regard, availing of information on the individual consumer, network platforms can benefit from some of the properties deriving from the network configuration, extracting data on a single node (hence, on a consumer or on an item), but also capturing data stemming from its connections’ patterns.
To this end, we proposed an additional measure – further to the one related to the degree of a node – taking into account the quality of nodes’ connections and consequently of a hypothetical user in relation to its neighbourhood. We therefore exploited a well-known network science concept in order to establish a new analytical quality measure. We measured how users who might enjoy of benefits deriving from a good neighbourhood – hence of a superior connections set – may also obtain better information. In order to test the validity of our measure, we prove it on four Amazons’ benchmark instances Amazons’, providing some interesting insights for one of them in particular.
As a matter of fact, the definition of such measure could allow platforms to implement a twofold strategy. Detecting whether a node is over-performing or under-performing compared to the average degree level of its neighbours, it is possible – focusing on over-performing nodes – to offer them more precise recommendations thanks to to a more accurate inference based on their neighbourhood quality. In turns, in relation to under-performing nodes, it will be possible to exploit the recommendation systems in order to offer them goods or services so that such nodes come into contact with higher quality ones, and prompting higher quality recommendations in the future.
The limitations of such approach are mainly connected to the lack – in the present literature – of benchmark instances for empirical tests capable to demonstrate the previous mentioned hypotheses. However, preliminary results obtained provide a positive answer to our research question, and the emerged data properties, together with their envisioned impact in terms of the relevant economic phenomena, points to the suitability of conducting further research on the matter.
[^1]: In the light of the existing literature, the value of a network can be inferred from to Metcalfe’s Law [@gilder1993metcalfe] which defines the network value as proportional to the square of its size. Some other laws have been proposed: Sarnoff’s and the Reed’s laws [@reed1999sneaky] and the Odlyzko’s one [@BOT2006]. However, despite its simplicity and some of its limits [@swann2002functional; @BOT2006], Metcalfe’s law remains a reliable tool [@madureira2013empirical; @van2016testing], which has been used, for example, in order to figure out Facebook’s network value [@metcalfe2013metcalfe; @zhang2015tencent].
[^2]: A collaborative filtering algorithm implements a recommender system [@lu2012recommender] in order to offer goods or services to a user, starting from the analysis of his/her behaviours (and those of similar users), ending up with advising what the same consumer might find useful, on the basis of the expressed preferences [@Resnick1997; @sarwar2001item; @Breese2013], of the choices made by similar consumers, which allows to cluster them [@xue2005scalable]. Relying on similar form of users’ profiling techniques (such as Collaborative Filtering methods) may allow indeed an efficient matching of people and relevant purchase opportunities, [@Levin2011], although it could also bring about some distortions and disequilibria, up to market failures [@Gertz2002]. For a different take on the functioning of digital markets, see @Fuller.
[^3]: Amazon’s profiling techniques – their so called item-to-item collaborative filtering – focus is though not on grouping similar customers on the basis of their individually analysed behaviours, but rather on clustering them via the correlation of similarities between the items that they have chosen: on the basis of a user’s purchased and/or rated items, the algorithm attempts to find out similarities with items not chosen yet, then it aggregate them in order to come up with purchase recommendations [@Linden2003].
[^4]: Collaborative filtering offers consumption prediction based on the customers’ purchase history [@Linden2003].
[^5]: In this respect, it is worth recalling that the economic literature identifies three types of price discrimination: first-degree price discrimination, which occurs when a seller is a position to charge different prices for each buyer (personalised pricing); second-degree price discrimination, occurring when a consumer self-selects himself by choosing a specific package – whose per-unit price is dependent on the amount purchased – that best fits his needs (think about the Netflix package that each individual is free to choose according to his specific needs); third-degree price discrimination arising when sellers propose different prices to different socio-demographic groups [@Cabral2000; @acquisti2008identity; @Arpetti2018].
[^6]: Such goods could be perfect substitutes and an algorithm could decide to show only a part of them, proposing to the consumer the only goods that reflects the [*Willingness To Pay*]{} (WTP) identified for that profiled user.
[^7]: The two most well-known classification and clustering algorithms – used by CF – are, respectively, $k$-nearest neighbour algorithm ($k$-nn) (not to be confused with the “Nearest Neighbour Degree”, $k_{nn}$, which origins from the network science field and which we will use later in this paper) and $k$-mean clustering [@sarwar2001item; @mobasher2001improving]. While the $k$-nn algorithm proposes a classification measuring the distance between similar items or users in order to suggest which of them are closer (in terms of the already purchased item or in terms of users brought together by similar purchase histories) from the targeted user, $k$-mean algorithms are designed to cluster items (and so individuals on the basis of their choices and purchase histories when they are “user-item”), suggesting to the targeted subject those items surrounding those already purchased by him/her, thus defining the center of the temporary cluster and suggesting the closest nodes [@paterek2007improving; @katarya2016collaborative].
[^8]: Is it worth to specify that the term [*social network*]{} has a double meaning: it may refer both to a social structure where actors interact networked by means of a web platform and to the scientific discipline of measuring actor interaction on a network as a mathematical object.
[^9]: In order, of course, to suggest them to the platform’s users.
[^10]: i.e. behavioural biases to which consumers are generally subject.
[^11]: i.e. purchase and internet history, GPS data stemmed from mobile devices, etc.
[^12]: In this regard, the UK Competition and Market Authority stated that: Firms could also seek to discriminate between customers using competitive variables other than price. \[...\] The collection of consumer data may enable firms to make judgements about the lowest level of quality needed by consumers/groups of similar consumers. This may enable a firm to engage in quality discrimination where quality differences are not reflected in the prices of goods or services. Firms may do this by restricting the products that are displayed to consumers or by varying the order in which products are listed on their website to display relatively poorer or better quality products first depending on the information they collect about consumers [@CMA-CompetitionandMarketsAuthority2015 pp. 93].
[^13]: A platform should be able to estimate each consumers’ reservation price, variable that is not directly observable but just inferred from. Moreover, not all platforms avail of the means to constantly observe every move made online by each consumer, while none of them can estimate their WTP for each item. As stated by Ezrachi and Stucke in “Virtual Competition":One impediment to perfect discrimination is insufficient data. Although the algorithm has a lot more personal data that brick-and-mortar retailer of twenty years ago, the algorithm still has insufficient data for any particular customer: the customer may never have bought the item before; and the customer’s behavior may never have signaled how much or she is willing to spend to accurately predict an individual’s reservation price would require sufficient data to identify and measure each of many variables that affect the reservation price. [@Ezrachi2016 pp. 96-97].
[^14]: In order to implement a perfect price discrimination practice, it would be necessary to predict how individuals are subjected to biases and heuristics, that can change their preferences and affect their reservation prices: an algorithm whose predictions are based on preexisting reservation prices cannot ignore how such elements could change [@arrow1958utilities; @kahneman1986rational; @herbert1955behavioral; @simon1990bounded].
[^15]: An algorithm must have an adequate amount of data so that a perfect price discrimination practice can be performed. To this purpose, it is presumable that algorithms avail of the necessary data sources to infer information, hence to make predictions on individuals’ purchase preferences related to products routinely bought. However, as pointed out by Ezrachi and Stucke, the platforms do not have sufficient data about scattered purchases: when a purchase is not cyclically performed, it is more complex to elaborate forecasts on individual behaviour because of the absence of a sufficient amount of trial-and-errordata up to the point to detect every variable needed to figure up the reservation price of each individual for a corresponding good (think, for instance, about the rate at which individuals buy a PC screen [@Ezrachi2016 pp. 99]).
[^16]: In order for this to happen, segmentation strategies and individuals’ clustering practices are put in place to include each individual in a specific group of consumers who share similar preferences and price sensitivity, assuming that grouping persons with analogous tastes and purchase behaviours in small clusters allows a better approximation of their reservation prices [@Ezrachi2016a]
[^17]: Despite the fact that, the same report further explains how more complex it is to infer information about Internet users while having access to their data (such as the user’s IP address, or the kind of operating system) but without being able to define and their willingness to pay.
[^18]: To be understood as the possibility to decide what to show to individuals and guiding their choices in this sense.
[^19]: The aim of the present paper it is not to analyse the above mentioned algorithm [e.g. see @hakimi1962realizability] neither to investigate the mathematical properties allowing the graph creation from a given sequence [@EG1960].
[^20]: In such case the network can be generated exploiting analytical methodologies [@zhou2014social].
[^21]: Therefore, $n$ nodes are so connected to other $n-1$ nodes, thus the value is proportional to $n^2$
[^22]: In fact, in this case each node has degree $d_i = n -1$, then $IP_i = d_i/2m = (n-1)/n(n-1) = 1/n$, while $\langle d^2 \rangle = (n-1)^2$ and $\langle d \rangle = n-1$ thus $NIP_i = (1/n) (1 + (n-1)^2/(n-1))= 1$.
[^23]: For instance, when neutral with respect to degree correlation, it does not present assortative mixing ($r = 0$)
[^24]: The centralisation degree of a node is merely its degree, i.e. the number of links connected to it. In Social Network Analysis literature it is emphasised as a measure since is meaningful in many circumstances. For an extensive discussion on this measure and many other centrality measures please refer to @scott2011sage or @newman2018networks.
[^25]: For the sake of completeness, the computational complexity of our measures depend from the calculation of $k_{nn}$, which correspond to a product of a square matrix of size $n$ for a vector of size $n$. It is well known that this calculation is polynomial in the size of the matrix, i.e., it is an $O(n^2)$.
[^26]: The data processing, the network analysis and all simulations are conducted using the software R [@team2013r] with the igraph package [@csardi2006igraph].
[^27]: The density of a network is defined as the number of its actual links divided by the number of potential links which is $n(n-1)/2$. It can assume value from $0$ (empty network) to $1$ (complete network).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present a fractional quantization in a two dimensional space. The angular momenta of the two dimensional electrons are quantized in fractional numbers by the boundary conditions on a multi-layered Riemann surface. Extended wave functions for the incompressible quantum fluid states are presented and the cohesive and the excitation energies are given.'
address: 'Department of Physics, Kyungpook National University, Taegu, 702-701 Korea'
author:
- Hyeong Rag Lee
title: Fractional Quantization and Fractional Quantum Hall Effect
---
PACS numbers: 73.40.Hm, 71.10.Pm, 05.30.-d
Since the experimental observation of the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect(FOHE)\[1\] there have been a variety of theoretical approaches as well as experimental works\[2,3\] to understand it. This remarkable phenomenon occurs when a two dimensional electron system is under a strong magnetic field in the quantum limit $\omega_c \tau >> 1$ where $\omega_c = \frac {eB_0}{m_e c}$ is the cyclotron frequency and $\tau$ is the electronic scattering time. Hall conductance shows plateaus at certain values of the rational filling factor $\nu = \frac{n}{m}$\[2,3\], where n and m are integers with m being odd, i. e. $\sigma_{xy} = \frac {\nu e^2}{h}$. The filling factors for $\nu = \frac {1}{m}$ are associated with the formation of a uniform incompressible quantum fluid state so called Laughlin liquid\[4\]. The quasi-particles of charge $\frac{e}{m}$ are responsible for the formation of such liquid. The hierarchy states for the general fillings are proposed with the scheme of the quasi-particles\[5\] and the composite fermion approach\[6\] long time ago. However, the ground states and the excited states for the general fillings are not clear yet. In this paper, we provide the ground state wave functions for an arbitrary filling($\nu = \frac{n}{m}$) and the excited states associated with the fractionally charged quasi-particles $\frac{e}{m}$ on a Riemann surface .
It is clear that the statistics in two dimensional space is different from those in three dimensions, because the former space is represented by the Braid group\[7\] while the latter is represented by the permutation group\[8\]. The permutation group allows only two possible statistics bosonic and fermionic statistics. However fractional statistics\[5,6,9,10\] is allowed in the context of the Braid group representation. The basic generator of the Braid group is the exchange of two particles in the configuration space. Consequently, if we consider the interchange of the positions of two identical particles in two dimensions, the wave function obtains a phase factor, $$\Psi \left( z_2, z_1 \right) = e^{i \theta} \Psi \left( z_1, ~z_2 \right).$$ Here $\frac {\theta}{\pi}$ can be any real number. (i) When $\frac {\theta}{\pi}$ is an even integer or 0, the particles are bosons. (ii) When $\frac {\theta}{\pi}$ is an odd integer, the particles are fermions. (iii) For other $\frac {\theta}{\pi}$ real numbers, the particles are called anyons\[10\]. When $\frac {\theta}{\pi} = \frac {m}{n}$, where m and n are arbitrary integers, the particles are quantized in fractional numbers by the following arguments. Wave functions for the fractional angular momenta are multi-valued functions of the positions in the multiply connected fundamental space except for the branch points which are located at 0 and $\infty$. A Riemann surface for the fractional quantization is obtained by replacing the two dimensional plane with a surface made up of n sheets $R_0 , R_1 , \cdots , R_n$, each cut along the positive real axis with the common origin. The lower edge of the slit in the first sheet is joined to the upper edge of the slit in the second sheet with the exchange of two branch points(0, $\infty$), which flips the second sheet and makes the rotation in the same direction. The lower edge of the slit in the second sheet is joined to the upper edge of the slit in the third sheet in the same manner and so on until the last sheet. By joining the upper edge of the slit in the last sheet to the lower edge of the slit in the first sheet with the exchange of two branch points, we can construct an extended Riemann surface which is closed and simply connected. The geometric device for n=3 is shown in figure 1. The wave function is a continuous single-valued function of complex variables on the extended Riemann surface with $\theta = [0, 2n \pi]$. If we continuously interchange the positions of two particles 2n times in the same direction, which corresponds to winding n times of particle 1 around particle 2, the wave function will change by a complex phase factor $e^{\theta(2n \pi)} = e^{2m \pi} = 1$. By the boundary condition of joining the wave smoothly on itself after the interchange of the particles 2n times the wave function is quantized on the extended Riemann surface. The angular momentum is quantized in integral numbers m on the n layered Riemann surface, which is associated with the fractional angular momentum $\frac {m}{n}$ in the projected two dimensional space. In the case after particle 1 interchanges n times with particle 2 in the same sense, so that 1 ends where 2 began and vice versa, the phase change $e^{\theta (n \pi)} = e^{m \pi}$. For an odd integral m, the particles are fermions.
We consider the electrons confined to the x-y plane under a transverse magnetic field $B_0 \hat z$. Ignoring the electron-electron interaction, two electron Hamiltonian is given by $$H = \sum_{j=1}^{2} \frac{1}{2m_e} |\frac{\hbar}{i} \nabla_j - \frac{e}{c} {\bf A}_j|^2,$$ where ${\bf A} = \frac{1}{2} B_0 (y \hat x -x \hat y )$ is the symmetric gauge vector potential. This problem separates into the center of mass coordinates and the relative coordinates given by, $$Z = \frac {(z_1 + z_2 )}{\sqrt 2}, z = \frac {(z_1 - z_2 )}{\sqrt 2},$$ where $z_j = x_j - i y_j$ is a complex number locating the j-th electron. The center of mass motion is trivial and quantized in the ordinary Landau levels with the Hamiltonian of the form $$H_{cm} = \frac{1}{2m_e} | \frac{\hbar}{i} \nabla -\frac{e}{c} {\bf A}|^2,$$ where the mass is $m_e$ at the center of mass in this transformation. The Hamiltonian for the relative motion is given as $$H_{rel} = \frac{1}{2m_e} | \frac{\hbar}{i} \nabla -\frac{e}{c} {\bf A}|^2,$$ in two dimensional configuration space. Using the dimensionless units \[energy in units of cyclotron energy $\hbar \omega_c = \hbar \frac{eB_0}{m_e c}$, length in units of magnetic length $a_0 = \left( \frac{\hbar}{m_e \omega_c} \right)^{1/2}$\], we obtain $$\frac{H_{rel}}{\hbar\omega_c} = -\frac{1}{2}\nabla^2 + \frac{i}{2}
\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta} + \frac{1}{8}\rho^2,$$ where $\rho = (x^2 + y^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}$. For the internal motion, as discussed earlier of this paper, fractional quantization $\frac{\theta}{\pi} = \frac{m}{n}$ is allowed in a two dimensional space. The magnetic flux seen by an electron is $e\oint {\bf A} \cdot d {\bf r}$ in the two dimensional configuration space. To achieve the same magnetic flux on an n layered Riemann surface the electron separates into n quasi-particles of the reduced charge $e^* = \frac{e}{n}$ and the reduced mass $m_e^* =\frac{m_e}{n}$ in each plane. The n quasi-particles in each layer are sticked together with the common origin by the property of the Rieman surface. Therefore the effective Hamiltonian for the relative coordinate is written by $$H_{rel}^{eff} = \frac {1}{m_e^*} | \frac{\hbar}{i} \nabla - \frac{e^*}{c} {\bf A} |^2,$$ on the Riemann surface. We adopt energy and length scales in which the cyclotron energy $$\hbar \omega_c = \hbar \frac{e^* B_0}{m_e^* c} = \hbar \frac{eB_0}{m_e c},$$ and the magnetic length $$a_n = \left( \frac{\hbar}{m_e^* \omega_c} \right)^{1/2} = \sqrt n a_0.$$ In dimensionless units \[energy in units of the same cyclotron energy $\hbar \omega_c$, length in units of magnetic length $a_n$\], the effective Hamiltonian is transformed into $$\frac{H_{rel}^{eff}}{\hbar\omega_c} = -\frac{1}{2}\nabla^2 + \frac{i}{2}
\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta} + \frac{1}{8}\rho^2,$$ which has exactly the same form as given in eq. (6). Here the angle $\theta$ can vary from 0 to $2n\pi$ on the Riemann surface of n sheets. The Landau level wave functions are polynomials in $\rho$ times a Gaussian function. We are therefore led to try a power series in $\rho$ times a Gaussian function as the solution. The requirement that the power series must terminate gives the following energy eigenvalues: $$E_{rel} = \hbar\omega_c \left( n_{rel} + \frac{1}{2}|l_{rel}| + \frac{1}{2}l_{rel}
+\frac{1}{2} \right),$$ where $n_{rel}$ is positive integer and $l_{rel}$ is the angular momentum of the quasi-particles. The angular momentum $l_{rel}$ of a quasi-particle has a fractional value $\frac{m}{n}$ in each layer, that is, each quasi-particle is quantized in fractional numbers with $\theta=[0, 2\pi]$. The angular momentum for the n degenerate quasi-particles which are sticked together on the Riemann surface will be $m$ in the expanded space of $\theta=[0, 2n\pi]$. The value of $m$ is even integral for a symmetric state and odd integral for an antisymmetric state. Therefore, the eigen energy spectrum represents just the ordinary Landau levels. If we consider the lowest Landau level, the eigen state for the internal motion can be obtained as $$\phi_{\frac{m}{n}} = \frac{1}{[2n\pi 2^{\frac{m}{n}} \Gamma(\frac{m}{n})]^{1/2}} z^{\frac{m}{n}} e^{-\frac{1}{4}|z|^2},$$ where the value of n in the normalization constant is due to the expansion of the angle $\theta$ from $[0,2\pi]$ to $[0,2n\pi]$ on the Rieman surface. The cyclotron motion in the relative coordinates has a fractional angular momentum $\frac{m}{n}$ about the origin in two dimensional space. These states (with many different values of m and n) are constructed from the statistics of the identical particles in two space dimensions and can not be derivable from any single particle state. These many particle states can now be utilized in two dimensional systems with a proper thermodynamic limit. For the fractional quantum Hall effect at a filling less than one, the wave function for the relative motion should be antisymmetric and m becomes odd integral in this case.
The model Hamiltonian for the N electrons confined in two dimensions under a transverse magnetic field can be written $$H = \sum_{j=1}^{N} \frac{1}{2m_e} |\frac{\hbar}{i} \nabla_j - \frac{e}{c} {\bf A}_j|^2
+ \sum _{j<k} V_{e-e}(|{\bf r}_j - {\bf r}_k|) + \sum_j V_{b-e}({\bf r}_j),$$ where $V_{e-e}$ is the Coulomb repulsion between electrons and $V_{b-e}$ is the one body background potential due to a uniform density of positive charge. In the limit of high magnetic field, the electrons are at the lowest Landau level. As a result, the first term is simply a constant. For a short range interaction (shorter than $r^{-2}$ as $r\rightarrow \infty$), the background potential is simply a constant, except close to the edges of the sample\[11\]. Fractional qunatum Hall states arise from a condensation of the two dimensional electrons into a collective state, i.e., incompressible quantum fluid state, as a result of repulsive interelectron interactions\[4\].
We can thus construct the extended wave functions for the incompressible quantum fluid of the form\[4\] $$\Psi_\mu (z_1 , \cdots ,z_N ) = \prod_{j>k}^N (z_j - z_k )^\mu exp \left( - \frac{1}{4}
\sum_l | z_l| ^2 \right),$$ where $\mu = \frac{m}{n}$. The states $\Psi_\mu$ are translationally invariant and eigenstates of total angular momentum. Since the total angular momentum $M$ is a good quantum number in the projected two dimensional configuration space, we use the conventional definition of the filling factor $\nu=N(N-1)/2M$. Therefore, the wave functions $\Psi_\mu$ represent the hierarchy states for the general filling factor $\nu = \frac{n}{m}$ in FQHE. The electronic charges separate into the n degenerate layers of the Rieman surface. In each layer the quasi-particles of fundamental charge $\frac{e}{m}$ condensate into the Laughlin states. If n such degenrate layers are projected to the two dimensional space, the composite particles of charge $\frac{n}{m}e$ condensate into the incompressible quantum fluid states with a filling factor $\frac{n}{m}$. This description for the composite particle is the same as the degenerate Landau levels for the quasi-particles in the composite fermion theory propoesd by Jain\[6\]. For n = 1, we can recover Laughlin’s results of filling factor $\frac{1}{m}$.
The ground state energy of $\Psi_\mu$ can be obtained by the ordinary hypernetted chain approximation\[3,4\] $$U_{total} \left( \frac{m}{n} \right) = \frac{0.814}{\sqrt{m}} \left[\frac{0.230}{(m/n)^{0.64}}
-1 \right] \frac{e^2}{a_0}$$.$$ The cohesive energy of the incompressible quantum fluid decreases as m increases. For the given m, the cohesive energy decreases as n increases: the factor $n^{0.64}$ in the first term of (15) reflects the larger magnetic length for the quasi-particles in n-layered structure.
We define the elementary excitations of $\Psi_\mu$ as $$\Psi_\mu^{(z_0 )} = \prod_i^N (z_i - z_0 )^{\frac{1}{n}} \Psi_\mu.$$ Writing $|\Psi_\mu ^{(z_0 )}|^2 = e^{-H_\mu (Z_0 )}$, $$H_\mu (z_0 ) = -2 \mu \sum_{j<k}^N ln | z_j - z_k | + \frac{1}{2} \sum_l | z_l |^2 +
\frac{2}{n} \sum_i ln | z_i - z_0 |.$$ The elementary excitations of $\Psi_\mu$ are particles of charge $\frac{1}{m}$ by the Berry phase calculation\[12\]. We can calculate the excitation energy to make the quasihole using the two-component hypernetted chain approximation\[3,4\]. The results for $\left( \frac{n}{m} \right)$ $= \left( \frac{1}{3}, \frac{2}{3} \right)$; $( \frac{1}{5}$, $\frac{2}{5}, \frac{3}{5}$, $\frac{4}{5} )$; and $( \frac{1}{7}, \frac{2}{7}$, $\frac{3}{7}, \frac{4}{7}, \frac{5}{7}$, $\frac{6}{7} )$ are $(0.0095, 0.0079) \frac{e^2}{a_0}$, $( 0.0018, 0.0015, 0.0013$, $0.0012) \frac{e^2}{a_0}$ and $( 0.00059, 0.00050, 0.00045$, $0.00041, 0.00038$, $0.00037) \frac{e^2}{a_0}$ respectively\[13\]. These results are close to the experimental results observed\[14\].
In conclusion, the angular momenta of the two dimensional electrons are quantized in fractional numbers on a multi-layered Riemann surface. The incompressible quantum fluid of the filling factor $\nu = \frac{n}{m}$ is related with these fractional quantum numbers. The cohesive energy of the two dimensional electron system is reduced by the expansion of the inter-electronic distance on a multi-layered Riemann surface. The effect of disorder\[15\] in the system is also reduced on the multi-layered Riemann surface. As a result, Hall plateau is observed for bigger values of n as m becomes large in the experiment. We believe the Hall plateau can be observed for smaller values of n with the same m observed in the experiment if the sample is cleaned to a disorder free system.
This research is partially supported by the Korea Ministry of Education (BSRI 97-2404) at Kyungpook National University.
Electronic Address: [email protected]
D. C. Tsui, H. L. Stormer, and A. C. Gossard, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**48**]{}, 1559 (1982) , edited by R. E. Prange and S. M. Girvin (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990), and references therein. For the latest review see: T. Chakraborty and P. Pietilainen, [ *The Quantum Hall Effects : Fractional and Integral*]{}, 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995), and references therein. R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**50**]{}, 1395 (1983); R. B. Laughlin, Surf. Sci. [**142**]{}, 163 (1984) F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**51**]{}, 605(1983); B. I. Halperin, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**52**]{}, 1583(1984); J. K. Jain, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**63**]{}, 199(1989); J. K. Jain, Phys. Rev. B [**41**]{}, 7653(1990) Cf. J. Birman, [*Braids, Links, and Mapping Class Groups*]{}, Annals of Math. Studies 82 (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1973) H. C. Lee, M. L. Ge, and M. Couture, Int. Jour. Mod. Phys. [**A4**]{}, 2333 (1989); J. M. Leinaas, and J. Myrheim, Nuo. Cim. [**37B**]{}, 1 (1997) See Sect. 6.7 in Ref. 3 and references therein. F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**49**]{}, 957(1982) S. A. Trugman and S. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. B [**31**]{}, 5280(1985) D. Arovas, J. R. Schrieffer, F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**53**]{}, 722(1984) In the two-component hypernetted chain approximation the quasihole density is not properly given in Refs. 3 and 4. Since the elementary excitation of charge $\frac{e}{m}$ occupies the same area of an electron, the density of a quasihole $\frac{e}{m}$ is reduced by a factor $\frac{1}{m}$ compared to the electron density. See Sect. 6.6 in Ref. 3. and references therein. A. Gold, Europhys. Lett. [**1**]{}, 241, 479(E), (1986); R. B. Laughlin, M. L. Cohen, J. M. Kosterlitz, H. Levine, S. B. Libby, A. M. M. Pruisken, Phys. Rev. [ **B32**]{}, 1311 (1985); R. B. Laughlin, Surf. Sci. [**170**]{}, 167 (1986)
Figure Caption
Fig. 1.
: Fig. (1). Geometry of three layered Riemann surface.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'Matthew T. Hale and Magnus Egerstedt$^\dag$ [^1]'
bibliography:
- 'sources.bib'
title: '**Convergence Rate Estimates for Consensus over Random Graphs** '
---
=1
[^1]: $^\dag$School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA. Email: `{matthale, magnus}@gatech.edu`.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
Jonathan L. Feng\
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA
---
\[1996/06/01\]
Non-WIMP Candidates$^\dagger$
=============================
Motivations
-----------
There are many non-WIMP dark matter candidates. Two prominent and highly motivated examples are axions and sterile neutrinos, which are reviewed in Chapters 11 and 12, respectively. In addition, there are candidates motivated by minimality, particles motivated by experimental anomalies, and exotic possibilities motivated primarily by the desire of their inventors to highlight how truly ignorant we are about the nature of dark matter.
In this brief Chapter, we focus on dark matter candidates that are not WIMPs, but which nevertheless share the most important virtues of WIMPs. As discussed in Chapters 7, 8, and 9, WIMPs have several nice properties:
- They exist in well-motivated particle theories.
- They are naturally produced with the correct thermal relic density (the “WIMP miracle”).
- They predict signals that may be seen in current and near future experiments.
The candidates we discuss also have all three of these properties. They fall naturally into two classes: superWIMP candidates, which inherit the correct relic density through decays, and WIMPless candidates, which have neither weak-scale masses nor weak interactions, but which nevertheless have the correct thermal relic density. These possibilities appear in the same particle physics frameworks as WIMPs, but they imply very different cosmological histories for our Universe, as well as qualitatively new dark matter signals for both astrophysical observatories and particle physics experiments.
SuperWIMP Dark Matter
---------------------
### Candidates and Relic Densities
In the superWIMP framework for dark matter, WIMPs freeze out as usual in the early Universe, but later decay to superWIMPs, superweakly-interacting massive particles that form the dark matter that exists today. Because superWIMPs are very weakly-interacting, they have no impact on WIMP freeze out in the early universe, and the WIMPs decouple, as usual, with a thermal relic density $\Omega_{{{\rm WIMP}}}$ that is naturally near the required density $\Omega_{{{\rm DM}}} \approx 0.23$. Assuming that each WIMP decay produces one superWIMP, the relic density of superWIMPs is $$\Omega_{{{\rm SWIMP}}} = \frac{m_{{{\rm SWIMP}}}}{m_{{{\rm WIMP}}}}
\Omega_{{{\rm WIMP}}} \ .$$ SuperWIMPs therefore inherit their relic density from WIMPs, and for $m_{{{\rm SWIMP}}} \sim m_{{{\rm WIMP}}}$, they are also naturally produced in the desired amount to be much or all of dark matter. The evolution of number densities is shown in [Fig. \[fig:freezeout\_swimp\]]{}.
The superWIMP scenario is realized in many particle physics models. The prototypical example is gravitinos, which exist in all supersymmetric theories [@Feng:2003xh; @Feng:2003uy; @Feng:2003nr; @Ellis:2003dn; @Buchmuller:2004rq; @Wang:2004ib; @Feng:2004zu; @Feng:2004mt; @Feng:2004gn; @Ellis:2004bx; @Roszkowski:2004jd]. In the simplest supersymmetric models, supersymmetry is transmitted to standard model superpartners through gravitational interactions, and supersymmetry is broken at a high scale. The mass of the gravitino ${\tilde{G}}$ is $$m_{{\tilde{G}}} = \frac{F}{\sqrt{3} {M_{*}}} \ ,
\label{gravitinomass}$$ and the masses of standard model superpartners are $$\tilde{m} \sim \frac{F}{{M_{*}}} \ ,
\label{tildem}$$ where ${M_{*}}= (8 \pi G_N)^{-1/2} \simeq 2.4 \times 10^{18}~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$ is the reduced Planck scale and $F \sim (10^{11}~{\,\mbox{GeV}})^2$ is the supersymmetry-breaking scale squared. The precise ordering of masses depends on unknown, presumably ${\cal O}(1)$, constants in [Eq. (\[tildem\])]{}. It is, then, perfectly possible that the gravitino is the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) and a candidate for superWIMP dark matter. The role of the decaying WIMP is played by the next-to-lightest supersymmetric particle (NLSP), typically a slepton, sneutrino, or neutralino. As required, the gravitino couples very weakly, with interactions suppressed by ${M_{*}}$, and so it is irrelevant during the WIMP’s thermal freeze out.
The gravitino superWIMP scenario differs markedly from other gravitino dark matter scenarios. In previous frameworks [@Pagels:1981ke; @Weinberg:1982zq; @Krauss:1983ik; @Nanopoulos:1983up; @Khlopov:1984pf; @Ellis:1984eq; @Ellis:1984er; @Juszkiewicz:1985gg; @Ellis:1990nb; @Moroi:1993mb; @Bolz:2000fu], gravitinos were expected to be produced either thermally, with $\Omega_{{\tilde{G}}} \sim 0.1$ obtained by requiring ${m_{{\tilde{G}}}}\sim
{\,\mbox{keV}}$, or through reheating, with $\Omega_{{\tilde{G}}} \sim 0.1$ obtained by tuning the reheat temperature to $T_{{{\rm RH}}} \sim
10^{10}~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$. In the superWIMP scenario, the desired amount of dark matter is obtained without relying on the introduction of new, fine-tuned energy scales.
Other examples of superWIMPs include Kaluza-Klein gravitons in scenarios with universal extra dimensions [@Feng:2003xh; @Feng:2003uy; @Feng:2003nr], axinos [@Rajagopal:1990yx; @Covi:1999ty; @Covi:2001nw] and quintessinos [@Bi:2003qa; @Bi:2004ys] in supersymmetric theories, and many other scenarios in which a metastable particle decays to the true dark matter particle through highly suppressed interactions, with lifetimes ranging from fractions of a second to beyond the age of the Universe.
### Astrophysical Signals
Because superWIMPs are very weakly interacting, they are impossible to detect in conventional direct and indirect dark matter search experiments. At the same time, the extraordinarily weak couplings of superWIMPs imply that the decays of WIMPs to superWIMPs may be very late and have an observable impact on, for example, Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), the Planckian spectrum of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), small scale structure, the diffuse photon flux, and cosmic ray experiments.
In the prototypical case of a slepton decaying to a gravitino superWIMP, the decay width is $$\Gamma(\tilde{l} \to l \tilde{G}) =\frac{1}{48\pi {M_{*}}^2}
\frac{m_{\tilde{l}}^5}{m_{\tilde{G}}^2}
\left[1 -\frac{m_{\tilde{G}}^2}{m_{\tilde{l}}^2} \right]^4 \ ,
\label{sfermionwidth}$$ assuming the lepton mass is negligible. This decay width depends on only the slepton mass, the gravitino mass, and the Planck mass. For ${m_{{\tilde{G}}}}/ m_{\tilde{l}} \approx 1$, the slepton decay lifetime is $$\begin{aligned}
\tau(\tilde{l} \to l \tilde{G})
\simeq 3.6\times 10^8~{{{\rm s}}}\left[\frac{100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}}{m_{\tilde{l}} - m_{{\tilde{G}}}}\right]^4
\left[\frac{m_{\tilde{G}}}{{\,\mbox{TeV}}}\right]\ .
\label{decaylifetime}\end{aligned}$$ This expression is valid only when the gravitino and slepton are nearly degenerate, but usefully illustrates that decay lifetimes of the order of days or months are perfectly natural. Similar expressions hold for the decay of a neutralino NLSP to a gravitino.
#### BBN and CMB
Signals in BBN and the CMB are determined primarily by the WIMP lifetime and the energy released in visible decay products when the WIMP decays. This energy release destroys and creates light elements, distorting the predictions of standard BBN. In addition, the injection of electromagnetic energy may also distort the frequency dependence of the CMB away from its ideal black body spectrum. For the decay times of interest with redshifts $z \sim 10^5$ to $10^7$, the resulting photons interact efficiently through $\gamma e^- \to
\gamma e^-$ and $e X \to e X \gamma$, where $X$ is an ion, but photon number is conserved, since double Compton scattering $\gamma e^- \to
\gamma \gamma e^-$ is inefficient. The spectrum therefore relaxes to statistical but not thermodynamic equilibrium, resulting in a Bose-Einstein distribution function $$f_{\gamma}(E) = \frac{1}{e^{E/(kT) + \mu} - 1} \ ,$$ with chemical potential $\mu \ne 0$.
The energy release is conveniently expressed in terms of $$\begin{aligned}
\xi_{{{\rm EM}}} \equiv \epsilon_{{{\rm EM}}} B_{{{\rm EM}}}
Y_{{{\rm NLSP}}}
\label{eq:xi_EM}\end{aligned}$$ for electromagnetic energy, with a similar expression for hadronic energy. Here $\epsilon_{{{\rm EM}}}$ is the initial EM energy released in NLSP decay, and $B_{{{\rm EM}}}$ is the branching fraction of NLSP decay into EM components. $Y_{{{\rm NLSP}}} \equiv
n_{{{\rm NLSP}}}/n_{\gamma}$ is the NLSP number density just before NLSP decay, normalized to the background photon number density $n_{\gamma} = 2 \zeta(3) T^3 / \pi^2$. It can be expressed in terms of the superWIMP abundance: $$Y_{{{\rm NLSP}}}\simeq 3.0 \times 10^{-12}
\left[\frac{{\,\mbox{TeV}}}{m_{{\tilde{G}}}}\right]
\left[\frac{\Omega_{{\tilde{G}}}}{0.23}\right] \ .
\label{eq:def_Y}$$ Once an NLSP candidate is specified, and assuming superWIMPs make up all of the dark matter, with $\Omega_{{\tilde{G}}} = \Omega_{{{\rm DM}}}
= 0.23$, both the lifetime and energy release are determined by only two parameters: $m_{{\tilde{G}}}$ and $m_{{{{\rm NLSP}}}}$. The results for slepton and neutralino NLSPs are given in [Fig. \[fig:prediction\]]{}.
![Predicted values of WIMP lifetime $\tau$ and electromagnetic energy release ${\zeta_{{{\rm EM}}}}\equiv {\varepsilon_{{{\rm EM}}}}{Y_{{{{\rm WIMP}}}}}$ in the ${\tilde{B}}$ (left) and ${\tilde{\tau}}$ (right) NLSP scenarios for ${m_{{{{\rm SWIMP}}}}}= 1~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $10~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, …, $100~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$ (top to bottom) and $\Delta m \equiv {m_{{{{\rm WIMP}}}}}-
{m_{{{{\rm SWIMP}}}}}= 1~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$, $100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, …, $100~{\,\mbox{MeV}}$ (left to right). For the ${\tilde{\tau}}$ NLSP scenario, we assume ${\varepsilon_{{{\rm EM}}}}= \frac{1}{2}
E_{\tau}$. From Ref. [@Feng:2003uy]. \[fig:prediction\] ](prediction.eps){width="10cm"}
In [Fig. \[fig:mu\]]{}, these predictions are compared with BBN and CMB constraints. The shaded regions are excluded by an analysis of BBN constraints on EM energy release [@Cyburt:2002uv]. This analysis has been strengthened by including hadronic constraints and updated and refined in many ways in recent years, as described in Chapter 28. Although the excluded region has shifted around, the basic features remain: some of the gravitino superWIMP parameter space is excluded, and some remains. In addition, late decays to superWIMPs may in fact improve the current disagreement of standard BBN predictions with the observed $^7$Li and $^6$Li abundances [@Cumberbatch:2007me; @Bailly:2008yy].
![The grid gives predicted values of WIMP lifetime $\tau$ and electromagnetic energy release ${\zeta_{{{\rm EM}}}}\equiv {\varepsilon_{{{\rm EM}}}}{Y_{{{{\rm WIMP}}}}}$ in the ${\tilde{B}}$ (left) and ${\tilde{\tau}}$ (right) WIMP scenarios for ${m_{{{{\rm SWIMP}}}}}=
100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $300~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $500~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $1~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$, and $3~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$ (top to bottom) and $\Delta m \equiv {m_{{{{\rm WIMP}}}}}- {m_{{{{\rm SWIMP}}}}}= 600~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $400~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, $200~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, and $100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$ (left to right). For the ${\tilde{\tau}}$ WIMP scenario, we assume ${\varepsilon_{{{\rm EM}}}}= \frac{1}{2} E_{\tau}$. The shaded regions are excluded in one analysis of BBN constraints [@Cyburt:2002uv]; the circle gives a region in which $^7$Li is reduced to observed levels. The contours are for $\mu$, which parameterizes the distortion of the CMB from a Planckian spectrum. From Ref. [@Feng:2003uy]. \[fig:mu\] ](mu.eps){width="10cm"}
Figure \[fig:mu\] also includes contours of the chemical potential $\mu$, as determined by updating the analysis of Ref. [@Hu:1993gc]. The current bound is $\mu < 9\times
10^{-5}$ [@Fixsen:1996nj; @Eidelman:2004wy]. Although there are at present no indications of deviations from black body, current limits are already sensitive to the superWIMP scenario, and future improvements will further probe superWIMP parameter space.
#### Small Scale Structure
In contrast to WIMPs, superWIMPs are produced with large velocities at late times. This has two effects. First, the velocity dispersion reduces the phase space density, smoothing out cusps in DM halos. Second, such particles damp the linear power spectrum, reducing power on small scales [@Cembranos:2005us; @Kaplinghat:2005sy; @Borzumati:2008zz].
Depending on the particular decay time and decay kinematics, superWIMPs may be cold or warm. As seen in [Fig. \[fig:small\_scale\]]{}, superWIMPs may suppress small scale structure as effectively as a 1 keV sterile neutrino. Some superWIMP scenarios may therefore been differentiated from standard cold DM scenarios by studies of halo profiles, and may even be favored by indications that cold DM predicts halos that are too cuspy, as discussed in Chapter 3.
![The power spectrum for scenarios in which dark matter is completely composed of WIMPs (solid), half WIMPs and half superWIMPs (dashed), and completely composed of superWIMPs (dotted). For comparison, the this solid curve is the transfer function for a 1 keV warm DM model. From Ref. [@Kaplinghat:2005sy]. \[fig:small\_scale\] ](small_scale.eps){width="8cm"}
### Astroparticle and Collider Signals
The possibility of long-lived charged particles in superWIMP scenarios also has many implications for astroparticle and particle physics experiments.
#### Cosmic Rays
In superWIMP (and other similar) scenarios, long-lived charged particles may be produced by cosmic rays, resulting in exotic signals in cosmic ray and cosmic neutrino experiments [@Albuquerque:2003mi; @Bi:2004ys; @Albuquerque:2006am; @Ahlers:2006pf; @Ando:2007ds; @Albuquerque:2008zs; @Canadas:2008ey]. As an example, ultra-high energy neutrinos may produce events with two long-lived sleptons through $\nu q \to
\tilde{l} \tilde{q}'$ followed by the decay $\tilde{q}' \to
\tilde{l}$. The sleptons are metastable and propagate to neutrino telescopes [@Huang:2006ie], where they have a typical transverse separation of hundreds of meters. They may therefore be detected above background as events with two upward-going, extremely high energy charged tracks in experiments such as IceCube.
#### Colliders {#sec:colliders}
As evident in [Eq. (\[decaylifetime\])]{}, in supersymmetric superWIMP scenarios, the NLSP decays to the gravitino with lifetimes that may be of the order of seconds to months. Such particles are effectively stable in collider experiments, and this scenario therefore implies that each supersymmetric event will be characterized not by missing energy, but by two charged, heavy metastable particles. This is a spectacular signal that will be cannot escape notice at the LHC [@Drees:1990yw; @Goity:1993ih; @Nisati:1997gb; @Feng:1997zr; @Feng:2005gj]. In addition, given the possibility of long lifetimes, it suggests that decays to gravitinos may be observed by capturing slepton NLSPs and detecting their decays.
The sleptons may be captured in water tanks placed outside collider detectors [@Feng:2004yi], in the detectors themselves [@Hamaguchi:2004df], or by mining LHC cavern walls for sleptons [@DeRoeck:2005bw]. In the first case, shown in [Fig. \[fig:trap\_diagram\]]{}, the water tanks may be drained periodically to underground reservoirs where slepton decays may be observed in quiet environments. As many as $10^4$ sleptons per year may be stopped in 1 meter thick water tanks, opening up the possibility of a precise measurement of slepton lifetime and the first study of a gravitational process at high energy colliders, along with many other implications [@Feng:2004gn].
{width="7cm"}
WIMPless Dark Matter
--------------------
### Candidates and Relic Densities
Under general conditions, the thermal relic density of a particle $X$ is [@Zeldovich:1965; @Chiu:1966kg; @Steigman:1979kw; @Scherrer:1985zt] $$\Omega_X \propto {1\over \langle \sigma v \rangle}
\sim \frac{m_X^2}{g_X^4} \ ,
\label{omega}$$ where $\langle \sigma v \rangle$ is its thermally-averaged annihilation cross section, and $m_X$ and $g_X$ are the characteristic mass scale and coupling entering this cross section. The last step follows from dimensional analysis. The WIMP miracle is the statement that, for $m_X \sim {m_{\rm weak}}\sim 100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}- 1~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$ and $g_X \sim
{g_{\rm weak}}\simeq 0.65$, $\Omega_X$ is roughly $\Omega_{{{\rm DM}}} \approx
0.23$.
Equation (\[omega\]) makes clear, however, that the thermal relic density fixes only one combination of the dark matter’s mass and coupling, and other combinations of $(m_X, g_X)$ can also give the correct $\Omega_X$. WIMPless models [@Feng:2008ya] are those in which the correct thermal relic density is achieved with parameters $(m_X, g_X) \ne ({m_{\rm weak}}, {g_{\rm weak}})$.
Because WIMPless dark matter does not have weak interactions, and existing constraints effectively exclude electromagnetic and strong interactions, WIMPless dark matter is necessarily hidden dark matter, that is, dark matter that has no standard model gauge interactions. Hidden sectors have a long history, and hidden sector dark matter has been discussed for decades, beginning with work on mirror matter and related ideas. For a general discussion and references, see Chapter 9. Here we note only that, counter to conventional wisdom, existing constraints place only weak bounds on hidden sectors. For example, light degrees of freedom change the expansion rate of the Universe and thereby impact BBN. The constraint from BBN is highly sensitive to the temperature of the hidden sector, however. Current bounds from BBN on the number of light and heavy degrees of freedom are given in [Fig. \[fig:gstarlog\]]{}. For hidden sector temperatures within a factor of 2 of the observable sector, hundreds of degrees of freedom, equivalent to several copies of the standard model or the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM), may be accommodated.
![Bounds from BBN in the $({g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm light}}}}, {g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm heavy}}}})$ plane, where ${g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm light}}}}$ and ${g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm heavy}}}}$ are the hidden degrees of freedom with masses $m < {T^h_{{{\rm BBN}}}}$ and ${T^h_{{{\rm BBN}}}}< m < {T^h_{{{\rm RH}}}}$, respectively, for hidden to observable sector reheat temperature ratios ${T^h_{{{\rm RH}}}}/{T_{{{\rm RH}}}}= 0.5$, 0.7, 0.8, 1.0 (from top to bottom). The regions above the contours are excluded. The values of $({g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm light}}}},
{g^{h\, {{\rm BBN}}}_{{{\rm heavy}}}})$ are marked for four example hidden sectors: (A) 1-generation and (B) 3-generation flavor-free versions of the MSSM with ${T^h_{{{\rm BBN}}}}< m_X < {T^h_{{{\rm RH}}}}$, and (C) 1-generation and (D) 3-generation flavor-free versions of the MSSM with $m_X < {T^h_{{{\rm BBN}}}}/2$. From Ref. [@Feng:2008mu]. []{data-label="fig:gstarlog"}](gstarlog.eps){width="10cm"}
Of course, WIMPless dark matter requires hidden sectors with additional structure to guarantee that the hidden sector’s dark matter has the desired thermal relic density. Remarkably, this structure may be found in well-motivated models that have been explored previously for many other reasons [@Feng:2008ya]. As an example, consider supersymmetric models with gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking (GMSB) [@Dine:1981za; @Dimopoulos:1981au; @Nappi:1982hm; @AlvarezGaume:1981wy; @Dine:1994vc; @Dine:1995ag]. These models necessarily have several sectors, as shown in [Fig. \[fig:sectors\]]{}. The supersymmetry-breaking sector includes the fields that break supersymmetry dynamically and mediate this breaking to other sectors through gauge interactions. The MSSM sector includes the fields of the minimal supersymmetric standard model. In addition, supersymmetry breaking may also be mediated to one or more hidden sectors. The hidden sectors are not strictly necessary, but given the discussion above, there is no reason to prevent them, and hidden sectors are ubiquitous in such models originating in string theory.
![Sectors of supersymmetric models. Supersymmetry breaking is mediated by gauge interactions to the MSSM and the hidden sector, which contains the dark matter particle $X$. An optional connector sector contains fields $Y$, charged under both MSSM and hidden sector gauge groups, which induce signals in direct and indirect searches and at colliders. There may also be other hidden sectors, leading to multi-component dark matter. From Ref. [@Feng:2008ya]. []{data-label="fig:sectors"}](sectors.eps){width="9cm"}
As is well-known, GMSB models generate superpartner masses proportional to gauge couplings squared. Slightly more precisely, the MSSM superpartner masses are $$\label{mmass}
m \sim \frac{g^2}{16 \pi^2} \frac{F}{M} \ ,$$ where $g$ is the largest relevant standard model gauge coupling, and $F$ and $M$ are the vacuum expectation values of the supersymmetry-breaking sector’s chiral field $S$, with $\langle S
\rangle = M + \theta^2 F$. With analogous couplings of the hidden sector fields to hidden messengers, the hidden sector superpartner masses are $$\label{mxmass}
m_X \sim \frac{g_X^2}{16 \pi^2} \frac{F}{M} \ ,$$ where $g_X$ is the relevant hidden sector gauge coupling. As a result, $$\frac{m_X}{g_X^2} \sim \frac{m}{g^2} \sim
\frac{F}{16 \pi^2 M} \ ;
\label{mxgx}$$ that is, $m_X/g_X^2$ is determined solely by the supersymmetry-breaking sector. As this is exactly the combination of parameters that determines the thermal relic density of [Eq. (\[omega\])]{}, the hidden sector automatically includes a dark matter candidate that has the desired thermal relic density, irrespective of its mass.
The freeze out of hidden sector dark matter in such GMSB models has been studied numerically. As an example, in Ref. [@Feng:2008mu] the hidden sector was assumed to be a copy of the MSSM, but with a free superpartner mass scale $m_X$ and all Yukawa couplings $\sim
{\cal O}(1)$, so that the only light hidden sector particles are the hidden gluon, photon, and neutrinos. The results are given in [Fig. \[fig:gxmx\]]{}. The criterion that the standard model weak scale be between 100 GeV and 1 TeV requires values of $(m_X, g_X)$ within the band. The solid curves, where the thermal relic density of hidden dark matter is consistent with dark matter, are seen to lie within this band, confirming the scaling arguments and rough estimates described above.
![Contours of $\Omega_X h^2 = 0.11$ in the $(m_X,g_X)$ plane for hidden to observable reheat temperature ratios ${T^h_{{{\rm RH}}}}/{T_{{{\rm RH}}}}=0.8$ (upper solid) and 0.3 (lower solid), where the hidden sector is a 1-generation flavor-free version of the MSSM. Also plotted are lines of ${m_{\rm weak}}\equiv (m_X/g^2_X)g'^2 = 100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$ (upper dashed) and 1 TeV (lower dashed). From Ref. [@Feng:2008mu]. []{data-label="fig:gxmx"}](gxmx.eps){width="10cm"}
In summary, well-known frameworks for hidden sectors include models in which the hidden sector contains a particle whose thermal relic density is automatically in the desired range to be dark matter, even when the particle’s mass is not at the weak scale. This property relies on the relation $m_X \propto g_X^2$, which is common to other frameworks for new physics that avoid flavor-changing problems, such as anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking. The “coincidence” required for WIMPless dark matter may also be found in other settings; see, for example, Ref. [@Hooper:2008im].
### Direct and Indirect Detection Signals
The decoupling of the WIMP miracle from WIMPs has many possible implications and observable consequences. In the case that the dark matter is truly hidden, it implies that there are no prospects for direct or indirect detection. Signals must be found in astrophysical observations, as in the case of superWIMPs. Alternatively, there may be connector sectors containing particles that mediate interactions between the standard model and the hidden sector through non-gauge (Yukawa) interactions (see [Fig. \[fig:sectors\]]{}). Such connectors may generate many signals with energies and rates typically unavailable to WIMPs.
As an example, first consider direct detection. The DAMA signal, interpreted as spin-independent, elastic scattering, has conventionally favored a region in the mass-cross section plane with $(m_X, {\sigma_{{{\rm SI}}}}) \sim (20 - 200~{\,\mbox{GeV}},
10^{-5}~{\,\mbox{pb}})$ [@Belli:1999nz]. This is now excluded, most stringently by XENON10 [@Angle:2007uj] and CDMS (Ge) [@Ahmed:2008eu], which require ${\sigma_{{{\rm SI}}}}< 10^{-7}~{\,\mbox{pb}}$ throughout this range of $m_X$. Gondolo and Gelmini have noted, however, that an alternative region with $(m_X, {\sigma_{{{\rm SI}}}}) \sim
(1-10~{\,\mbox{GeV}}, 10^{-3}~{\,\mbox{pb}})$ may explain the DAMA results without violating other known bounds [@Gondolo:2005hh]. DAMA’s relative sensitivity to this region follows from its low energy threshold and the lightness of Na nuclei. This region may be extended to lower masses and cross sections by the effects of channeling [@Bernabei:2007hw; @Petriello:2008jj; @Bottino:2008mf; @Savage:2008er; @Fairbairn:2008gz] and may also be broadened by dark matter streams in the solar neighborhood [@Gondolo:2005hh].
The acceptable DAMA-favored region with $m_X \sim 5~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$ has masses that are low for WIMPs, given that their masses are expected to be around ${m_{\rm weak}}\sim 100~{\,\mbox{GeV}}- 1~{\,\mbox{TeV}}$. However, in WIMPless models, where the thermal relic density is achieved for a variety of dark matter masses, such masses are perfectly natural. A WIMPless particle $X$ may couple to the standard model through Yukawa interactions $${\cal L} = \lambda_f X \bar{Y}_L f_L
+ \lambda_f X \bar{Y}_R f_R \ ,
\label{connector}$$ where $Y$ is a vector-like connector fermion, and $f$ is a standard model fermion. Taking $f$ to be the $b$ quark, and the $Y$ mass to be 400 GeV, consistent with current bounds, these couplings generate spin-independent scattering cross sections given in [Fig. \[fig:superkdirect2\_mod\]]{}. We see that WIMPless dark matter may explain the DAMA results without difficulty.
![Direct detection cross sections for spin-independent $X$-nucleon scattering as a function of dark matter mass $m_X$. The magenta shaded region is DAMA-favored given channeling and no streams [@Petriello:2008jj], and the medium green shaded region is DAMA-favored at 3$\sigma$ given streams and no channeling [@Gondolo:2005hh]. The light yellow shaded region is excluded by the direct detection experiments indicated. The blue cross-hatched region is the parameter space of WIMPless models with connector mass $m_Y = 400~{\,\mbox{GeV}}$ and $0.3 <\lambda_b < 1.0$. The black solid line is the published Super-K exclusion limit [@Desai:2004pq], and the black dashed line is a projection of future Super-K sensitivity. From Ref. [@Feng:2008qn]. \[fig:superkdirect2\_mod\] ](superkdirect2_mod.eps){width="10cm"}
WIMPless dark matter also provides new target signals for indirect detection. For WIMPs, annihilation cross sections determine both the thermal relic density and indirect detection signals. The thermal relic density therefore constrains the rates of indirect detection signals. In the WIMPless case, however, this connection is weakened, since the thermal relic density is governed by hidden sector annihilation and gauge interactions, while the indirect detection signals are governed by the interactions of [Eq. (\[connector\])]{}.
This provides a wealth of new opportunities for indirect detection. As an example, WIMPless dark matter may be detected through its annihilation to neutrinos in the Sun by experiments such as Super-Kamiokande. Although such rates depend on the competing cross sections for capture and annihilation, the Sun has almost certainly reached its equilibrium state, and the annihilation rate is determined by the scattering cross section [@Desai:2004pq]. The prospects for Super-Kamiokande may therefore be compared to direct detection rates [@Desai:2004pq; @Hooper:2008cf; @Feng:2008qn]. The results are given in [Fig. \[fig:superkdirect2\_mod\]]{}. In the near future, Super-Kamiokande may be able to probe the low mass regions corresponding to the DAMA signal.
WIMPless dark matter also provides additional targets for indirect detection experiments looking for photons, positrons, and other annihilation products. The connectors may also play an interesting role in collider experiments. Further details may be found in Refs. [@Feng:2008dz; @Hooper:2008cf; @Feng:2008qn].
[10]{}
Markus Ahlers, Joern Kersten, and Andreas Ringwald. . , 0607:005, 2006, hep-ph/0604188.
Z. Ahmed et al. . 2008, arXiv:0802.3530 \[astro-ph\].
Ivone Albuquerque, Gustavo Burdman, and Z. Chacko. . , 92:221802, 2004, hep-ph/0312197.
Ivone F. M. Albuquerque, Gustavo Burdman, and Z. Chacko. . , D75:035006, 2007, hep-ph/0605120.
Ivone F. M. Albuquerque, Gustavo Burdman, Christopher A. Krenke, and Baran Nosratpour. . , D78:015010, 2008, arXiv:0803.3479 \[hep-ph\].
Luis Alvarez-Gaume, Mark Claudson, and Mark B. Wise. . , B207:96, 1982.
Shin’ichiro Ando, John F. Beacom, Stefano Profumo, and David Rainwater. . , 0804:029, 2008, arXiv:0711.2908 \[hep-ph\].
J. Angle et al. . , 100:021303, 2008, arXiv:0706.0039 \[astro-ph\].
Sean Bailly, Karsten Jedamzik, and Gilbert Moultaka. . 2008, arXiv:0812.0788 \[hep-ph\].
P. Belli et al. . , D61:023512, 2000, hep-ph/9903501.
R. Bernabei et al. . , C53:205–213, 2008, arXiv:0710.0288 \[astro-ph\].
Xiao-Jun Bi, Ming-zhe Li, and Xin-min Zhang. . , D69:123521, 2004, hep-ph/0308218.
Xiao-Jun Bi, Jian-Xiong Wang, Chao Zhang, and Xin-min Zhang. . , D70:123512, 2004, hep-ph/0404263.
M. Bolz, A. Brandenburg, and W. Buchmuller. . , B606:518–544, 2001, hep-ph/0012052.
Francesca Borzumati, Torsten Bringmann, and Piero Ullio. . , D77:063514, 2008, hep-ph/0701007.
A. Bottino, F. Donato, N. Fornengo, and S. Scopel. . , D78:083520, 2008, arXiv:0806.4099 \[hep-ph\].
Wilfried Buchmuller, Koichi Hamaguchi, Michael Ratz, and Tsutomu Yanagida. . , B588:90–98, 2004, hep-ph/0402179.
B. Canadas, D. G. Cerdeno, C. Munoz, and S. Panda. . 2008, arXiv:0812.1067 \[hep-ph\].
Jose A. R. Cembranos, Jonathan L. Feng, Arvind Rajaraman, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , 95:181301, 2005, hep-ph/0507150.
Hong-Yee Chiu. . , 17:712, 1966.
Laura Covi, Hang-Bae Kim, Jihn E. Kim, and Leszek Roszkowski. . , 05:033, 2001, hep-ph/0101009.
Laura Covi, Jihn E. Kim, and Leszek Roszkowski. . , 82:4180–4183, 1999, hep-ph/9905212.
Daniel Cumberbatch et al. . , D76:123005, 2007, arXiv:0708.0095 \[astro-ph\].
Richard H. Cyburt, John R. Ellis, Brian D. Fields, and Keith A. Olive. . , D67:103521, 2003, astro-ph/0211258.
A. De Roeck et al. . , C49:1041–1066, 2007, hep-ph/0508198.
S. Desai et al. . , D70:083523, 2004, hep-ex/0404025.
Savas Dimopoulos and Stuart Raby. . , B192:353, 1981.
Michael Dine, Willy Fischler, and Mark Srednicki. . , B189:575–593, 1981.
Michael Dine, Ann E. Nelson, Yosef Nir, and Yuri Shirman. . , D53:2658–2669, 1996, hep-ph/9507378.
Michael Dine, Ann E. Nelson, and Yuri Shirman. . , D51:1362–1370, 1995, hep-ph/9408384.
Manuel Drees and X. Tata. . , B252:695–702, 1990.
S. Eidelman et al. . , B592:1, 2004.
John R. Ellis, G. B. Gelmini, Jorge L. Lopez, Dimitri V. Nanopoulos, and Subir Sarkar. . , B373:399–437, 1992.
John R. Ellis, Jihn E. Kim, and Dimitri V. Nanopoulos. . , B145:181, 1984.
John R. Ellis, Dimitri V. Nanopoulos, and Subir Sarkar. . , B259:175, 1985.
John R. Ellis, Keith A. Olive, Yudi Santoso, and Vassilis C. Spanos. . , B588:7–16, 2004, hep-ph/0312262.
John R. Ellis, Keith A. Olive, Yudi Santoso, and Vassilis C. Spanos. . , B603:51, 2004, hep-ph/0408118.
Malcolm Fairbairn and Thomas Schwetz. . 2008, arXiv:0808.0704 \[hep-ph\].
Jonathan L. Feng and Jason Kumar. . , 101:231301, 2008, arXiv:0803.4196 \[hep-ph\].
Jonathan L. Feng, Jason Kumar, John Learned, and Louis E. Strigari. . 2008, arXiv:0808.4151 \[hep-ph\].
Jonathan L. Feng, Jason Kumar, and Louis E. Strigari. . , B670:37–40, 2008, arXiv:0806.3746 \[hep-ph\].
Jonathan L. Feng and Takeo Moroi. . , D58:035001, 1998, hep-ph/9712499.
Jonathan L. Feng, Arvind Rajaraman, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , D68:085018, 2003, hep-ph/0307375.
Jonathan L. Feng, Arvind Rajaraman, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , 91:011302, 2003, hep-ph/0302215.
Jonathan L. Feng, Arvind Rajaraman, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , D68:063504, 2003, hep-ph/0306024.
Jonathan L. Feng, Arvind Rajaraman, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , D13:2355–2359, 2004, hep-th/0405248.
Jonathan L. Feng and Bryan T. Smith. . , D71:015004, 2005, hep-ph/0409278.
Jonathan L. Feng, Shu-fang Su, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , D70:063514, 2004, hep-ph/0404198.
Jonathan L. Feng, Shufang Su, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , D70:075019, 2004, hep-ph/0404231.
Jonathan L. Feng, Shufang Su, and Fumihiro Takayama. . , 96:151802, 2006, hep-ph/0503117.
Jonathan L. Feng, Huitzu Tu, and Hai-Bo Yu. . , 0810:043, 2008, arXiv:0808.2318 \[hep-ph\].
D. J. Fixsen et al. . , 473:576, 1996, astro-ph/9605054.
J. L. Goity, W. J. Kossler, and Marc Sher. . , D48:5437–5439, 1993, hep-ph/9305244.
Paolo Gondolo and Graciela Gelmini. . , D71:123520, 2005, hep-ph/0504010.
Koichi Hamaguchi, Yoshitaka Kuno, Tsuyoshi Nakaya, and Mihoko M. Nojiri. . , D70:115007, 2004, hep-ph/0409248.
Dan Hooper, Frank Petriello, Kathryn M. Zurek, and Marc Kamionkowski. . 2008, arXiv:0808.2464 \[hep-ph\].
Dan Hooper and Kathryn M. Zurek. . , D77:087302, 2008, arXiv:0801.3686 \[hep-ph\].
W. Hu and J. Silk. . , 70:2661–2664, 1993.
Yiwen Huang, Mary Hall Reno, Ina Sarcevic, and Jessica Uscinski. . , D74:115009, 2006, hep-ph/0607216.
R. Juszkiewicz, J. Silk, and A. Stebbins. . , B158:463–467, 1985.
Manoj Kaplinghat. . , D72:063510, 2005, astro-ph/0507300.
M. Yu. Khlopov and Andrei D. Linde. , B138:265–268, 1984.
Lawrence M. Krauss. . , B227:556, 1983.
T. Moroi, H. Murayama, and Masahiro Yamaguchi. . , B303:289–294, 1993.
Dimitri V. Nanopoulos, Keith A. Olive, and M. Srednicki. . , B127:30, 1983.
Chiara R. Nappi and Burt A. Ovrut. . , B113:175, 1982.
Aleandro Nisati, Silvano Petrarca, and Giorgio Salvini. . , A12:2213–2222, 1997, hep-ph/9707376.
Heinz Pagels and Joel R. Primack. . , 48:223, 1982.
Frank Petriello and Kathryn M. Zurek. . , 09:047, 2008, arXiv:0806.3989 \[hep-ph\].
Krishna Rajagopal, Michael S. Turner, and Frank Wilczek. . , B358:447–470, 1991.
Leszek Roszkowski, Roberto Ruiz de Austri, and Ki-Young Choi. . , 08:080, 2005, hep-ph/0408227.
Christopher Savage, Graciela Gelmini, Paolo Gondolo, and Katherine Freese. . 2008, arXiv:0808.3607 \[astro-ph\].
Robert J. Scherrer and Michael S. Turner. . , D33:1585, 1986.
G. Steigman. . , 29:313–338, 1979.
Fei Wang and Jin Min Yang. . , C38:129–133, 2004, hep-ph/0405186.
Steven Weinberg. . , 48:1303, 1982.
Ya. B. Zeldovich. , 3:241, 1965.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We study the analogy between the Hawking radiation in Black-Holes and the Quantum depletion process of a Bose-Einstein condensate by using the Bogoliubov transformations method. We find that the relation between the Bogoliubov coefficients is similar in both cases (in the appropriate regimes). We then connect the condensate variables with those associated to the Black-Hole, demonstrating then that the zero temperature regime of the condensate is equivalent to the existence of an event horizon in gravity.'
author:
- |
Ivan Arraut\
The Open University of Hong Kong\
30 Good Shepherd Street, Homantin, Kowloon\
`[email protected]`
title: 'Black-Hole evaporation and Quantum-depletion in Bose-Einstein condensates'
---
Introduction
============
The phenomena of Quantum depletion in Bose condensation was observed recently experimentally [@1]. The analogy of this phenomena and Black-Holes suggests that the Quantum depletion is just equivalent to the Hawking radiation [@2]. Indeed, it was discovered by Hawking before that the Black-Holes not only absorb particles but they are also able to emit them. By then, Hawking used arguments of Quantum Mechanics over a classical background (semi-classical) [@3]. Hawking argument compares the modes of a scalar field defined in the past null infinity with those modes defined in the future null infinity for the same field. It comes out that the modes in the future null infinity do not contain the whole information of the scalar field. There are some additional modes completing the information of the scalar field, but they only have data at the event horizon of the Black-Hole and their information is not available for the observers. The main point is that the unitarity is lost when we compare the modes defined in the future null infinity with the modes defined in the past null infinity. Such comparison has to be done in a single vacuum which is defined by convention at the past null infinity which is devoid of particles [@3]. The connection between the Black-Hole evaporation and the phenomena of Quantum-depletion of Black-Holes was proposed by Dvali et al in [@2] by using the Black-Hole N-portrait which makes a connection between the size of the system (event horizon) and the number of gravitons involved in the condensate. From this perspective the Black-Hole is a leaky bound state of a condensate of $N$ interacting soft gravitons existing in a critical condition. The analogy was extended to the scenario of neural networks where the degrees of freedom of a gas of bosons were mapped to the degrees of freedom representing a neural network arrangement [@4]. The analysis of the Black-Hole evaporation from the perspective of neural networks was done by the author in [@5] without considering the phenomena of Quantum depletion. In [@5], the author just mapped the relation between the Bogoliubov coefficients, necessary for the reproduction of the Hawking radiation onto the modes expanded in the Hamiltonian representing a neural network arrangement. In this paper we analyze the conditions necessary for the process of Quantum depletion to be equivalent to the process of Black-Hole evaporation. The conditions are obtained by deriving the Bogoliubov coefficients independently for both situations and subsequently comparing the corresponding results. We then fins an expression for the surface gravity of the Black-Hole as a function of the variables of the condensate which include the momentum of the particles able to escape the condensate and the frequency of the associated modes. We focus on the low momentum regime since the particles escaping the condensate are supposed to have small momentum due to the fact that the condensate under analysis has a temperature near the absolute zeto $T=0$. Our results show the consistent relation suggesting that for a fixed momentum for the particles escaping the system, a lower frequency for the modes implies a larger mass associated to the Black-Hole.
Quantization of a gas of bosons and Quantum depletion {#QDC}
=====================================================
Consider a gas of bosons represented by a Quantum field $\phi({\bf r})$ with the dynamic obeying the following Hamiltonian
$$\label{Ham}
\hat{H}=\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\int d^3r\phi^+({\bf r})\nabla^2\phi({\bf r})+\frac{1}{2}\int\int\phi^+({\bf r}_1)\phi^+({\bf r}_2)u({\bf r}_1, {\bf r}_2)\phi({\bf r}_2)\phi({\bf r}_1).$$
Here $u({\bf r}_1, {\bf r}_2)$ is the two-body interaction potential [@Pathria]. Since the Quantum depletion phenomena is expected to happen at low temperatures, namely, near the absolute zero; then the momentum of the particles at that point is expected to be small. We define the particle number operator as
$$\hat{N}=\int d^3r\psi^+({\bf r})\psi({\bf r}).$$
The particle number is a conserved quantity for the Hamiltonian under analysis and then its operator commutes with the Hamiltonian operator as
$$[\hat{N}, \hat{H}]=0.$$
If we make the expansion in a Fourier series of the Quantum field $\psi({\bf r})=\sum_i\hat{a}_iu_i({\bf r})$, together with its complex conjugate, then we get the standard definition of the particle number operator as
$$\hat{N}=\sum_i\hat{a}^+_i\hat{a}_i.$$
Here the summation is carried out over all the particle states of the system. Evidently, for the single particle state we can define the particle number operator as $\hat{N}_i=\hat{a}^+_i\hat{a}_i$ (omitting the summation over index). The Hamiltonian (\[Ham\]) itself can be also expressed in terms of annihilation and creation operators, written in this form, it becomes
$$\label{sumpot}
\hat{H}=\sum_{\bf p}\frac{p^2}{2m}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{{\bf p}_1', {\bf p}_2'}u^{{\bf p}_1', {\bf p}_2'}_{{\bf p}_1, {\bf p}_2}\hat{a}^+_{{\bf p}_1'}\hat{a}^+_{{\bf p}_2'}\hat{a}_{{\bf p}_2}\hat{a}_{{\bf p}_1}.$$
Here $u^{{\bf p}_1', {\bf p}_2'}_{{\bf p}_1, {\bf p}_2}$ is just a matrix element representing the interaction of two particles as it is defined in [@Pathria]. The transfer momentum due to the interaction of a pair of particles, is defined as
$${\bf p}=({\bf p}_2-{\bf p}_2')=-({\bf p}_1-{\bf p}_1').$$
Evidently, the momentum conservation in the form ${\bf p}_1'+{\bf p}_2'={\bf p}_1+{\bf p}_2$ is satisfied. If the spin of the particles is considered, it can be also included in the Hamiltonian. Here for our purposes, it is irrelevant to include the spin of the particles. One relevant quantity to define is the scattering amplitude, here defined as
$$a({\bf p})=\frac{m}{4\pi\hbar^2}\int u({\bf r})e^{i{\bf p}\cdot{\bf r}/\hbar}d^3r.$$
At the lowest order in momentum, which is the case of low-energy scattering, we have the limiting result
$$\label{limit value}
a\approx\frac{mu_0}{4\pi\hbar^2},\;\;\;u_0=\int u({\bf r})d^3r.$$
Low temperature behavior of a Bose gas
--------------------------------------
At low temperatures, the matrix element $u^{{\bf p}_1', {\bf p}_2'}_{{\bf p}_1, {\bf p}_2}$, takes the limit value $u_0/V$ as it is defined in eq. (\[limit value\]). Note that since in this case we have zero-momentum transfer ${\bf p}=0$, then in the sum for the potential term in eq. (\[sumpot\]), we only consider those terms with a vanishing momentum transfer. In this way, the Hamiltonian becomes
$$\label{Hamiltonexpr}
\hat{H}=\sum_{\bf p}\frac{p^2}{2m}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{mV}\left(\sum_{\bf p}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\sum_{{\bf p}_1\neq{\bf p}_2}(\hat{a}^+_{\bf p_1}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p_2}\hat{a}_{\bf p_2}\hat{a}_{\bf p_1}+\hat{a}^+_{\bf p_2}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p_1}\hat{a}_{\bf p_2}\hat{a}_{\bf p_1})\right).$$
It can be easily proved that the energy eigenvalues for this Hamiltonian are defined as
$$E_{\bf p}\approx \sum_{\bf p}n_{\bf p}\frac{p^2}{2m}+\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{mV}(2N^2-n_0^2).$$
From this, it is clear that the ground state is defined as $E_0\approx 2\pi a\hbar^2N^2/mV$.
Quantum depletion
-----------------
At low temperatures, the emission of particles in the system is dominated by the phenomena of Quantum depletion. When the temperature is near the zero value, the particles are not supposed to escape. However, Quantum depletion still allows the possibility for this to happens. This is analogous to the fact that the particles are not supposed to escape from the event horizon of a Black-Hole. Indeed, later we will demonstrate that this fact is the key point for the comparison with the Hawking radiation. Near the zero temperature, it is expected for most of the particles in the system to be in the ground state where the particle number is $n_0$ with ${\bf p}=0$. In this way $n_0/N\approx1$. In the same form, the number of excited particles with ${\bf p}\neq0$, is considered to be small and then $n_{\bf p}/N<<1$. In this way, we can use the approximation
$$2N^2-n_0^2\approx N^2+2N\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p},$$
which can be used for simplifying the Hamiltonian expression given in eq. (\[Hamiltonexpr\]). In addition, due to the large amount of particles in the ground state, we can take the annihilation and creation operators of the found state as c-numbers, namely $\hat{a}_0\hat{a}_0^+=\hat{a}_0^+\hat{a}_0$. Considering this aspect and still using the zero-order approximation for $u({\bf r})$ given in eq. (\[limit value\]), then we get a simplified version of the Hamiltonian given by
$$\label{impro}
\hat{H}=\sum_{\bf p}\frac{p^2}{2m}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\frac{u_0}{2V}\left(N^2+N\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}(2\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{-\bf p}^++\hat{a}_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{-\bf p})\right).$$
It can be proved that if we consider $u_0$ expanded up to second-order, considering then the transitions of the system, we obtain
$$u_0\approx \frac{4\pi a\hbar^2}{m}\left(1+\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2}{V}\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\frac{1}{p^2}\right).$$
In this way, the Hamiltonian (\[impro\]), becomes
$$\label{Hamilton}
\hat{H}=\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\frac{p^2}{2m}\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m}\frac{N}{V}\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}(2\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{-\bf p}^++\hat{a}_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{-\bf p})+\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2}{m}\frac{N^2}{V}\left(1+\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2}{V}\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\frac{1}{p^2}\right).$$
The energy level of the system can be found after diagonalization of the Hamiltonian by using the Bogoliubov transformations in the form [@equi]
$$\label{TransformationsBogo}
\hat{b}_{\bf p}=\frac{\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\alpha_{\bf p}\hat{a}^+_{-{\bf p}}}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}},\;\;\;\;\;\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}=\frac{\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}+\alpha_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{-{\bf p}}}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}}.$$
These transformations can be inverted as
$$\label{TransformationsBogo2}
\hat{a}_{\bf p}=\frac{\hat{b}_{\bf p}-\alpha_{\bf p}\hat{b}^+_{-{\bf p}}}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}},\;\;\;\;\;\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}=\frac{\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}-\alpha_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{-{\bf p}}}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}},$$
with
$$\label{alpha}
\alpha_{\bf p}=\frac{mV}{4\pi a\hbar^2N}\left(\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2N}{mV}+\frac{p^2}{2m}-\epsilon({\bf p})\right).$$
Here $\epsilon({\bf p})$ represents the dispersion relation, which here is defined as
$$\label{Dispersion}
\epsilon({\bf p})=\left(\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2N}{mV}\frac{p^2}{m}+\left(\frac{p^2}{2m}\right)^2\right)^{1/2}.$$
Evidently, the commutation relations are unchanged after executing a Bogoliubov transformation. Then we have
$$\label{Commutation}
[\hat{a}_{\bf p}, \hat{a}_{\bf p'}]=[\hat{b}_{\bf p}, \hat{b}_{\bf p'}]=\delta_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}},$$
with all the other commutators vanishing. At the ground state, since the operators $\hat{a}_{\bf p}$ behave as $c$-numbers, the previous commutator will naturally vanish in such situations. After using the transformations (\[TransformationsBogo\]) inside the Hamiltonian (\[Hamilton\]), then we get
$$\label{NewHamilton}
\hat{H}=E_0+\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\epsilon({\bf p})\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{\bf p},$$
with $E_0$ defined as
$$E_0=\frac{2\pi a\hbar^2N^2}{mV}+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{{\bf p}\neq0}\left(\epsilon({\bf p})-\frac{p^2}{2m}-\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2N}{mV}+\left(\frac{4\pi a\hbar^2N}{mV}\right)^2\frac{m}{p^2}\right).$$
The form of the Hamiltonian (\[NewHamilton\]) together with the commutation relations (\[Commutation\]), suggests that $\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}$ is the creation operator of some quasiparticle and $\hat{b}_{\bf p}$ corresponds to the annihilation operator of the same quasiparticle. Evidently $\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{\bf p}$ is the particle number operator of the quasi-particle. The dispersion relation for the quasi-particle is given by eq. (\[Dispersion\]). The form of the Hamiltonian (\[NewHamilton\]) suggests that $E_0$ is the ground state of the system and that the quasi-particles behave as Bosonic field. If the ground state of the system were perfect, we would have zero particles with non-vanishing momentum, in agreement with the eigenvalues $\hat{n}_{{\bf p}\neq0}^b=\hat{b}^+_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{\bf p}$ which would vanish in such a case. However, these eigenvalues do not represent the behavior of real particles. Additionally, in order to get a finite energy for the ground state, it is necessary to have some particles having non-zero energy even at absolute zero [@Pathria].
Evaporation of Physical particles {#Physicalpart}
---------------------------------
The particle number corresponding to physical particles is defined by $\hat{n}_{\bf p}^a=\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}$. We can then find the number of real particles perceived from the perspective of the vacuum defined by the quasi-particles as $<\bar{0}\vert\hat{n}_{\bf p}^b\vert\bar{0}>=0$. Then we find
$$\label{mama}
<\bar{0}\vert\hat{n}_{\bf p}^a\vert\bar{0}>=<\bar{0}\vert\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}\vert\bar{0}>=\frac{\alpha_{\bf p}^2}{1-\alpha_{\bf p}^2}.$$
This result is obtained after replacing the Bogoliubov transformations (\[TransformationsBogo2\]) inside the expression $<\bar{0}\vert\hat{a}^+_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}\vert\bar{0}>$ in eq. (\[mama\]). We can analyze further the role of the Bogoliubov coefficients in eq. (\[TransformationsBogo2\]), if we express the Bogolibov transformation in general as
$$\label{realbogo}
\hat{a}_{\bf p}=u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\hat{b}_{\bf p'}-v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\hat{b}_{\bf p'}^+.$$
Then we can define
$$\label{losAlamos}
u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}},\;\;\;v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}=\frac{\alpha_{\bf p}}{\sqrt{1-\alpha^2_{\bf p}}}.$$
It is trivial to demonstrate that
$$\vert u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert^2-\vert v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert^2=1.$$
This demonstrates that the commutation relations are preserved after doing the Bogoliubov transformations. From eq. (\[losAlamos\]), it is important to notice the relation between the Bogoliubov coefficients as
$$v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}=\alpha_{\bf p}u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}.$$
This relation suggests that $\vert v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert=\alpha_{\bf p}\vert u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert$
A comparison with the Black-Hole evaporation process
----------------------------------------------------
The quantum depletion process is analogous to the Black-Hole evaporation process [@3]. Then in the same way as the particles are not supposed to escape from a condensate at zero temperature; no particle is supposed to escape from a Black-Hole classically [@BH]. The particles can escape from a Black-Hole via Hawking radiation in the same way as the particles can escape from a condensate at zero temperature via Quantum-depletion. In order to understand this fact, we need to analyze the Black-Hole evaporation process. The Hawking radiation process is a natural consequence of a comparison between the vacuum located at the future null infinity, namely, the vacuum with no-gravity and defined after the formation of the Black-Hole; with respect the vacuum located in the past null-infinity, namely, the one defined before the Black-Hole formation and devoid of particles. Naturally, before the Black-Hole formation (past-null infinity) there are no particles; then we can settle the vacuum in such a case as
$$\hat{b}_{\bf p}\vert\bar{0}>=0.$$
Then the vacuum defined in the past-null infinity is consistent with the vacuum defined by the quasi-particles in the subsection (\[Physicalpart\]). On the other hand, the vacuum defined at the future null infinity, is consistent with the vacuum defined for the real particles in the same subsection. Then we should expect the observers located at the future null-infinity to detect particles, even in these are not supposed to escape from the Black-Hole. The standard calculation done by Hawking in [@3], suggests that a scalar field in the past-null infinity can be expanded as
$$\label{field1}
\phi(x, t)=\sum_{\bf p}\left(f_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{\bf p}+\bar{f}_{\bf p}\hat{b}_{\bf p}^+\right).$$
The same scalar field, expanded at the future-null infinity, requires two different set of modes, then we can write
$$\label{field2}
\phi(x, t)=\sum_{\bf p}\left(p_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}+\bar{p}_{\bf p}\hat{a}_{\bf p}^++q_{\bf p}\hat{c}_{\bf p}+\bar{q}_{\bf p}\hat{c}_{\bf p}^+\right).$$
Both equations, (\[field1\]) and (\[field2\]) carry the same information. The vacuum $\hat{a}_{\bf p}\vert0>=0$ is defined at the future null-infinity. On the other hand, the modes $q_{\bf p}$, together with the operators $\hat{c}$, are defined at the event horizon. These are the modes which the observer located at the asymptotic future cannot see, generating the famous information problem in Black-Holes [@3]. Here we focus only on the modes which are perceived by the observers. In order to relate the modes defined by $f_{\bf p}$ and those defined by $p_{\bf p}$, we employ the Bogoliubov transformations. Following the arguments of Hawking in [@3], we can find that the relation between the modes under discussion, follow the same Bogoliubov transformations defined in eq. (\[realbogo\]), and evidently
$$\label{mama2}
<\bar{0}\vert\hat{n}_{\bf p}^a\vert\bar{0}>=\vert v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert^2,$$
which is related to the result (\[mama\]). The arguments of Hawking demonstrated that the fraction of particles escaping the Black-Hole, follow the following distribution
$$<\bar{0}\vert\hat{n}_{\bf p}^a\vert\bar{0}>=\frac{\Gamma_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}}{e^{\frac{2\pi\omega}{\kappa}}-1},$$
if the particles escaping the Black-Hole are bosons. In the previous expression, $\Gamma_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}$ represents the fraction of particles entering the collapsing body (Black-Hole). One key ingredient in the Hawking calculation is the relation between the Bogoliubov coefficients in the following way
$$\vert u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert=e^{\frac{\pi\omega}{\kappa}}\vert v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}} \vert.$$
If we take the Quantum-depletion process as analogous to the Hawking radiation, then we conclude that $\alpha_{\bf p}=e^{\frac{\pi\omega}{\kappa}}$. Here, naturally $\omega$ is a function of ${\bf p}$. We can easily solve for the surface gravity, obtaining then the temperature associated to the depletion to be proportional to
$$\label{Impressiveyou are}
\kappa=\frac{\pi\omega}{Ln\vert\alpha_{\bf p}\vert}=\frac{\pi\omega}{Ln\frac{\vert u_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert}{\vert v_{{\bf p}, {\bf p'}}\vert}}.$$
Since the Quantum-depletion occurs at low temperature, and the momentum associated to the particles is low, then we will focus on the low momentum limit. Before that, we can simplify $\alpha_{\bf p}$ with the help of eqns. (\[alpha\]) and (\[Dispersion\]) and using the change of variables
$$x=p\left(\frac{V}{8\pi a\hbar^2N}\right)^{1/2}.$$
In this way, we obtain
$$\alpha_{\bf p}=1+x^2-\sqrt{2x^2+x^4}.$$
The low momentum regime is equivalent to $x<<1$ and then we get the approximation
$$\alpha_{\bf p}\approx 1-\frac{3}{\sqrt{2}}x.$$
If we replace this expression in eq. (\[Impressiveyou are\]), then we get the result
$$\kappa\approx\frac{\pi\omega}{\sum_{m=1}^\infty\frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m}\left(\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}x\right)^m}.$$
If we expand up to the first order term in the logarithm expansion, then we get
$$\kappa\approx\frac{2\pi\omega}{\sqrt{3}x}.$$
We can then proceed to make some interpretations. Note that the previous expression connects the concept of surface gravity with the condensed matter variables associated to the modes. Hawking demonstrated that for Black-Holes, $\kappa=1/2\pi M$, then we can conclude that
$$\frac{\omega}{x}=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{4\pi^2M}.$$
This result suggests that a large mass for the Black-Hole is associated to a low frequency for the modes of the condensate. Here it is always assumed that $x<<1$. The negative heat capacity associated to the Black-Holes, emerges then naturally from the Quantum depletion of the condensate as it was suggested in a similar scenario in [@2].
Conclusions
===========
In this paper we have analyzed the similarities between the process of Hawking radiation in Black-Holes and the process of Quantum-depletion in Bose-Einstein condensates. We have demonstrated that the Bogoliubov coefficients obey similar relations in both situations. In this way, we could make a direct connection between the variables and parameters of the condensate with those related to the Black-Hole. From the perspective of Black-Holes, the existence of an event horizon implies that classically no particles can escape from a Black-Hole. In the same way, at zero temperature of the condensate, no particle is supposed to escape from it if we employ the classical approximation. In both situations, namely, Black-Holes and Bose-Einstein condensates, the Quantum effects (Hawking radiation or Quantum-depletion) allow the particles to escape. In the case of a condensate this gives space to the phenomena of Quantum depletion and for the case of Black-Holes, the Quantum effects give space to the phenomena of Hawking radiation. Further studies are necessary for analyzing possible connections with the hologaphic principle [@Malda].
[**Acknowledgement**]{}
The author would like to thank Naoki Yamamoto for the hospitality during the visit to Keio University in Yokohama-Japan, where part of this work was presented.
[1]{}
M. Pieczarka, E. Estrecho, M. Boozarjmehr et al., [*Observation of quantum depletion in a non-equilibrium exciton–polariton condensate*]{}, Nat. Commun. [**11**]{}, 429 (2020). G. Dvali and C. Gomez, [*Black Hole’s Quantum N-Portrait*]{}, arXiv:1112.3359 \[hep-th\]. S. W. Hawking, [*Particle Creation by Black Holes*]{}, Commun. Math. Phys. [**43**]{} (1975) 199-220; Erratum: Commun.Math.Phys. 46 (1976) 206. G. Dvali, M. Michel and S. Zell, arXiv:1805.10292 \[quantph\]; G. DVali, arXiv:1804.06154 \[hep-th\]; G. Dvali, arXiv:1801.03918 \[hep-th\]; G. Dvali, Phys. Rev. D [**97**]{}, 105005 (2018); Dvali G., arXiv:1711.09079 \[quant-ph\]. I. Arraut, [*Black-Hole evaporation from the perspective of neural networks*]{}, EPL 124 (2018) [**no.5**]{}, 50002. R. K. Pathria and P. D. Beale, [*Statistical Mechanics*]{}, elsevier, First published 1972; Second edition 1996. N. N. Bogoliubov, [*On the theory of superfluidity*]{}, J. Phys. (USSR), 11:23, 1947; L. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari, [*Bose-Einstein Condensation*]{}, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2003; T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, [*Many-body problem in quantum mechanics and quantum statistical mechanics*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**105**]{}:1119-1120, 1957; T. D. Lee, K. Huang and C. N. Yang, [*Eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of a Bose system of hard spheres and its low-temperature properties*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**106**]{}:1135-1145, 1957; D. M. Stamper-Kurn, A. P. Chikkatur, A. GÄorlitz, S. Inouye, S. Gupta, D. E. Pritchard, and W. Ketterle [*Excitation of phonons in a bose-einstein condensate by light scattering*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83**]{}:2876-2879, 1999; S. Utsunomiya, L. Tian, G. Roumpos, C. W. Lai, N. Kumada, T. Fijisawa, M. Kuwata Gonokami, A. Löffler, A. Höfling, A. Forchel and Y. Yamamoto, [*Observation of bogoliubov excitations in exciton-polariton condensates*]{}, Nature Physics, 4:700-705, 2008. R. M. Wald, [*General Relativity*]{}, University of Chicago Press, 1984. J. Maldacena, [*The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity*]{}, Int. J. Theor. Phys. [**38**]{} (1999) 1113-1133, Adv.Theor.Math.Phys. [**2**]{} (1998) 231-252.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'Teng Liu, Paolo Tozzi, Elena Tundo, A. Moretti, Jun-Xian Wang, Piero Rosati, Fabrizia Guglielmetti'
bibliography:
- 'voronoi.bib'
title: 'EXSdetect: an end-to-end software for extended source detection in X-ray images: application to [*Swift*]{}-XRT data'
---
[ We present a stand-alone software (named EXSdetect) for the detection of extended sources in X-ray images. Our goal is to provide a flexible tool capable of detecting extended sources down to the lowest flux levels attainable within instrumental limitations, while maintaining robust photometry, high completeness, and low contamination, regardless of source morphology. EXSdetect was developed mainly to exploit the ever-increasing wealth of archival X-ray data, but is also ideally suited to explore the scientific capabilities of future X-ray facilities, with a strong focus on investigations of distant groups and clusters of galaxies. ]{} [ EXSdetect combines a fast Voronoi tessellation code with a friends-of-friends algorithm and an automated deblending procedure. The values of key parameters are matched to fundamental telescope properties such as angular resolution and instrumental background. In addition, the software is designed to permit extensive tests of its performance via simulations of a wide range of observational scenarios. ]{} [ We applied EXSdetect to simulated data fields modeled to realistically represent the [[*Swift*]{}]{} X-ray Cluster Survey (SXCS ), which is based on archival data obtained by the X-ray telescope onboard the [[*Swift*]{}]{} satellite. We achieve more than $90\%$ completeness for extended sources comprising at least $80$ photons in the $0.5$–$2$ keV band, a limit that corresponds to $10^{-14}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ for the deepest SXCS fields. This detection limit is comparable to the one attained by the most sensitive cluster surveys conducted with much larger X-ray telescopes. While evaluating the performance of EXSdetect, we also explored the impact of improved angular resolution and discuss the ideal properties of the next generation of X-ray survey missions. ]{}
Introduction\[introduction\]
============================
In the past decade, X-ray astronomy reached an unprecedented level in imaging and spectroscopic performances, mostly thanks to the [*Chandra*]{} and [*XMM-Newton*]{} telescopes. Their high imaging quality and large effective area allowed us to discover an increasing complexity in the morphology of X-ray extended sources, which reflects the rich physics involved. Extended X-ray emission may be associated with a variety of Galactic objects: supernova remnants, star-forming regions, or planetary nebulae. In extragalactic fields, it is mostly associated with the hot intra cluster medium (ICM) that permeates the potential well of galaxy clusters and groups. Other extragalactic, extended X-ray sources are given by the inverse Compton scattering from relativistic jets in radio galaxies, from supernova remnants, hot gas and massive X-ray binaries in star-forming galaxies, and low-mass X-ray binaries in normal galaxies. In this paper, we mainly focus on galaxy clusters and groups.
Thanks to the development of tools for analyzing the morphology of extended sources and the capability of simultaneous imaging and spectroscopy with CCD, a wealth of new physical phenomena has been opened to direct investigation in the field of galaxy groups and clusters. The most noticeable discoveries include the interaction between the ICM and the relativistic jets of the central radio galaxy, which is directly observed as bubbles inflated by the jets; the presence of cold fronts; and the physics of cool-cores and their metal distribution. However, less attention has been paid to the detection of very faint extended sources, despite the increasing interests in distant groups and clusters of galaxies. Based on the serendipitous discoveries of high-z massive clusters of galaxies through X-ray observation of [*XMM-Newton*]{} and [*Chandra*]{} or through the Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect [see @jee09; @foley11; @santos11], we expect a significant population of massive clusters at very high redshift ($z\sim 1.5$), whose presence was considered unlikely just a few years ago. The detection of a sizable number of high-z massive clusters may pave the way to a substantial revision of the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmological model [@hc12; @hoyle12; @waiz12]. Moreover, a largely unexplored population of small or medium-z groups awaits systematical study. Overall, a thorough investigation of the low-flux, extended X-ray sources is expected to provide significant progress in this field.
Robust detection and characterization of faint extended X-ray sources is very difficult. In the photon-starving regime of X-ray images [@hobart2005], Poissonian fluctuations in the sparse background can produce spurious source detections at low fluxes, which makes the firm detection of faint sources very difficult, irrespective of their extent. In addition, detecting an extended source is much more difficult than detecting an unresolved source with the same number of net photons. First, extended emission is spread over more pixels, resulting in a much lower contrast to the background, and can be more easily swamped by the sparse background. Second, faint extended sources can be confused with faint unresolved sources.
In addition, the mere detection of a source is not sufficient, since a robust characterization of its extension is also required on the basis of X-ray data. In principle, the only requirement to characterize a source as extended is that its measured size must be larger than the instrument point spread function (PSF). However, given the large number density of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) and distant star-forming galaxies, unresolved sources largely outnumber extended ones, especially at low fluxes. The risk of finding faint extended emission encompassing several unrelated unresolved sources is high. Moreover, in the classical Wolter-type design of X-ray mirrors, the PSF varies significantly across the field of view (FOV), introducing more uncertainties. Finally, extended X-ray sources are complex in morphology, because they come in a wide variety of shapes and surface brightness distributions, with scales ranging from a few arcsec to a few arcmin. Therefore, a considerable effort should be made to search and characterize extended sources in X-ray images.
In this paper, we aim at providing a flexible and efficient detection algorithm to identify extended X-ray sources down to a low flux level to exploit the large amount of data in the archive of current X-ray missions ([*Chandra*]{}, [*XMM-Newton*]{}, [*Swift*]{}, [*Suzaku*]{}), and to explore the scientific cases of future X-ray facilities. We mostly focus on the detection of diffuse extragalactic sources, namely groups and clusters of galaxies.
The identification of extended sources consists of two parts: source detection and source characterization. For the first part, we use the same algorithm – a combination of Voronoi tessellation (VT) and friends-of-friends (FOF) – as used in the classical software [vtpdetect]{} based on the work by @ebeling93. VT is a useful tool to deal with typical X-ray images, which are largely dominated by empty pixels. A recent application has been presented by @diehl06, who used weighted VT in adaptive binning of X-ray images. This software is not designed for source detection, however.
Although it has been widely used for detecting galaxy clusters in optical images (for instance in @ramella01, @kim02, @panko05, @vanbreukelen09, and @barkhouse06) [^1], the method of VT+FOF is seldom used in X-ray cluster surveys. Presently, the only X-ray source detection software based on VT available to the community is [vtpdetect]{} as a part of the [ciao]{}[^2] software developed for the [*Chandra*]{} mission. However, so far it has been applied mainly to ROSAT data [@scharf97; @ebeling98; @ebeling00], and to our knowledge, only once to [*Chandra*]{} data [@boschin02]. The detection algorithms commonly used in X-ray surveys are based on wavelet transform methods ([@rosati98 the ROSAT Deep Cluster survey];[@vikhlinin98_160d the ROSAT 160d survey];[@burenin07_400d the ROSAT 400d survey]; [@fassbender11_XDCP the [*XMM-Newton*]{} Distant Cluster Project]; [@lloyd-davies11_XCS the XMM Cluster Survey]; [@pacaud06 The XMM Large-Scale Structure survey]; [@barkhouse06 the [*Chandra*]{} Multi-wavelength Project]).
Very few alternative lines of research are being developed for exploiting the entire information contained in X-ray images. So far, the only method fully employing the information of the photon counts per pixel and of the counts in neighboring pixels is the background/source separation technique [@guglielmetti09]. This method uses the Bayesian probability theory combined with a two-component mixture model. This way, background and source intensity can be estimated jointly. First results based on this technique and applied to deep [*Chandra*]{} fields are currently under scrutiny (Guglielmetti et al. in preparation). Given this framework, it is well worth putting a significant effort into developing diversified detection algorithms for extended sources.
In this paper, we further develop the VT+FOF algorithm, making a great effort against its major shortcomings. We provide the flexible and efficient [*Extended X-ray Source detection*]{} software ([*EXSdetect*]{}), which can be easily applied to a wide range of X-ray images, and is optimized to detect extended sources. The software, written in [*Python*]{} and made available to the community on a public website, can be used for a double purpose: exploiting the rich (and increasing) archive of current X-ray missions; and investigating scientific cases of the next-generation X-ray facilities, in particular those that will perform large-area surveys. Here we do not consider supplementary information, although we may use the CCD spectral information to distinguish thermal (X-ray soft) from nonthermal (X-ray hard) emission. This option is not practical, because mostly the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) is very low in the hard band (above 2 keV) where the difference between thermal and nonthermal spectra is highest. We also ignore the possibility of cross-correlating X-ray images with images in other wavebands like optical and IR. This process is very effective in finding distant cluster candidates, but it would severely undermine the possibility of clearly defining the surveyed volume, an essential requirement to derive the physical density of the cluster population as a function of the cosmic epoch. Our goal is to obtain samples selected entirely by their X-ray properties and characterized by clearly defined completeness criteria. This requirement is mostly relevant for cosmological tests, where we need a robust estimate of the search volume of the survey to measure the comoving number density of sources.
The paper is organized as follows. In §\[algorithm\] we review the [vtpdetect]{} algorithm and describe the improvements and the additions of [*EXSdetect*]{}. In §\[simu\] we discuss the practical case of the ongoing [*Swift*]{} X-ray Cluster Survey [SXCS, @tundo12], presenting extensive simulations aimed at testing the performance and evaluating the completeness of the survey. In §4 we briefly discuss the effect of improving the angular resolution. Finally, in §\[conclusions\] we summarize our findings.
Algorithm\[algorithm\]
======================
VT+FOF as implemented in [vtpdetect]{}\[VTP\]
----------------------------------------------
There are several ways to find photon density enhancements, and therefore identify source candidates in an X-ray image. The simplest way is to search across the image inside sliding boxes with different sizes and shapes. A more effective option is to search for overdensities on different scales in Fourier space, making use of wavelet transform. Another possibility is to calculate the local flux density across the image in Voronoi cells and locate excess in the flux density distribution. This method has been introduced by @ebeling93 and is implemented in the [ciao]{} task [vtpdetect]{}. This algorithm is a combination of the classical VT and FOF. The classical VT is a nonparametric method that uniquely partitions the infinite plane into convex polygon cells according to a list of starting locations (named Voronoi sites) in the plane. Each cell contains only one Voronoi site and includes all points that are closer to this site than to any other. The positions of all occupied pixels are assumed as Voronoi sites, and the local photon density value associated to each occupied pixel is computed as the number of photons in the occupied pixel divided by the Voronoi cell area. In this way, the raw image is converted into the local photon density map, in which high-density regions show up by a direct comparison between the photon density map and a background map. Then, the FOF method is used to identify source candidates.
The VT+FOF method has two immediate advantages. First, it is applied to the X-ray photon event list or to the original unbinned image, and it preserves the full angular resolution at each step, at variance with other methods, where image-binning is often adopted to avoid oversampling of the PSF and improve the low count statistics. Second, the VT+FOF algorithm does not require assumptions about the shape and size of the structure one is looking for. In the simplest approach, a measure of the size (area) of the source candidate and the corresponding aperture photometry is directly obtained by defining the source edges as the [*loci*]{} where the photon density value is equal to the background density, without using a predefined aperture region.
Despite these properties, [vtpdetect]{} is not widely used compared to wavelet-based algorithms. The construction of VT has been considered to be very time-consuming, and [vtpdetect]{} was suggested to be applied only to small fields or low-event-density regions [@ebeling93]. Another major reason for this infrequent use is that the FOF algorithm has a severe source-blending problem, i.e., the merging of two or more neighboring sources into one. This is a well-known problem, which is particularly severe in deep fields where both the background and the source number density are high. Therefore, using [vtpdetect]{} requires significant additional work to obtain a well-characterized list of extended sources.
In this work we present a new end-to-end software by implementing the same VT+FOF method as used in @ebeling93 and solving these drawbacks. Most importantly, we add a self-contained deblending procedure and provide a well-characterized extended source list as the output. We preserve all advantages of [vtpdetect]{}, without introducing any image binning or smoothing, or assuming any specific source shape or size. The details of our algorithm are given in the following sections.
Voronoi diagram construction\[VT\]
----------------------------------
The pattern of the Voronoi cells is also called a Voronoi diagram, which is composed of the edges of the cells (Voronoi edges). A simple algorithm for constructing a Voronoi diagram at the highest computational speed is the [*sweep-line*]{} algorithm [@Fortune1986] [^3]. We implemented this algorithm and further developed it for better and faster performance. As a first step, we confined the Voronoi diagram, originally defined in the infinite plane, to the box domain of the image. Second, in addition to the classical Voronoi diagram, we built a discrete Voronoi diagram by including all pixels enclosed by a Voronoi cell into a discrete Voronoi cell. If one pixel is equally distant from two or more Voronoi sites (i.e., the pixel center falls on an Voronoi edge), it is assigned randomly among the two or more cells. Finally, as a third step, we connected the pair of Voronoi sites on both sides of each Voronoi edge, building the so-called Delaunay diagram, which will constitute the structure on which FOF and our deblending procedure are run. Based on the Voronoi diagram, we created an area map that contains the area of Voronoi cells associated to each occupied pixel (Voronoi site). We calculated the accurate area of the cell polygons rather than counting the pixels in the discrete Voronoi cells. Finally, we computed the photon density map by dividing the original image by the area map. An example of a Voronoi tessellation and its associated photon density map is shown in Figure \[opdCorr\]. To identify source candidates, the photon density map must be compared with a background map, which is generated as described in the following section.
{width="\textwidth"}
Background map generation\[bkgmap\]
-----------------------------------
A photon in an X-ray image can be associated to a source or the background. The background is defined as the sum of all contributions not associated to astronomical sources, or associated to some astronomical component that cannot be resolved (like the Galactic diffuse emission). We estimated the average background flux adopting the same method as used in @ebeling93 [see their section D]. We assumed that the background photons in the exposure-corrected image, which is obtained by dividing the photon density image by the exposure map, are distributed according to the Poisson statistics, and that the fraction of filled pixels with the lowest photon density values are dominated by background. Fitting a simple analytical model to the distribution of the low photon-density pixels, an average background intensity was estimated. The final background map of the image in units of $photon/pixel$ is obtained by multiplying the mean background flux by the exposure map. In this way the variations across the field of view due to vignetting, edges of the chips, or missing columns and pixels were taken into account.
We adopted a constant background for each exposure-corrected XRT image. This choice is reasonable for XRT images as we tested with simulations. However, it may not apply to images with strong background variations. Another caveat is that this method works properly when the number of occupied pixels is dominated by background photons. Thus it cannot be applied to fields dominated by source emission (for example, very shallow fields with very bright sources, or with extended sources that cover the entire FOV). For such fields a manual treatment of the background is preferable. We plan to introduce a more sophisticated background treatment in a future version of the code.
FOF detection and deblending\[fof\]
-----------------------------------
In the FOF algorithm two occupied pixels whose distance is smaller than a chosen linking length are defined as [*friends*]{}. Starting from any occupied pixel, all its [*friends*]{} are associated with it, and then [*friends*]{} of its [*friends*]{}, until no more new [*friends*]{} can be found. All connected pixels (or the corresponding Voronoi cells) constitute a source candidate. The FOF algorithm is iteratively applied to all involved pixels, until all of them are assigned to some source candidates. We ran FOF on the occupied pixels whose photon density was above the background level. This choice is very generous in the sense that several spurious detections may survive above the background level. However, we preferred to start with a large list of candidates and to refine it later, a procedure often adopted [see @broos].
The direct application of the FOF algorithm results in a large number of blended sources, as mentioned also in @ebeling93. However, given the relatively low number density of sources in the X-ray sky [^4], most of the blended sources overlap only in their fainter outer regions, while their bright cores, corresponding to the peak of the PSF, remain isolated. In principle, the blended sources can be deblended by raising the threshold well above the background level.
The threshold necessary to separate two blended sources varies according to the background, the distance between the sources, and the size of the sources themselves, which, for unresolved sources, is determined only by the PSF profile. This step has been performed by @horner08 on the [vtpdetect]{} direct output. They ran [vtpdetect]{} five times on each X-ray image using different thresholds of surface brightness, and then selected the best threshold for each field by visually inspecting the source photon distribution for each threshold value. This procedure is reliable but time-consuming, especially for a large survey that spans a wide range of exposure times and therefore surface brightness thresholds. As previously anticipated, a major improvement of our new software consists in including the auto-deblending procedure in the algorithm.
As a first step, to flag blended sources, we created a number of source maps[^5] by running FOF with thresholds corresponding to different photon densities, starting from the lowest (corresponding to the background level, map with index $j=1$) to the highest value present in the photon density image, distributed on a logarithmic scale. Clearly, the source regions defined in the map $j=1 $ will be larger than the regions in the higher order maps. An example of this process is shown in Figure \[separate\], where two blended sources are identified by FOF as one in panels 1 to 4, and finally as two separate sources in panel 5. A source is tagged as blended whenever its source region includes more than one source in one of the higher order maps.
At this point we had a list of sources virtually free from blending. Their positions were assigned by searching for the pixel whose $3\times 3$ square island has the largest number of photons. Then we separated the blended sources among the most reasonable non-overlapping source regions, without assuming a source brightness model. This is obtained as follows. For each pair of blended sources, we can find a threshold above which they are detected without overlapping pixels. Sorting all occupied pixels by their photon densities, we identify the pixel with the lowest value whose inclusion causes the bridging of the two sources. This pixel is flagged as a [*bridge pixel*]{} and is removed from the original image. After a [*bridge pixel*]{} is found and removed, we again run FOF on all occupied pixels above local background. Unless the sources are detected separately by FOF, we repeat the above procedure to identify a new [*bridge pixel*]{}. The final set of [*bridge pixels*]{} is the minimum set of the faintest filled pixels we need to remove to separate the two sources. This process can be seen in Figure \[separate\] going from panel 5 back to panel 1. As soon as the set of [*bridge pixels*]{} are found and removed, the regions of the two sources are built directly with FOF. At the last step, each one of the bridge pixels are re-assigned to one of the two sources, with a simple criterion based on the neighboring filled pixels: if the majority of them belong to a given source, the [*bridge pixel*]{} is assigned to this source. In the very few cases where this condition does not apply, the bridge pixel is assigned randomly. The final result is shown in panel 6 of Figure \[separate\].
![Example of the deblending procedure applied to two unresolved sources spaced by $\sim 6$ pixels. In panels 1–5 we show the pixels whose photon density is above a threshold that increases at each step. [*Bridge pixels*]{} (see text for the definition) are marked with green boxes and are identified backwards starting from panel 4 to 1. Panel 6 shows the two sources identified separately, with the [ *bridge pixels*]{} re-assigned according to a local criterion.[]{data-label="separate"}](separate.ps){width="\linewidth"}
There are some cases that require special treatments. The first one concerns blending of extended sources. In principle, blended extended sources cannot be separated without making assumptions on their surface brightness distributions. However, for most of the extended sources we are interested in, such as regular clusters with only one bright cool core, it is reasonable to assume that the surface brightness decreases monotonically from the core to the edge. In such cases, blended extended sources can be separated with the same method as described above. This step is left as an option. The second case is the bridging between extended sources and background overdensity regions, which results in branch-like shapes at the edge of extended sources. We managed to clean such cases by identifying the [*cut-vertex*]{}. A [*cut-vertex*]{} is similar to a [*bridge pixel*]{}, but it is defined as the single pixel whose removal allows one to separate the blended sources into two or more components in the image. Clearly, the presence of a [*cut-vertex*]{} indicates a weak connection between two regions. Cutting off these weak connections allowed us to efficiently reduce the bridging of real extended sources with background fluctuations.
Reliability filter and source classification\[classification\]
--------------------------------------------------------------
We applied a reliability criterion by comparing the total photons $C_{total}$ inside the source region to the number of background photons $Bkg$ expected in the same area, as obtained from the background map. We computed the S/N as $C_{net}/\sqrt{Bkg}$, where $C_{net}=C_{total}-Bkg$. This is not the traditional definition of the S/N, which is net counts over the square root of the total counts (source plus background) for Poisson statistics. However, this definition[^6] is a good estimator of the probability of a source to be inconsistent with a Poissonian background fluctuation. In Figure \[poisson\] we show the curves in the $C_{net}-Bkg$ plane that correspond to $S/N = 3,\, 4$ and to a Poissonian probability of $10^{-3}$ and $10^{-4}$ of to be a random fluctuations. A filter for a given reliability threshold can be applied by setting the S/N threshold to the required confidence level. In the remainder of the paper we set this threshold to $S/N > 4$, corresponding to a Poissonian probability of $10^{-4}$ of the signal inside the source region being random fluctuation. We verified [*a posteriori*]{} that with this condition our algorithm is able to detect extended sources down to a flux level much lower than that required to characterize them as extended. Therefore, this step does not significantly affect the final flux limit for extended source detection. The filter was applied not only to the final source list, but also [*on the run*]{} to the temporary source list to avoid applying the extension criterion to unreliable sources and thus to reduce the computation time.
![Curves in the net photons-background photons plane corresponding to a probability $p$ of $10^{-3}$ or $10^{-4}$ of being a random fluctuation (red lines), compared with those corresponding to $S/N$ of $3$ or $4$ (blue lines). Curves for $S/N=4$, $p=10^{-4}$ and $S/N=3$, $p=10^{-3}$ are shown with solid and dashed lines, respectively.[]{data-label="poisson"}](poisson_snr.eps){width="\linewidth"}
\[0cm\]\[0cm\][{width="40.00000%"}]{} {width="65.00000%"}
To classify all sources according to their extent, we drew a circle centered on the position of each source after masking all surrounding detected sources. The radius was chosen to enclose $60\%\sim70\%$ energy (slightly larger than $HEW/2$ of the PSF). For the sources that survived the reliability filter, we produced a normalized cumulative profile in the core circle by sorting each pixel according to the distance from the source position, and summing all photons at shorter distance [^7]. A reference profile for the instrument PSF was calculated in the same way. The two profiles were then compared with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test. Under the null hypothesis that they are drawn from the same distribution, this procedure gives us the probability that the source image is not consistent with being unresolved in the core region. An example is shown in Figure \[kstest\]. Based on this procedure, we can classify the source as unresolved or extended by setting a threshold on the null-hypothesis probability of the KS test. This threshold must be chosen [*a posteriori*]{} after extensive simulations to keep both the contamination and the completeness of the sample under control. This is shown for [*Swift*]{}-XRT in §\[simu\].
The KS null-hypothesis probability also depends on the net detected photons and the background level. As we show in Section 3, one simple but effective way is to set the threshold that divides the unresolved from the extended source in the probability-S/N plane. The optimal threshold is determined through extensive simulations by computing the completeness (fraction of recovered extended sources) and the contamination (number of sources spuriously classified as extended) and choosing the best compromise.
One may argue that a small region (the core circle) is not the best choice for classification, because extended sources are maximally different from unresolved sources at large radii. However, because of the low S/N in the outer regions, it turns out that it is more efficient to focus on the core region where the S/N is maximized. However, this choice may cause the loss of extended sources whenever a bright unresolved source in the center is present.[^8]. This may occur because of a strong (typically unrelated) unresolved source is embedded in the extended emission, or because of the presence of a bright cool core whose size is below the angular resolution. To overcome this problem, we applied a supplementary step to recover most of these sources. We considered all sources that are classified as unresolved but with KS null-hypothesis probability $> 50\%$. For each of these sources, we normalized the local PSF to the total photon inside the core region and calculated the radius where it reaches $1/2$ the [*local*]{} background level. Since the edges resulting from the FOF algorithm are set by the [*overall*]{} background level, the circles defined by this criterion should not be entirely encompassed by the FOF source regions. If this happens, though, it may imply the presence of extended emission embedded in a larger background region (for whatever reason) and the source is tentatively classified with a flag as extended. We remark, however, that this procedure may introduce several false candidates if the PSF shape is not completely under control. Eventually, these cases may be visually inspected for final inclusion in the extended source list. Finally, as a very last step, extended sources found within a larger, surrounding extended source are merged into it and considered part of the largest one.
Source regions and aperture photometry\[photometry\]
----------------------------------------------------
The definition of a FOF detected source region depends on the linking length, which is the only parameter of FOF. The linking length is defined as the median distance between occupied pixels in a pure background image, and therefore it depends on the background intensity only. An estimate of the linking length in units of pixel size is given by $\sqrt{Bkg^{-1}}$, where $Bkg$ is in units of $photon/pixel$. Clearly the linking length depends on the position on the image, therefore we defined a linking length map according to the background map. Using this linking length, the borders of each source are automatically defined as the [*loci*]{} where the photon density is equal to the background density. We recall that the photon density still includes both the source signal and the background, since no background was subtracted from the image. With this definition, statistically the entire signal associated to the source is included in the FOF region. In other words, this choice of the linking length corresponds to a precise definition of the source boundaries, and allows us to perform aperture photometry directly inside the FOF region.
For the sources classified as extended, the regions obtained by FOF were used as photometry aperture. However, unresolved sources that are well-described by the PSF shape were treated differently. For each source classified as unresolved, we normalized the PSF to the total photon inside the core region and calculated the radius where it reaches $1/2$ the local background level. This defines the extraction radius for all unresolved sources. When two unresolved sources are closer than this radius, the overlapping pixels were assigned to the one with the brighter expected value in that position. A more sophisticated treatment including a source-fitting procedure is planned to be introduced in a future version of the algorithm.
We calculated the total number of photons within each source region from the original image, and the total background photons within the same region from the background map. Aperture photometry for each source was simply computed as the total number of photons minus the number of background photons. After all these steps, we obtained a list of extended source candidates without any [*a priori*]{} assumptions on their intrinsic size and properties. For each source, we provide position and area, together with its aperture photometry, and the normalized exposure time corresponding to the emission-weighted exposure in the source region.
Application to [*Swift*]{}-XRT archival data\[simu\]
====================================================
One of our goals is to provide a flexible algorithm that can be used for extensive simulations adapted to specific cases. This is a relevant aspect since the performance of any algorithm changes significantly as a function of instrument characteristics, such as resolution and background level. In this section we describe set-up of simulations to obtain a characterization of a survey in terms of completeness and contamination. We describe the specific case of the X-ray Telescope (XRT) onboard the [*Swift*]{} satellite, which has been used mainly to follow up gamma-ray bursts (GRB), and which so far provided a serendipitous survey of about 70 deg$^2$ of the X-ray sky [see @tundo12]. The result of this section will be used in a forthcoming paper to characterize the final catalog (from about 400 deg$^2$) of SXCS (Liu et al. in preparation).
XRT image simulation
--------------------
{width="\textwidth"}
@tundo12 used a first chunk of the XRT archive as of April 2010 including 336 GRB follow-up fields with Galactic latitude $|b|>20\ $deg, resulting in a catalog of 72 extended X-ray sources (catalog I). Several of these sources have already been identified as groups or clusters thanks to a cross-correlation with available optically data (mostly from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey) or have been confirmed as clusters thanks to a detailed X-ray spectral analysis (Moretti et al. in preparation).
The selection method used in @tundo12 was based on the [wavdetect]{} algorithm and a simple growth-curve characterization. Completeness and contamination levels were kept under control thanks to the relatively high detection threshold adopted in catalog I (corresponding to at least 100 net counts in the soft band). We intend to increase both the sensitivity and the sky coverage of SXCS by applying the algorithm described here to the full [*Swift*]{}-XRT archive (updated to November 2011), after removing all fields with Galactic latitude $|b|>20$ deg or originally targeted at groups or clusters. Thanks to a much larger number of fields ($\gtrsim 3000$) and a lower flux limit than that adopted in @tundo12, we expect a significantly larger number of extended sources ($\gtrsim 300$). To push the detection limit of extended sources down to the faintest possible fluxes, we need to robustly assess the completeness and the contamination levels of the survey.
To the aim of building simulations as close as possible to the actual survey, we generated one image for each field in the soft band using the same exposure time, exposure map, Galactic column density, energy conversion factor (ECF), and background flux as in the real image (see Figure \[realmockimages\] for a comparison of a real image and a mock image of the same field). Point sources were randomly extracted from a distribution consistent with the logN-logS measured in deep [*Chandra*]{} fields [@2002Rosati; @lehmer2012] and simulated down to fluxes about one order of magnitudes lower than the expected detection limit of XRT images. For each input source we converted the intrinsic soft-band flux into photon rate, using the appropriate ECFs, which are computed as in @tundo12, taking into account the Galactic absorption. While computing the ECF, we assumed a spectral slope of $\Gamma = 1.4$, which is justified by the observed stacked spectrum of all unresolved sources in the flux range of interest, as shown in deep-field studies [see, e.g., @tozzi01]. Given the exposure time, we computed the expected photon rate from each simulated source. Then the image of each unresolved source was created by distributing these photons according to the PSF of XRT [@2007Moretti]. After randomly distributing the sources across the field, the exposure map was used to apply vignetting correction at a given position.
It is admittedly a limitation of our simulations that we assumed no spatial correlation between sources. However, we argue that adding a correlation among X-ray sources would not significantly affect the final results. In particular, our algorithm includes a treatment of unresolved sources embedded within extended ones (see the last paragraph in §\[classification\]), which reduces the impact of the correlation between unresolved and extended sources.
The background level of each field was measured from the actual SXCS image with the method described in Section \[bkgmap\]. This background was added with a Poissonian distribution to the mock image. The added background already includes the contributions from sources below the detection limit of each image. Since the mock unresolved sources are simulated down to fluxes well below the detection limit in XRT images, the contribution of sub-threshold sources would be counted twice. To account for this effect, we consistently revised the value of the background downward. The background values were checked a posteriori by comparing the background of the final simulated images with that in the corresponding real images.
The flux distribution of the input extended sources was taken from the logN-logS of groups and clusters measured in the ROSAT deep cluster survey [@rosati98]. We did not consider other extended sources such as radio jets or nearby resolved normal galaxies. As previously mentioned, the morphology of extended sources may affect detection at a significant level toward the faint end. To take into account the different morphologies of groups and clusters, we used ten real images of relatively bright groups and clusters of galaxies obtained with the [*Chandra*]{} satellite, covering a wide range in ICM temperature (from 2 to 8 keV). The source image was obtained by rescaling the original [*Chandra*]{} image to the number of net photons expected for XRT, and to the source size typically corresponding to the source flux, adopting the phenomenologically observed relation between X-ray size and flux. This is just an approximation adopted to avoid unrealistic sources with large size and low flux or vice versa, but the details or the intrinsic scatter of this relation do not affect the results of the simulations. This technique has already been used to investigate the evolution of cool core clusters at high-z in @santos10. The expected net photons were computed as for the unresolved sources, adopting the ECF appropriate for a thermal spectrum, which, as shown in @tundo12, has a weak dependence on the actual temperature and redshift of the source. Finally the mock cluster image was convolved with the XRT PSF.
Detection efficiency and contamination
--------------------------------------
According to the definition in §\[classification\], a core radius of 5 pixel sizes (corresponding to $\sim 12$ arcsec, enclosing $\sim60\%$ of the total energy) was chosen. In Figure \[distinguish\] we show the threshold in the KS-test probability–S/N plane that we used to classify a source as extended. In the same plane we show the difference between the number of extended and unresolved sources as a color-coded grid. This immediately shows that the threshold has been defined simply by the condition of having an equal number of spurious and extended source in a given position on the grid. In the following we compute the fraction of recovered extended sources and the contamination level of our survey based on this simple choice. We stress that the final properties of the survey critically depends on this selection curve. One may want to change the selection curve to find the best compromise between completeness and contamination required for a given scientific goal: this can be done by applying different selection curves to the simulations.
![ Selection curves in the KS-test probability–S/N plane (magenta solid line). The color-coded grid indicates the absolute value of the number of unresolved minus the number of extended sources. Regions dominated by unresolved sources are depicted in blue, while regions dominated by extended sources are shown in red. The selection curve has been defined as the loci of zeros on the grid. The cyan line refers to a KS-test probability of $50\%$. []{data-label="distinguish"}](classification.eps){width="\linewidth"}
The completeness is defined as the fraction of recovered extended sources in a given net photon bin. We have a $100\%$ completeness above $\sim 200$ input net soft photons, and a gentle decrease down to $80\%$ at $\sim 60$ photons. As shown in Figure \[completeness\], the completeness also depends on the source extent, with larger sources having higher identification probability. This effect of course depends on the cluster population we used, which may not reflect the actual cluster population at high-z (or faint fluxes) that is still largely unknown. In the following, when we consider the average completeness as a function of the source photometry, we account for the mix of surface brightness distributions used in the simulation. We acknowledge that a group/cluster population with different morphologies can give different completeness curves.
The completeness curve can be used to set a net photon threshold to the final source list. For example, if one allows a minimum completeness level of 90%, all sources with more than 80 net photons are included in the final catalog. The sharp limit in net photons immediately translates into a flux limit for each exposure time. For each field we computed a flux-limit map obtained as ECF$(N_H)\times80/Expmap(t)$, where ECF depends on the Galactic column density, and $Expmap(t)$ (the exposure map in units of effective time) includes the effect of vignetting. Then, the solid angle covered by the survey above a given flux was obtained by measuring the total solid angle where the flux-limit is lower than a given flux. In Figure \[skycov\] we show the resulting sky coverage $\Omega (S)$ of the total SXCS (Liu et al. in preparation) and compare it with the sky coverage of the 400 Square Degree ROSAT PSPC Galaxy Cluster Survey by @burenin07_400d and with the sky coverage used in @tundo12, which corresponds to a sharp limit of 100 net photons and a much smaller number of fields.
![Color-coded 2D completeness distribution in the photometry-size plane. For a given value of detected net photons, larger sources are more easily identified (i.e., detected and characterized as extended). []{data-label="completeness"}](completeness.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![Sky coverage of the complete SXCS (Liu et al. in preparation) compared with that of the first SXCS release [@tundo12] and with the 400sd survey [@burenin07_400d].[]{data-label="skycov"}](skycov.eps){width="\linewidth"}
The other key aspect to be kept under control is the contamination level. The cumulative number of unresolved sources spuriously classified as extended above a given photometry is shown in Figure \[contamination\]. This value is rapidly increasing below 100 net counts. At around 80 net photons, the contamination is reaching a high level of about 40 sources in the entire survey. As shown in Figure \[contamination\], most of the contamination is due to deep fields (with exposure times $> 10^5$ s), which have a higher background and more blended sources. One option to reduce the contamination is to apply tighter constraints on the source classification. Of course, this would affect the completeness, and the best compromise must be fine-tuned with several trials. Another option is to proceed with a visual inspection of all extended source candidates.
Visual inspection has already been used in @tundo12, and it is often used in [*XMM-Newton*]{} cluster surveys as well. It consists of a careful image inspection of each extended source candidate to reject all sources that appear to be dominated by the contribution of unresolved sources. Since most of the spurious candidates are found in high-exposure fields, this procedure is performed only on fields with exposure times $> 10^5$ s. As shown in Figure \[contamination\] by comparing the solid and dashed lines, this procedure reduces the number of spurious sources with more than $\sim 80$ photons to an acceptable level: only $\sim$ ten spurious sources are now expected in the entire survey (about $400$ deg$^2$), as opposed to $40$ before the visual inspection. In our simulations, only one extended source with more than 80 net photons has been erroneously discarded with the visual inspection. This result shows that X-ray astronomy would greatly benefit by visual analysis, as already successfully done for optical extragalactic astronomy in the form of “crowd sourcing” experiments [see, e.g., @lintott08].
![Cumulative number (top) and fraction (bottom) of sources spuriously classified as extended as a function of the measured net photons, before (blue) and after (red) visual inspection. Results of fields with exposure time $< 10^5$ s and $> 10^5$ s are plotted separately, showing that most of the contamination comes from deep fields. []{data-label="contamination"}](contamination.eps){width="\linewidth"}
We also verified the accuracy of our extended source photometry. In Figure \[cts-cts\] we show the input versus the recovered net photons in the soft band for all sources identified as extended. Spurious extended sources (marked as blue points) typically have overestimated fluxes, because they are often due to blending of unresolved sources. For all properly characterized extended sources the photometry agrees very well with the actual fluxes and no significant bias is observed. The cumulative number counts for sources detected with more than 80 net photons is finally computed as
$$N(>S) = \Sigma_{S_i>S} C_i^{-1}/\Omega(S_i) \, ,
\label{lnls}$$
where $S$ is the total soft flux, $S_i$ is the soft flux within the extraction radius of the $i^{th}$ source, and $\Omega(S_i)$ is the sky coverage corresponding to $S_i$ [see @tundo12]. Finally, $C_i$ is the average completeness factor corresponding to a given source photometry, which depends on the net detected photons of the $i^{th}$ source and it is estimated on the basis of the mix of surface brightness distribution assumed in the calibrating simulations (see Figure \[completeness\]). In this way, each source is weighted with a factor inversely proportional to the survey completeness.
This treatment is correct only if we can ignore the effects of the statistical errors on the flux measurements. In reality, flux errors, due to the Poissonian noise on the aperture photometry of each source, introduce a Malmquist bias. In other words, the measured cumulative number counts $N(>S)$ are biased high by an amount roughly estimated as $\Delta N(>S) \sim \alpha \times N(>S) \Delta Cts/ Cts$, where $\alpha$ is the slope of the logN-logS, and $Cts$ is the typical number of measured photons at the survey limit. If we assume a low background, as in the case of XRT, we can assume $\Delta Cts \sim \sqrt{Cts}$. For $Cts\sim 80$ and $N\sim 300$ as in our case, we estimate $\Delta N\sim 30$, which implies about 35 sources above the detection limit due to the Malmquist bias. This is a crude estimate, but the Malmquist bias is consistently included in our simulations, since it can be directly computed from the ratio of the recovered and input sources as a function of the [*measured*]{} total net photons. Once the Malmquist bias was taken into account, we checked that we recovered the input model of the logN-logS with good accuracy.
![Net recovered photons vs input photons for the extended sources detected in the simulation (red points). Spurious extended sources are also shown (blue points). The best-fit for sources with more than 80 net photons is $C_{out} = 0.996\times C_{in} +
0.383$. []{data-label="cts-cts"}](cts-cts.eps){width="\linewidth"}
Improving the angular resolution
================================
Angular resolution is a key factor for detecting faint sources. A high angular resolution enables the identification of unresolved sources even with an extremely low number of photons . Angular resolution is clearly also crucial to distinguish between extended and unresolved X-ray sources, and to remove the contribution of faint unresolved sources, which otherwise would be confused with the extended emission itself. To study the impact of angular resolution on X-ray surveys and in particular in the identification of extended sources, we again ran the entire set of simulations after improving the PSF by a factor of two. This corresponds to an imaginary instrument with the same properties as [*Swift*]{}-XRT, including pixel size, field of view, and background level, but its PSF HEW is only $9$ arcsec, half of the original HEW of XRT [@2007Moretti]. With this sharper PSF, the core radius was chosen to be 3 pixel sizes ($\sim7\ $ arcsec, enclosing $\sim 65\%$ of the total source energy of an unresolved source). A classification threshold curve was chosen with the same criterion. As shown in Figure \[sharp\], the completeness of the simulation is significantly improved, while the contamination is reduced. With this enhanced resolution, we can identify extended sources down to a much lower flux limit at similar completeness and contamination levels. We did not include the visual inspection here, but instead compared the direct outcome of the source detection algorithm. As a rule of thumb, we find that by improving the angular resolution by a factor of two we can identify extended sources down to a flux limit about 60% lower for the same completeness and contamination levels. We also expect that visual inspection would improve the final results significantly.
![Distributions of differential recovered fraction (upper panel) and cumulative contamination fraction (lower panel) in our simulations, obtained with standard XRT PSF ($HEW = 18$ arcsec, blue line) and with a sharper PSF ($HEW = 9$ arcsec, red line). []{data-label="sharp"}](sharp.eps){width="\linewidth"}
This exercise shows that angular resolution is critical for the performance of an X-ray survey mission. While a powerful, small FOV, pointing telescope should maximize angular resolution at the aimpoint as in the classical Wolter type mirrors, a survey telescope should maximize the area-weighted angular resolution on the entire FOV. The only mission designed according to this criterion is the proposed Wide Field X-ray Telescope [WFXT, @2010WFXT; @wfxt1]. The advantage with respect to a Wolter type-I mirror configuration is clearly shown by the comparison of the $1$ deg$^2$ [*Chandra*]{} COSMOS image, worth of the 1.8Ms [@elvis2009], to the simulated WFXT COSMOS field, obtained with only 13ks WFXT exposure [@wfxt2]. The simulated WFXT image has an angular resolution lower by only a factor of $2$ than the average resolution of the [*Chandra*]{} mosaic, in front of a $\sim 10$ time larger HEW of the WFXT PSF with respect to [*Chandra*]{}. This is because using a Wolter type-I telescope in survey mode results in an average resolution much poorer than the nominal aimpoint resolution, due to the rapid degradation of the angular resolution at large off-axis angle, where most of the FOV resides.
Conclusions\[conclusions\]
==========================
The combined use of VT and FOF can provide an efficient algorithm for detecting faint extended sources in X-ray images. Although such an algorithm is available to the scientific community for many years [@ebeling93], it has not been used widely for searching extended sources, possibly because of the complex implementation of the method. In this work we present an updated implementation of VT and FOF, plus an automated deblending procedure, in a software ([*EXSdetect*]{}) for the identification of extended source detection in X-ray images. The aim is to provide a user-friendly, end-to-end algorithm that can be used to exploit present X-ray data archives and to explore the performance of future X-ray missions. Among the most relevant properties of [*EXSdetect*]{} are the following:
- we include source detection, classification and photometry, which are usually performed independently, in a single stand-alone algorithm. We also include a self-consistent deblending procedure that efficiently reduces the number of blended sources;
- thanks to our python implementation of the sweep-line algorithm, the adopted Voronoi construction scheme is fast also on large images;
- only the PSF of the instrument across the FOV is necessary to run the algorithm, and no [*a priori*]{} assumption on the shape of the extended sources is needed;
- the reasonably short computation time allows one to run extensive simulations to optimize the internal parameters such as the selection curve for detecting and characterizing extended sources, which depend on the survey properties.
We also tested our algorithm on extensive simulations run for the SXCS survey. While the survey presented in @tundo12 consists of about 40 deg$^2$, here we considered a substantial extension of the survey, with a huge increase of the sky coverage particularly at bright fluxes. We find that, with our algorithm, we can detect and characterize extended sources with total net photons as low as $80$ (in the soft band) with a completeness higher than $90\%$. The contamination amounts to a few tens of sources, but can be drastically reduced by visual inspection. In the simulations we recovered the input logN-logS with great accuracy down to a flux of $10^{-14}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. This algorithm is currently being applied to the real SXCS data and the final catalog will be presented in Liu et al. (in preparation). The simple exercise of improving the angular resolution by a factor of two shows that the corresponding sensitivity to extended source detection improves by a factor $\sim 1.6$.
To summarize, [*EXSdetect*]{} is a new tool to exploit the huge X-ray archives from existing X-ray facilities like [*Chandra*]{}, [*XMM-Newton*]{}, [*Swift*]{}, and [*Suzaku*]{}. At the same time it is also very useful to explore the capability of future X-ray facilities. The Python code [*EXSdetect*]{} is available on the SXCS website (<http://adlibitum.oats.inaf.it/sxcs>) and it is open to continuous refinements and updates.
We thank the referee, Harald Ebeling, for a detailed and helpful report that significantly improved our work. LT & WJX acknowledge support from Chinese NSF grant 10825312 & 11233002. We acknowledge support from ASI-INAF I/088/06/0, ASI-INAF I/009/10/0, and from INFN PD51.
[^1]: These works identify overdensities in the field of galaxies using a third information in addition to the 2D galaxy coordinates, such as redshift, magnitude, or color.
[^2]: http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao4.4/
[^3]: The computing time scales as $O(n\log n)$, where $n$ is the number of occupied pixels. Using the sweep-line algorithm, the time spent on Voronoi construction is negligible compared to the subsequent steps.
[^4]: This clearly depends on the depth of the image. At the flux levels currently explored in the deepest survey [$\sim 10^{-17}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ in the soft band in the CDFS, see @xue11], this value is about $2\times 10^4$ deg$^{-2}$ [@lehmer2012], and only thanks to the high angular resolution of [*Chandra*]{} this value is still far from the confusion limit. Nevertheless, most of the archival X-ray data available at present are, at best, one or two orders of magnitudes less sensitive than the CDFS, which will remain for a long time the deepest X-ray image of the sky.
[^5]: The number of the maps can vary; a number around 10 guarantees robust results.
[^6]: See also http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/W3Browse/all/cxoxassist.html
[^7]: For an asymmetric PSF the distance of each pixel to the source position can be changed to the according PSF value of each pixel.
[^8]: This effect seems to be negligible in real X-ray images, as shown, for example, by the X-ray follow-up of optically and IR selected clusters, which indicate that the occurrence of strong X-ray unresolved sources associated with the extended emission from groups and clusters of galaxies is very rare [see @hicks08; @big08]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present a systematic $^{115}$In NQR study on the heavy fermion compounds CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_5$ ($x$=0.25, 0.35, 0.45, 0.5, 0.55 and 0.75). The results provide strong evidence for the microscopic coexistence of antiferromagnetic (AF) order and superconductivity (SC) in the range of 0.35 $\leq x \leq$ 0.55. Specifically, for $x$=0.5, $T_N$ is observed at 3 K with a subsequent onset of superconductivity at $T_c$=0.9 K. $T_c$ reaches a maximum (0.94 K) at $x$=0.45 where $T_N$ is found to be the highest (4.0 K). Detailed analysis of the measured spectra indicate that the same electrons participate in both SC and AF order. The nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rate $1/T_1$ shows a broad peak at $T_N$ and follows a $T^3$ variation below $T_c$, the latter property indicating unconventional SC as in CeIrIn$_5$ ($T_c$=0.4 K). We further find that, in the coexistence region, the $T^3$ dependence of $1/T_1$ is replaced by a $T$-linear variation below $T\sim$0.4 K, with the value $\frac{(T_1)_{T_c}}{(T_1)_{low-T}}$ increasing with decreasing $x$, likely due to low-lying magnetic excitations associated with the coexisting magnetism.'
address:
- '$^1$Department of Physical Science, Graduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka University, Osaka 560-8531, Japan'
- '$^2$ Condensed Matter and Thermal Physics, MS K764, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA'
author:
- 'Guo-qing Zheng$^{1,*}$, N. Yamaguchi$^1$, H. Kan$^1$, Y. Kitaoka$^1$, J. L. Sarrao$^2$, P.G. Pagliuso$^2$, N.O. Moreno$^2$, J. D. Thompson$^2$'
title: ' Coexistence of antiferromagnetic order and unconventional superconductivity in heavy fermion compounds CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_5$: nuclear quadrupole resonance studies'
---
Introduction
============
Superconductivity and long-range magnetic order are two outstanding quantum phenomena; however these ground states are not generally displayed by the same electrons simultaneously. This is because an internal magnetic field arising from magnetic order usually destroys superconductivity. In the 1970s, a number of materials were found to host both superconductivity and magnetic order, but the two orders were due to different electrons and occurred in spatially-separated regions . This is also true in the recently reported ruthenate-cuprate hybrid compound RuSr$_2$RCu$_2$O$_8$ (R=rare earth) where the RuO and CuO$_2$ planes are responsible for the magnetic order and superconductivity, respectively [@Barnhart]. An exceptional case is the heavy fermion compound UPd$_2$Al$_3$ in which magnetic order and superconductivity coexist homogeneously [@Geibel; @Tou]. In this system, however, it is believed that the multiple bands of uranium (U) electrons make such coexistence possible. Namely, among three U-5f electrons, the two with localized character are responsible for the magnetism and the remaining one is responsible for superconductivity [@Sato; @Miyake]. Such “duality” may also be at work in other U-based heavy fermion magneto-superconductors [@Geibel2; @UGe2; @URhGe]. It is therefore an outstanding question whether magnetic order and superconductivity due to the same electrons can coexist on a microscopic length scale. Although it has been proposed theoretically that magnetism and superconductivity may be viewed as two sub-components of a unified group and that they may coexist under certain conditions [@Zhang], accumulation of convincing experimental evidence is important. The Ce-based heavy fermion compounds and high superconducting transition-temperature ($T_c$) copper oxides are hosts of single-band magnetism or/and superconductivity, and are therefore good candidate materials for exploring this problem.
Recently, it has been suggested that in the layered heavy fermion compounds Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$)In$_5$ [@Pagliuso] and Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Co$_{x}$)In$_5$ [@Maple] and also CeRhIn$_5$ under pressure [@Mito; @Kawasaki], antiferromagnetism and superconductivity coexist. CeRh(Ir)In$_5$ crystallizes in a tetragonal structure which consists of CeIn$_3$ layers separated by a Rh(Ir)In$_2$ block. CeRhIn$_5$ is an antiferromagnet with $T_N$=3.7 K, but becomes superconducting under pressures above 1.6 GPa [@Hegger]. CeIrIn$_5$ is a superconductor at ambient pressure with $T_c$=0.4 K [@Petrovic] and line nodes in the superconducting energy gap [@Zheng]. It is remarkable that the magnetic fluctuations exhibit quasi two-dimensional character as revealed by NQR [@Zheng] and neutron scattering [@Bao1] measurements, probably reflecting the layered crystal structure. Upon substituting Rh with Ir, superconductivity was found in Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$)In$_5$ for $x$$>$0.3, while magnetic order continued to be observed around 3.8 K in the specific heat for x$\leq$0.5 (Ref. [@Pagliuso]) and an internal magnetic field was detected by muon spin rotation measurement [@Morris].
In this paper, we present results obtained from nuclear quadrupole resonance (NQR) measurements on Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$)In$_5$ that strongly suggest that antiferromagnetic (AF) order coexists microscopically with unconventional superconductivity (SC). We find that upon replacing Rh with Ir in the antiferromagnet CeRhIn$_5$, the Neel temperature $T_N$ increases slightly with increasing Ir content up to $x$=0.45 then decreases rapidly. Superconductivity sets in above $x\sim$0.35 and $T_c$ reaches a maximum of 0.94 K at $x$=0.45. The nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rate $1/T_1$ shows a broad peak at $T_N$ and follows a $T^3$ variation below $T_c$, the latter feature indicating that the SC is unconventional as in CeIrIn$_5$. In the coexistence region, $1/T_1$ becomes proportional to $T$ at very low temperatures in the superconducting state and the value $T_1(T=T_c)/T_1$ increases in the order of x=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45, which suggests the existence of low-lying magnetic excitations in addition to the residual density of states (DOS) due to the presence of disorder.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The experimental details are described in Section II. In Section III, the NQR spectroscopy that indicates the homogeneous alloying of the samples is presented. The results of the nuclear spin lattice relaxation that evidence the coexistence of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity are also presented in Section III, along with evidence for the unconventional nature of the superconductivity. We conclude in Section IV, following a brief discussion of the phase diagram deduced from our NQR measurements.
Experimetal
===========
Single crystals of Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$)In$_5$ used in this study were grown by the In-flux method [@Hegger]. For NQR measurements, the single crystals were crushed into a powder of moderate particle size to allow maximal penetration of the oscillating magnetic field, $H_1$, used in the NQR measurements. The measurements below 1.4 K were performed by using a $^{3}$He/$^{4}$He dilution refrigerator. NQR experiments were performed using a home-built phase-coherent spectrometer. A standard $\pi$/2-$\pi$-echo pulse sequence was used. A small $H_1$ was used to avoid possible heating by the RF pulse below 1 K; the $\pi$/2 pulse length is about 20 micro-seconds. A CuBe piston-cylinder device [@ZhengSSC], filled with Si-based organic liquid as a pressure-transmitting medium, was used to generate high pressure. The NQR coil was put inside a Teflon cell. To calibrate the pressure at low temperatures, the reduction in $T_{\rm c}$ of Sn metal under pressure was monitored by resistivity measurements [@smith]. $T_c$ of the samples was determined from the ac susceptibility measured by using the NQR coil at a frequency of $\sim$32 MHz, and from the $T_1$ data (see below). $1/T_1$ was measured by the saturation-recovery method. The value of $1/T_1$ was unambiguously extracted from a good fitting of the nuclear magnetization to the expected theoretical curve [@Maclaughlin; @Roos] (discussed in detail below).
![ $^{115}$In NQR spectra at $T$=4.2 K for CeIrIn$_5$ (upper panel [@Zheng]), and for CeRh$_{0.5}$Ir$_{0.5}$In$_5$ (lower panel).[]{data-label="fig:1"}](Fig1.eps)
Results and discussion
======================
Evidence for homogeneous alloying from NQR spectra
--------------------------------------------------
There are two inequivalent crystallographic sites of In in Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$)In$_5$: the In(1) site in the CeIn$_{3}$ plane and the In(2) site in the Rh(Ir)In$_2$ block. The NQR spectra for the In(1) site consist of four equally-spaced transition lines separated by $\nu_Q$, while the In(2) spectra are composed of four un-equally separated lines between 30 and 72 MHz. The spectra of CeIrIn$_5$ (Ref. [@Zheng]) is reproduced in Fig. 1(a). Here $\nu_Q$ is defined as the parameter in the following Hamiltonian, $$\begin{aligned}
H_Q = \frac{h\nu_Q}{6}(3I_z^2-I(I+1)+\frac{1}{2}\eta (I_{+}^2+I_{-}^2))\end{aligned}$$
where $$\begin{aligned}
\nu_Q = \frac{eQV_{zz}}{6I(2I+1)}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\eta = \frac{V_{xx}-V_{yy}}{V_{zz}}\end{aligned}$$
![ $^{115}$In NQR line shape ($\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition) of the In(1) site in CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$ at $T$=4.2 K for various Ir content. The horizontal line under each spectrum is the position of zero intensity for that spectrum.[]{data-label="fig:2"}](Fig2.eps)
A representative spectra for CeRh$_{0.5}$Ir$_{0.5}$In$_5$ is shown in Figure 1(b) . Two effects due to alloying are readily seen in this spectra. First, the transition lines for In(1) are broadened. Second, each transition for In(2) is split into three lines. Although naively this behavior might suggest phase segregation, we argue below by inspecting the Ir-concentration dependence of the spectra, that there is no phase separation in the alloyed sample; rather the sample is globally homogeneous.
Figure 2 shows the NQR line shape at T=4.2 K of the 2$\nu_Q$ transition at the In(1) site for various Ir contents. The $\nu_Q$ decreases monotonically from 6.78 MHz ($x$=0) [@Curro] to 6.065 MHz ($x$=1) [@Zheng], suggesting a smooth evolution of the lattice upon alloying, in agreement with x-ray diffraction measurements [@Pagliuso]. It should be emphasized that no trace of pure CeRhIn$_5$ or CeIrIn$_5$ is found in the alloyed samples because no peaks corresponding to $x$=0 or $x$=1 were observed.
![ $^{115}$In NQR line shape ($\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition) of the In(2) site of CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$ at $T$=4.2 K for various Ir content. In this plot, the vertical axis was adjusted so that all samples have the same height for the central peak (around 32.2 MHz). The signal around 35 MHz for low $x$ is from the second lowest transition ($\pm 1/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$3/2 transition); also see Fig. 1(b).[]{data-label="fig:3"}](Fig3.eps)
Figure 3 shows the spectra corresponding to the lowest transition ($m=\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm 5/2$) line of the In(2) site for various Ir concentration ranging from $x$=0.25 to 0.75. It is interesting that the positions of the three peaks do not change with Ir concentration (Fig. 4(a)), but the relative intensity distribution among these lines does (Fig. 4(b)). Also, the left peak is at the same position of the $m=\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm
5/2$ transition for CeRhIn$_{5}$, while the right peak is at the same position as the corresponding transition for pure CeIrIn$_5$. The central peak is characterized by $\nu_{Q}$=17.37 MHz and $\eta$=0.473.
![(a) Peak frequency of the three $\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition lines of the In(2) site of CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$ at $T$=4.2 K. (b) Ir-content dependence of the relative intensity of the three $\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition lines of the In(2) site of CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$. (c) Ir-content dependence of the peak frequency multiplied by the relative intensity for the three In(2) $\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition lines.[]{data-label="fig:4"}](Fig4.eps)
Figure 4(c) depicts a quantity that is the relative intensity shown in Fig. 4(b) multiplied by the corresponding peak position shown in Fig. 4(a). Most simply, this corresponds to the “weighted peak position” or “averaged resonance frequency” for the $m=\pm
3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm 5/2$ transition. Note that this quantity increases smoothly with increasing Ir concentration.
The results shown in Fig. 4 can be interpreted as follows. In(2) has two nearest neighbor $M$ (Rh, Ir) sites. There are $x$ Ir atoms and $(1-x)$ Rh atoms for a given alloy concentration x. If the NQR frequency is sensitive to the local environment, there will be three resonance lines depending on the nearest neighbor configuration of a given In(2), namely, (Rh, Rh), (Rh, Ir) or (Ir,Ir). The intensity of each peak will be proportional to the probability that In(2) has a corresponding nearest neighbor pair, namely, (Rh, Rh), (Rh, Ir) or (Ir,Ir). Figure 4 strongly suggests that this is the case, with the central transition corresponding to the case with (Rh,Ir) nearest neighbors.
In such a scenario, one might then wonder why In(1) only sees an averaged environment. This is probably because the wave function mixing between In(1) and the $M$ atom is weaker than in the case of In(2), because In(1) is farther away from $M$. In addition, In(1) has eight nearest neighbor $M$ atoms. The effect of having different nearest-neighbor pair is thus further averaged out. As a result, each In(1) transition is observed as a broadened line. This is in contrast to the case of In(2) whose $p$-orbital directly mixes with those of $M$. Since $\nu_Q$ is dominated by the on-site electronic configuration [@Harima], the stronger coupling between In(2) and $M$ atoms gives rise to three distinct resonance lines in the alloyed samples rather than a broad ’single’ transition as in the case of In(1).
Although the In(2) transition is sensitive to the local atomic configuration, it should be emphasized that globally the electronic states are quite homogeneous, as evidenced by the results of spin-lattice relaxation measurements described in the next subsection.
Nuclear spin lattice relaxation and the magnetic ordering
---------------------------------------------------------
The $1/T_1$ measurements were performed at the peak of the 2$\nu_Q$ transition ($m=\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm 5/2$ for the In(1) site and at the central peak of the three lowest frequency transition ($m=\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm 5/2$) lines for the In(2) site. Figure 5 shows the decay curve of the nuclear magnetization for $x$=0.45 at three typical temperatures above and below $T_N$ and $T_c$. At T=0.2K we used a small tipping-angle pulse so that the magnetization is less saturated at small delay time. The decay curve can be fitted by a single component of $T_1$ to the theoretical curve [@Maclaughlin], $$\begin{aligned}
1-\frac{M(t)}{M_0} = \frac{1}{33}
exp(-3\frac{t}{T_1})+\frac{20}{143}
exp(-10\frac{t}{T_1})+\frac{4}{165}exp(-21\frac{t}{T_1})+\frac{576}{715}exp(-36\frac{t}{T_1})\end{aligned}$$ The same quality of data were obtained for all alloys and also for the In(2) site, whose nuclear magnetization is fitted to the theoretical curve [@Roos]with a single component of $T_1$. $$\begin{aligned}
1-\frac{M(t)}{M_0} & =& 0.02421exp(-2.93355\frac{t}{T_1})+0.03961 exp(-8.30137\frac{t}{T_1}) \nonumber \\
& & +0.09771 exp(-16.30355\frac{t}{T_1})+0.83847 exp(-29.75056\frac{t}{T_1})\end{aligned}$$
![ Time dependence of the nuclear magnetization of the In(1) site at various temperatures in CeRh$_{0.55}$Ir$_{0.45}$In$_5$. The curves are fitting to equation (4) in the text.[]{data-label="fig:5)"}](Fig5.eps)
The successful fitting of the nuclear magnetization to the theoretical curve with a single $T_1$ component is a good indicator of the homogeneous nature of the electronic state. Figure 6 shows the temperature dependence of $1/T_1$ measured at the three peaks of In(2) for $x$=0.35. It can be seen that all sites show a quite similar $T$ dependence. Namely, there is a peak around $T$=4 K, although the peak height is reduced as compared to $x$=0 [@Mito3]. The absolute value is also very similar. In the figure, the origin for the left and right peaks were shifted for clarity. These results indicate that the three peaks probe the same electronic state despite the fact that they arise from different nearest-neighbor $M$ configurations.
![Temperature dependence of $1/T_1$ at the three $\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition lines of the In(2) site of CeRh$_{0.65}$Ir$_{0.35}$In$_{5}$. For clarity, $1/T_1$ at the left peak was multiplied by 3, while that for the right peak was divided by 3.[]{data-label="fig:6)"}](Fig6.eps)
Figure 7 shows the evolution of the $T$ dependence of $1/T_1$ at the central In(2) transition for various Ir concentrations. It is evident that the peak temperature and the peak height change with the Ir concentration. We associate this peak with the Neel ordering temperature, $T_N$, at which $1/T_1$ increases due to critical slowing down. $T_N$ determined in this manner correspond well with that inferred from the specific heat [@Pagliuso] and $\mu$sr measurements [@Morris]. Interestingly, $T_N$ first increases gradually with increasing Ir content up to $x$=0.45 then decreases rapidly. For $x$=0.5, $T_N$ is reduced to 3 K. For $x$=0.55, no feature is seen in the $T$-dependence of $1/T_1$ (for clarity of Fig. 7, data are not shown ), thus it becomes difficult to identify $T_N$.
![Typical data sets of $1/T_1$ measured at the central peak of the In(2) $\pm 3/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$5/2 transition in CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$.[]{data-label="fig:7)"}](Fig7.eps)
$T_N$ inferred from the peak in $1/T_1$ is sensitive to externally-applied hydrostatic pressure, as in pure CeRhIn$_5$. In the right panel of Fig. 7 is shown the $T_1$ result under a pressure of 1.02 GPa for the $x$=0.5 sample. The broad peak seen at ambient pressure is suppressed, and instead a distinct decrease of $1/T_1$ is found at 2.5 K, which resembles the case of pure CeRhIn$_5$ in which the application of pressure reduces the height of the peak at $T_N$ [@Mito3; @Kawasaki2; @Mito2; @Kohori] and eventually suppresses the peak under $P$=1.7 GPa [@Mito2]. Thus, as in pure CeRhIn$_5$, $T_1$ can serve as a probe to determine $T_N$.
Figure 8 shows typical data sets of $1/T_1$ measured at the In(1) site. The anomaly at $T_N$ is also visible at the In(1) site, although it is less clear presumably because the peak at $T_N$ at this site is already rather weak, even in the undoped compound.
![Typical data sets of $^{115}$In $1/T_1$ measured at the In(1) site of CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$. Data for $x$=1 and 0 are from Ref. [@Zheng] and Ref.[@Mito3; @Kawasaki2], respectively. []{data-label="fig:8)"}](Fig8.eps)
The non-monotonic change of $T_N$ as a function of $x$ may be attributed to the increase of exchange coupling between 4f spins which is overcome by the increase of coupling between 4f spins and conduction electrons above $x=0.45$, as inferred from Doniach’s treatment of the Kondo necklace [@Doniach]. This result also resembles the behavior of CeRhIn$_5$ [@Mito; @Kawasaki] as a function of pressure and indicates that the substitution of Ir for Rh acts as chemical pressure in CeRhIn$_5$.
Due to the broadening of the spectra upon alloying, it is difficult to estimate precisely the internal magnetic field in the ordered state. The Hamiltonion in the presence of magnetic field is given by
$$\begin{aligned}
H = H_Q+H_{Zeeman}\end{aligned}$$
where $H_Q$ is given by eq. (1) and $$\begin{aligned}
H_{Zeeman} = - \gamma\hbar (H_xI_x+H_yI_y+H_zI_z)\end{aligned}$$
![Calculated evolution of the NQR lines in the presence of internal field along the $a$-axis for In(1) site (a) and In(2) site (b).[]{data-label="fig:9(a))"}](Fig9.eps)
In the present case, $V_{zz}$ is along the crystal c-axis. Assuming an internal magnetic field in the ab-plane, which is the case for CeRhIn$_{5}$, the evolution of the resonance frequency for each transition is calculated for the In(1) site (Fig. 9(a)) and for the In(2) site (Fig. 9(b)). Here, the field is assumed to be along x-direction. Note that even the $m=\pm 3/2
\leftrightarrow \pm 5/2$ transition for the In(2) site, which has a FWHM of 0.26 MHz and is the sharpest among all transitions in the alloyed samples, does not show an appreciable change between $T$=4.2 K (above $T_N$) and $T$=1.4 K (below $T_N$), see Fig. 10. This suggests that the internal magnetic field at the In(2) site is less than 200 Oe for $x$=0.5, as inferred from the expected splitting deduced from Fig. 9. Such a small internal field, which is samller by a factor of 10 than that in CeRhIn$_5$ [@Curro], could be due to a moderate reduction of the ordered moment [@Christianson] with a concomitant reduction of the hyperfine coupling [@Curro2].
![The central peak of the $\pm 1/2 \leftrightarrow \pm$3/2 transition for CeRh$_{0.5}$Ir$_{0.5}$In$_5$ at $T$=4.2 K and 1.4 K. For clarity, the horizon has been shifted.[]{data-label="fig:10)"}](Fig10.eps)
Superconducting state
---------------------
Next, we discuss the low temperature behavior of Ce(Rh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$)In$_5$ well below $T_N$. Figure 11 shows $1/T_1$ for both the In(1) and In(2) sites at low temperatures for the $x$=0.5 sample. Below $T_c$=0.9 K, $1/T_1$ decreases sharply with no coherence peak, following a $T^3$ variation down to $T$=0.45 K. The observation of the $T^3$ behavior is strong evidence for the existence of line nodes in the superconducting gap function [@Zheng]. For an s-wave gap, $1/T_1$ would show a coherence peak just below $T_c$ followed by an exponential decrease upon further decreasing $T$. Because $1/T_1$ is measured at the same transition for the entire measured temperature range, our results suggest that antiferromagnetic order and superconductivity are due to the same electronic state derived from the Ce-4f$^1$ electron. If the two ordered states occurred in spatially-separated regions, the nuclear-magnetization decay curve would have been composed of two components (two $T_1$’s) below $T_N$, contradicting the single-component decay curve we observe. It is noteworthy that just above $T_c$, $1/T_1$ tends to be proportional to $T$, which suggests that there remains a finite density of states (DOS) at the Fermi level ($E_F$) in the magnetically ordered state, since $1/T_1T$ is dominantly proportional to the square of the low-energy DOS at such low-$T$ (see below, eq. (9)). This suggests that the gap opening due to the antiferromagnetic order is incomplete, in contrast to the behavior observed in pure CeRhIn$_5$ where the gap is more fully developed, leading to a stronger decrease of $1/T_1$ (see Fig. 8). This remnant of some part of the Fermi surface may be important for superconductivity to set in even in the magnetically ordered state.
![The $1/T_1$ results at low temperatures for CeRh$_{0.5}$Ir$_{0.5}$In$_5$ measured at the In(1) at In(2) sites, respectively. The two solid lines indicate the $T^3$ and $T$-linear variations, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:11)"}](Fig11.eps)
Finally, let us compare the superconducting behavior for $x$=0.45, 0.5 and 0.55. Figure 12 shows the ac-susceptibility (ac-$\chi$) measured using our NQR coil. Although it is hard to determine the onset temperature of the superconductivity from ac-$\chi$, it can be seen that the mid-point of the transition increases in the order of $x$=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45. $T_c$ determined from the point at which $1/T_1$ displays a distinct drop is 0.8 K, 0.9 K and 0.94 K for $x$=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45, respectively. Figure 13 shows $1/T_1$ normalized by its value at $T_c$ plotted against the reduced temperature $T/T_c$ for $x$=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45. Just below $T_c$, $1/T_1$ shows identical behavior for all samples, but at lower temperatures strong variation is observed. In particular, below $T\sim$ 0.4 K, $1/T_1$ becomes again proportional to $T$, and the normalized value of $1/T_1$ increases in the order $x$=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45.
![The ac-susceptibility for CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$In$_5$ ($x$=0.45, 0.5 and 0.55).[]{data-label="fig:12)"}](Fig12.eps)
The most straightforward explanation for $T$-linear $1/T_1$ at low-$T$ would be the presence of disorder that produces a finite DOS remaining at $E_F$. By assuming a gap function with line nodes, $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta(\theta)=\Delta_0 cos(\theta)\end{aligned}$$ and with a finite residual DOS, $N_{res}$ (Ref.[@Miyake2]), we tried to fit the data in the superconducting state to $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{T_1(T=T_c)}{T_{1}}& = & \frac{2}{k_BT_c}\int (\frac{N_{s}(E)}{N_0})^{2}f(E)(1-f(E))dE,\end{aligned}$$ where $\frac{N_{s}(E)}{N_{0}}=\frac{E}{\sqrt{E^{2}-\Delta^{2}}}$ with $N_{0}$ being the DOS in the normal state and $f(E)$ being the Fermi function. The resulting fitting parameters are $N_{res}/N_0$=0.32, 0.45 and 0.63 for $x$=0.55, 0.5 and 0.45, respectively, with $\Delta_0$=2.5$k_BT_c$ for all samples. In such a case, however, one would expect $N_{res}$ to be the same for $x$=0.55 and 0.45, because the amount of disorder is expected to be similar. The much larger $N_{res}$ inferred for $x$=0.45 than $x$=0.55 suggests an additional mechanism. We propose that this additional $N_{res}$ comes from low-lying magnetic excitations associated with the coexisting magnetic ordering that is more well developed at lower values of $x$ . Similar $N_{res}$ was seen in CeRhIn$_5$ under a pressure of 1.6 GPa where magnetism also coexists with superconductivity. In this case the observed behavior was interpreted as due to a gapless $p$-wave superconducting state [@Fuseya], or due to additional nodes in the d-wave order parameter [@Bang].
![The normalized $T_1$ plotted against the reduced temperature for CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_{x}$In$_5$ at the In(1) site. The solid curves are fits to the data as described in the text. $N_r$ is for short of $N_{res}/N_0$.[]{data-label="fig:13)"}](Fig13.eps)
On the other hand, the larger $N_{res}$ for the In(2) site than for In(1) site may be due to a larger disorder contribution for this site. This is because the source of disorder in the present case is in the Rh(Ir)In$_2$ block. The In(2) site is naturally more sensitive to such disorder than the In(1) site which is farther removed from this block. A similar case was seen in high-$T_c$ copper oxide superconductors. In Tl$_2$Ba$_2$Ca$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{10}$ ($T_c$=117 K) [@Zheng1], disorder due to inter-substitution of Ca/Tl occurs in the Ca layer. As a consequence, the Cu(1) site sandwiched by two Ca layers sees a larger $N_{res}$ than the Cu(2) site which is adjacent to only one of the Ca layers.
![The phase diagram of CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_{5}$ obtained from NQR measurements. AF and SC mean antiferromagnetic and superconducting states, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:14)"}](Fig14.eps)
phase diagram
-------------
The phase diagram shown in Fig. 14 summarizes our results. Upon doping with Ir, the system undergoes a quantum phase transition from an antiferromagnet ($x$=0) to a superconductor ($x$=1), with an intervening region where antiferromagnetic and superconducting orders coexist. Our results show that this behavior, reported previously based on thermodynamic data [@Pagliuso], is confirmed microscopically. $T_c$ reaches a maximum at $x$=0.45 ($T_c$=0.94 K), while $T_N$ is found to be the highest ($T_N$=4.0 K). The enhancement of $T_c$ in the antiferromagnetically ordered state is most interesting, suggesting the importance of magnetism in producing the superconductivity. Recently, antiferromagnetism and superconductivity was found to coexist also in CeRhIn$_5$ under external pressures [@Mito; @Kawasaki], but the coexistent region is rather narrow there. More importantly, in the present case superconductivity develops well inside the ordered state and $T_c$ increases when approaching the maximum of $T_N$, whereas $T_c$ reaches a maximum after $T_N$ disappears in hydrostatically-pressurized CeRhIn$_5$. The observed phase diagram may be understood in the framework of SO(5) theory in which the 5-component super-spin can be rotated by a chemical potential from the subspace of antiferromagnetic order to the subspace of d-wave superconductivity and vice versa [@Zhang]. However, a microscopic description of how the same 4f$^1$ electron can display both magnetic order and superconductivity is still lacking.
Conclusion
==========
In conclusion, we have carried out an extensive $^{115}$In NQR study on CeRh$_{1-x}$Ir$_x$In$_5$. We find that the substitution of Ir for Rh in the antiferromagnet CeRhIn$_5$ acts as chemical pressure. With increasing Ir content ($x$), $T_N$ increases slightly up to $x$=0.45, then decreases rapidly. The coexistence of superconductivity with antiferromagnetism for 0.35 $\leq$ $x\leq$ 0.5 is observed in the temperature dependence of $1/T_1$ which displays a broad peak at $T_N$ and drops as $T^3$ below $T_c$. At $x$=0.5, $T_N$ is reduced to 3 K while $T_c$ reaches 0.9 K. Our results suggest that the coexisting antiferromagnetic order and superconductivity are due to the same electronic state derived from the Ce-4f$^1$ electron. It is most interesting that the superconducting transition temperature $T_c$ is increased as the system penetrates deeper inside the antiferromagnetically ordered state. $T_c$ for $x$=0.45 and 0.5 is more than double that of CeIrIn$_5$. In the coexistence region, $1/T_1$ shows a $T$-linear dependence at low-$T$ below $T\sim$0.4 K. We have argued that this may arise from some magnetic excitations associated with the coexisting magnetism, in addition to the presence of crystal disorder that produces a residual density of states at the fermi level.
Acknowledgement
===============
We thank H. Harima for a helpful discussion on the $\nu_Q$ issue, and G. G. Lonzarich, N. Nagaosa and S.-C. Zhang for helpful comments. We also would like to thank W. Bao and N.J. Curro for useful discussion, and S. Kawasaki, K. Tanabe and S. Yamaoka for assistance in some of the measurements. Partial support by Japan MEXT grant No. 14540338, 16340104 (G.-q.Z) and No. 10CE2004 (Y.K) is thanked. Work at Los Alamos was performed under the auspices of the US DOE.
\* present address: Department of Physics, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8530, Japan. E-mail address: [email protected]
M. B. Maple and O. Fisher (Eds), [*Superconductivity and Magnetism*]{}, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982). C. Bernhard [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**B 61**]{}, R14960 (2000). C. Geibel [*et al.*]{}, Z. Phys. [**B 84**]{}, 1 (1991). H. Tou [*et al*]{}, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**64**]{}, 725 (1995). N. K. Sato, N. Aso, K. Miyake, R. Shiina, P. Thalmeier, G. Varelogiannis, C. Geibel, F. Steglich, P. Fulde and T. Komatsubara, Nature [**410**]{}, 340 (2001). S. Yotsuhashi, H. Kusunose and K. Miyake, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**70**]{}, 186 (2001). C. Geibel [*et al.*]{}, Z. Phys. [**B 83**]{}, 305 (1991). S. S. Saxena, P. Agarwal, K. Ahilan, F. M. Grosche, R. K. W. Haselwimmer, M. J. Steiner, E. Pugh, I. R. Walker, S. R. Julian, P. Monthoux, G. G. Lonzarich, A. Huxley, I. Sheikin, D. Braithwaite, and J. Flouquet, Nature [**406**]{}, 587 (2000). D. Aoki, A. Huxley, E. Ressouche, D. Braithwaite, J. Flouquet, J. P. Brison, E. Lhotel, and C. Paulsen, Nature [**413**]{}, 613 (2001). S.- C. Zhang, Science [**275**]{}, 1089 (1997). P.G. Pagliuso [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**B64**]{}, 100503 (2001). V. S. Zapf, E. J. Freeman, E. D. Bauer, J. Petricka, C. Sirvent, N. A. Frederick, R. P. Dickey, and M. B. Maple, Phys. Rev. [**B 65**]{}, 014506 (2002). T. Mito, S. Kawasaki, Y. Kawasaki, G.-q. Zheng, Y. Kitaoka, D Aoki, Y Haga, and Y. Onuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**90**]{}, 077004 (2003). S. Kawasaki, T. Mito, Y. Kawasaki, G.-q. Zheng, Y. Kitaoka, D Aoki, Y Haga, and Y. Onuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**91**]{}, 137001 (2003). H. Hegger, C. Petrovic, E. G. Moshopoulou, M. F. Hundley, J. L. Sarrao, Z. Fisk, and J. D. Thompson, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{}, 4986 (2000). C. Petrovic [*et al.*]{}, Europhys. Lett. [**53**]{}, 354 (2001). G.-q. Zheng, K. Tanabe, T. Mito, S. Kawasaki, Y. Kitaoka, D. Aoki, Y. Haga, and Y. Onuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**86**]{}, 4664 (2001). W. Bao [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**B 65**]{} 100505 (2002).
G.D. Morris [*et al*]{} Physica [**B 326**]{}, 390 (2003) G.-q. Zheng, E. Yanase, Y. Kitaoka, K. Asayama, Y. Kodama, R. Tanaka and S. Endo, Solid State Commun. [**79**]{}, 51 (1991). T. F. Smith, C. W. Chu and M. B. Maple, Cryogenics. [**9**]{}, 53 (1969). D.E. Maclaughlin [*al*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**B 4**]{}, 60 (1971). J. Chepin and J.H. Ross, J. Phys. Cond. Matt. [**3**]{}, 8103 (1991). N. Curro [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. [**B 62**]{}, 6100 (2000). K. Betsuyaku and H. Harima, J. Mag. Mag. Matt. [**272-276**]{}, 187 (2004). T. Mito, S. Kawasaki, G.-q. Zheng, Y. Kawasaki, K. Ishida, Y. Kitaoka, D. Aoki, Y. Haga, and Y. Onuki, Phys. Rev. [**B 63**]{}, 220507 (2001). S. Kawasaki, T. Mito, G.-q. Zheng, C. Thessieu, Y. Kawasaki, K. Ishida, Y. Kitaoka, D. Aoki, S. Araki, Y. Haga, R. Settai and Y. Onuki, Phys. Rev. [**B 65**]{}, 020504 (2002). T. Mito [*et al*]{}, unpublished. Y. Kohori [*et al*]{}, Eur. Phys. J. [**B18**]{}, 601 (2000).
S. Doniach, in [*Valence Instabilities and Related Narrow Band Phenomena*]{}, edited by R. D. Parks (Plenum, New York, 1977), p. 169. Preliminary neutron results suggest that the ordered moment for $x$=0.5 is reduced by a factor of 4 from that for the $x$=0 sample (A. D. Christianson, private communication). In fact, on going from CeRhIn$_5$ to CeCoIn$_5$, the hyperfine coupling decreases by a factor of 3. See Curro [*et al*]{}, Cond-mat/0205354. S. Schmitt-Rink, K. Miyake and C.M. Varma, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**57**]{}, 2575 (1986); K. Miyake, unpublished data (1991). Y. Fuseya, H. Kohno and K. Miyake, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**72**]{}, 2914 (2003). Y. Bang, M. J. Graf, A. V. Balatsky and J. D. Thompson, Phys. Rev. [**B 69**]{}, 014505 (2004). G.-q. Zheng, Y. Kitaoka, K. Asayama, K. Hamada, H. Yamauchi and S. Tanaka, Physica [**C 260**]{}, 197 (1996).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We study several aspects of the dynamic programming approach to optimal control of abstract evolution equations, including a class of semilinear partial differential equations. We introduce and prove a verification theorem which provides a sufficient condition for optimality. Moreover we prove sub- and superoptimality principles of dynamic programming and give an explicit construction of $\epsilon$-optimal controls.
**Key words**: optimal control of PDE, verification theorem, dynamic programming, $\epsilon$-optimal controls, Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations.
**MSC 2000**: 35R15, 49L20, 49L25, 49K20.
author:
- 'G. Fabbri[^1] F. Gozzi[^2] and A. Świȩch[^3]'
title: 'Verification theorem and construction of $\epsilon$-optimal controls for control of abstract evolution equations'
---
Introduction
============
In this paper we investigate several aspects of the dynamic programming approach to optimal control of abstract evolution equations. The optimal control problem we have in mind has the following form. The state equation is $$\label{deterministicstateequation} \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
\dot{x}(t) = Ax(t) + b(t,x(t),u(t)),\\
x(0)=x,
\end{array}
\right.$$ $A$ is a linear, densely defined maximal dissipative operator in a real separable Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$, and we want to minimize a cost functional $$\label{deterministiccostfunctional} J(x;u(\cdot))= \int_0^T
L(t,x(t),u(t)) {\mathrm{d}}t + h(x(T))$$ over all controls $$u(\cdot)\in\mathcal{U}[0,T]= \{ u\colon [0,T] \to U : \; u \;
\hbox{is measurable} \},$$ where $U$ is a metric space.
The dynamic programming approach studies the properties of the so called value function for the problem, identifies it as a solution of the associated Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation through the dynamic programming principle, and then tries to use this PDE to construct optimal feedback controls, obtain conditions for optimality, do numerical computations, etc.. There exists an extensive literature on the subject for optimal control of ordinary differential equations, i.e. when the HJB equations are finite dimensional (see for instance the books [@BCD; @CLSW; @FR; @FS; @Lo; @Vinter; @YongZhou] and the references therein). The situation is much more complicated for optimal control of partial differential equations (PDE) or abstract evolution equations, i.e. when the HJB equations are infinite dimensional, nevertheless there is by now a large body of results on such HJB equations and the dynamic programming approach ([@B1; @B2; @B3; @B4; @BaBaJe; @BaDaP1; @BaDaP2; @BaDaP3; @BaDaP4; @BaDaPPo; @Ca1; @CaCa; @CaDaP1; @CaDaP2; @CaDiB; @CaGoSo; @CaFr1; @CaFr2; @CaTe1; @CaTe2; @CL4; @CL5; @CL6; @CL7; @DiB; @GSS; @I; @KoSo; @LiYong; @Sh; @Sri; @T1; @T2] and the references therein). Numerous notions of solutions are introduced in these works, the value functions are proved to be solutions of the dynamic programming equations, and various verification theorems and results on existence and explicit forms of optimal feedback controls in particular cases are established. However, despite of these results, so far the use of the dynamic programming approach in the resolution of the general optimal control problems in infinite dimensions has been rather limited. Infinite dimensionality of the state space, unboundedness in the equations, lack of regularity of solutions, and often complicated notions of solutions requiring the use of sophisticated test functions are only some of the difficulties.
We will discuss two aspects of the dynamic programming approach for a fairly general control problem: a verification theorem which gives a sufficient condition for optimality, and the problem of construction of $\epsilon$-optimal feedback controls.
The verification theorem we prove in this paper is an infinite dimensional version of such a result for finite dimensional problems obtained in [@Zh]. It is based on the notion of viscosity solution (see Definitions \[defdeterministicsubsol\]-\[defdeterministicsol\]). Regarding previous result in this direction we mention [@CaFr1; @CaFr2] and the material in Chapter 6 §5 of [@LiYong], in particular Theorem 5.5 there which is based on [@CaFr1]. We briefly discuss this result in Remark \[remliyo\].
The construction of $\epsilon$-optimal controls we present here is a fairly explicit procedure which relies on the proof of superoptimality inequality of dynamic programming for viscosity supersolutions of the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation. It is a delicate generalization of such a method for the finite dimensional case from [@sw]. Similar method has been used in [@CLSS] to construct stabilizing feedbacks for nonlinear systems and later in [@IK] for state constraint problems. The idea here is to approximate the value function by its appropriate inf-convolution which is more regular and satisfies a slightly perturbed HJB inequality pointwise. One can then use this inequality to construct $\epsilon$-optimal piecewise constant controls. This procedure in fact gives the superoptimality inequality of dynamic programming and the suboptimality inequality can be proved similarly. There are other possible approaches to construction of $\epsilon$-optimal controls. For instance under compactness assumption on the operator $B$ (see Section 4) one can approximate the value function by solutions of finite dimensional HJB equations with the operator $A$ replaced by some finite dimensional operators $A_n$ (see [@CL4]) and then use results of [@sw] directly to construct near optimal controls. Other approximation procedures are also possible. The method we present in this paper seems to have some advantages: it uses only one layer of approximations, it is very explicit and the errors in many cases can be made precise, and it does not require any compactness of the operator $B$. It does however require some weak continuity of the Hamiltonian and uniform continuity of the trajectories, uniformly in $u(\cdot)$. Finally we mention that the sub- and superoptimality inequalities of dynamic programming are interesting on their own.
The paper is organized as follows. Definitions and the preliminary material is presented in Section 2. Section 3 is devoted to the verification theorem and an example where it applies in a nonsmooth case. In Section 4 we prove sub- and superoptimality principles of dynamic programming and show how to construct $\epsilon$-optimal controls.
Notation, definitions and background
====================================
Throughout this paper $\mathcal{H}$ is a real separable Hilbert space equipped with the inner product ${\left\langle}\cdot,\cdot{\right\rangle}$ and the norm $\|\cdot\|$. We recall that $A$ is a linear, densely defined operator such that $-A$ is maximal monotone, i.e. $A$ generates a $C_0$ semigroup of contractions $e^{sA}$, i.e. $$\label{ppp1} \| e^{sA} \| \leq 1 \;\;\; \text{for all $s\geq 0$}$$ We make the following assumptions on $b$ and $L$.
\[hpD2onb\] $$b\colon [0,T] \times \mathcal{H} \times U \to \mathcal{H} \;
\text{is continuous}$$ and there exist a constant $M>0$ and a local modulus of continuity $\omega(\cdot,\cdot)$ such that $$\begin{array}{ll}
\|b(t,x,u) - b(s,y,u)\| \leq M \|x-y\| + \omega(|t-s|,\|x\|\vee \|y\|)\\
\hskip 5cm \text{for all $t,s\in [0,T], \; u\in U \; x,y\in\mathcal{H}$}\\
\|b(t,0,u)\| \leq M \;\; \text{for all $(t,u)\in [0,T] \times U$}
\end{array}$$
\[hpD3onLandh\] $$L\colon [0,T] \times \mathcal{H} \times U \to \mathbb{R} \;\;\; and
\;\;\; h\colon \mathcal{H} \to \mathbb{R} \;\;\; \text{are
continuous}$$ and there exist $M>0$ and a local modulus of continuity $\omega(\cdot,\cdot)$ such that $$\begin{array}{ll}
|L(t,x,u) - L(s,y,u)|, \; |h(x)-h(y)| \leq \omega(\|x-y\|+|t-s|,\|x\|\vee \|y\|)\\
\hskip 5cm \text{for all $t,s\in [0,T], \; u\in U \; x,y\in\mathcal{H}$}\\
|L(t,0,u)|, |h(0)| \leq M \;\; \text{for all $(t,u)\in [0,T] \times
U$}
\end{array}$$
Notice that if we replace $A$ and $b$ by $\tilde A=A-\omega I$ and $b(t,x,u)$ with $\tilde b(t,x,u)= b(t,x,u) + \omega x$ the above assumptions would cover a more general case $$\label{ppp2} \| e^{sA} \| \leq e^{\omega s} \;\;\; \text{for all
$s\geq 0$}$$ for some $\omega \geq 0$. However such $\tilde b$ does not satisfy the assumptions of Section 4 and may not satisfy the assumptions needed for comparison for equation (\[deterministicHJB\]). Alternatively, by making a change of variables $\tilde
v(t,x)=v(t,e^{\omega t}x)$ in equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) (see [@CL4], page 275) we can always reduce the case (\[ppp2\]) to the case when $A$ satisfies (\[ppp1\]).
Following the dynamic programming approach we consider a family of problems for every $t\in[0,T], y\in \mathcal{H}$ $$\label{sydeterministicstate} \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
\dot{x}_{t,x}(s)=A {x}_{t,x}(s) + b(s,{x}_{t,x}(s),u(s))\\
x_{t,x}(t)=x
\end{array}
\right.$$ We will write $x(\cdot)$ for $x_{t,x}(\cdot)$ when there is no possibility of confusion. We consider the function $$\label{sydeterministiccost} J(t,x;u(\cdot))= \int_t^T L(s,x(s),u(s))
{\mathrm{d}}t + h(x(T)),$$ where $u(\cdot)$ is in the set of admissible controls $$\mathcal{U}[t,T]= \{ u\colon [t,T] \to U: \; u \hbox{ is measurable}
\}.$$ The associated value function $V\colon [0,T]\times\mathcal{H} \to
\mathbb{R}$ is defined by $$\label{deterministicvaluefunction} V(t,x)= \inf_{u(\cdot) \in
\mathcal{U}[t,T]} J(t,x;u(\cdot)).$$ The Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation related to such optimal control problems is $$\label{deterministicHJB} \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
v_t(t,x) +{\left\langle}Dv(t,x), Ax {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,Dv(t,x))=0\\
v(T,x)=h(x),
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $$\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
H\colon [0,T]\times\mathcal{H}\times\mathcal{H} \to \mathbb{R},\\
H(t,x,p)=\inf_{u\in U} \left ( {\left\langle}p, b(t,x,u) {\right\rangle}+ L(t,x,u)
\right )
\end{array}
\right.$$
The solution of the above HJB equation is understood in the viscosity sense of Crandall and Lions [@CL4; @CL5] which is slightly modified here. We consider two sets of tests functions: $$\begin{array}{ll}
test1=\{ \varphi \in C^1((0,T)\times\mathcal{H}) \; : & \varphi
\text{ is weakly sequentially lower}\\
& \text{semicontinuous and } A^*D\varphi\in C((0,T)\times
\mathcal{H}) \}
\end{array}$$ and $$\begin{array}{ll}
test2= \{ g\in C^1((0,T)\times\mathcal{H}) \; :& \exists g_0, \colon
[0,+\infty) \to [0,+\infty), \;\\
&and \; \eta\in C^1((0,T)) \text{ positive } \; s.t.\\
&g_0 \in C^1([0,+\infty)), \; g_0'(r) \geq 0 \; \forall r\geq 0, \\
& g_0'(0)=0 \; and \; g(t,x)=\eta(t)g_0(\|x\|) \\
&\forall (t,x)\in (0,T)\times \mathcal{H} \}
\end{array}$$ We use test2 functions that are a little different from the ones used in [@CL4]. The extra term $\eta(\cdot)$ in test2 functions is added to deal with unbounded solutions. We recall that $D\varphi$ and $Dg$ stand for the Frechet derivatives of these functions.
\[defdeterministicsubsol\] A function $v\in
C((0,T]\times\mathcal{H})$ is a (viscosity) *subsolution* of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) if $$v(T,x) \leq h(x) \;\;\; for \; all\; x\in\mathcal{H}$$ and whenever $v-\varphi-g$ has a local maximum at $(\bar t, \bar
x)\in[0,T)\times\mathcal{H}$ for $\varphi \in test1$ and $g\in
test2$, we have $$\label{eqsubsol} \varphi_t(\bar t, \bar x) + g_t(\bar t, \bar
x)+{\left\langle}A^* D \varphi(\bar t, \bar x) , \bar x {\right\rangle}+H(\bar t, \bar
x, D\varphi(\bar t, \bar x)+ Dg(\bar t, \bar x)) \geq 0.$$
\[defdeterministicsupersol\] A function $v\in
C((0,T]\times\mathcal{H})$ is a (viscosity) *supersolution* of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) if $$v(T,x) \geq h(x) \;\;\; for \; all\; x\in\mathcal{H}$$ and whenever $v+\varphi+g$ has a local minimum at $(\bar t, \bar
x)\in[0,T)\times\mathcal{H}$ for $\varphi \in test1$ and $g\in
test2$, we have $$\label{eqsupersol} -\varphi_t(\bar t, \bar x) - g_t(\bar t, \bar x)
- {\left\langle}A^* D \varphi(\bar t, \bar x) , \bar x {\right\rangle}+ H(\bar t, \bar
x, -D \varphi(\bar t, \bar x)- D g(\bar t, \bar x)) \leq 0.$$
\[defdeterministicsol\] A function $v\in
C((0,T]\times\mathcal{H})$ is a (viscosity) *solution* of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) if it is at the same time a subsolution and a supersolution.
We will be also using viscosity sub- and supersolutions in situations where no terminal values are given in (\[deterministicHJB\]). We will then call a viscosity subsolution (respectively, supersolution) simply a function that satisfies (\[eqsubsol\]) (respectively, (\[eqsupersol\])).
\[lemmaphi\] Let Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\] and \[hpD3onLandh\] hold. Let $\phi\in test1$ and $(t,x)\in(0,T)\times\mathcal{H}$. Then the following convergence holds uniformly in $u(\cdot) \in
\mathcal{U}[t,T]$: $$\begin{gathered}
\lim_{s\downarrow t} \left ( \frac{1}{s-t} \left (
\varphi(s,x_{t,x}(s)) - \varphi(t,x) \right ) - \varphi_t(t,x) -
{\left\langle}A^*D\varphi (t,x),x{\right\rangle}\right.\\
\left. - \frac{1}{s-t} \int_t^s {\left\langle}D \varphi (t,x), b(t,x,u(r))
{\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r \right ) =0\end{gathered}$$ Moreover we have for $s-t$ sufficiently small $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:explicitphi} \varphi(s,x_{t,x}(s))-\varphi(t,x) = \int_t^s
\varphi_t(r,x_{t,x}(r)) +
{\left\langle}A^*D\varphi (r,x_{t,x}(r)),x_{t,x}(r){\right\rangle}\\
+ {\left\langle}D \varphi(r,x_{t,x}(r)), b(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r\end{gathered}$$
See [@LiYong] Lemma 3.3 page 240 and Proposition 5.5 page 67.
\[lemmag\] Let Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\] and \[hpD3onLandh\] hold. Let $g\in test2$ and $(t,x)\in(0,T)\times\mathcal{H}$. Then for $s-t \to 0^+$ $$\begin{gathered}
\label{gconv1} \frac{1}{s-t} \left ( g(s,x_{t,x}(s)) - g(t,x) \right
) \leq g_t(t,x)
\\
+ \frac{1}{s-t} \int_t^s {\left\langle}D g (t,x), b(t,x,u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r +
o(1)\end{gathered}$$ where $o(1)$ is uniform in $u(\cdot) \in \mathcal{U}[t,T]$
To prove the statement when $x \ne 0$ we use the fact that, in this case (see [@LiYong] page 241, equation (3.11)), $$\|x_{t,x}(s)\| \leq \|x\| + \int_t^s {\left\langle}\frac{x}{\|x\|},
b(t,x,u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r + o(s-t)$$ So we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:prooflemmag}
g(s,x_{t,x}(s))-g(t,x) = \eta(s) g_0(\|x_{t,x}(s)\|) -\eta(t)g_0(\|x\|)\\
\leq \eta(s) g_0\left ( \|x\| + \int_t^s {\left\langle}\frac{x}{\|x\|}, b(t,x,u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r + o(s-t) \right ) - \eta(t)g_0(\|x\|) \\
\leq \eta'(t) g_0(\|x\|) (s-t) + \eta(t) g_0'(\|x\|) \left (
\int_t^s {\left\langle}\frac{x}{\|x\|}, b(t,x,u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r \right ) + o(s-t) \\
= g_t(t,x) (s-t) + \int_t^s {\left\langle}D g(t,x) , b(t,x,u(r)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r +
o(s-t)\end{gathered}$$ where $o(s-t)$ is uniform in $u(\cdot)$. When $x=0$, using the fact that $g'_0(0)=0$, we get $$g(s,x_{t,x}(s))-g(t,x)=g_t(t,x) (s-t) + o(s-t+\|x_{t,x}(s)\|)$$ and (\[gconv1\]) follows upon noticing that $\|x_{t,x}(s)\|\le
C(s-t)$ for some $C$ independent of $u(\cdot) \in \mathcal{U}[t,T]$.
\[thexistence\] Let Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\] and \[hpD3onLandh\] hold. Then the value function $V$ (defined in (\[deterministicvaluefunction\])) is a viscosity solution of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]).
The proof is quite standard and can be obtained with small changes (due to the small differences in the definition of test2 functions) from Theorem 2.2, page 229 of [@LiYong] and the proof of Theorem 3.2, page 240 of [@LiYong] (or from [@CL5]).
We will need a comparison result in the proof of the verification theorem. There are various versions of such results for equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) available in the literature, several sufficient sets of hypotheses can be found in [@CL4; @CL5]. Since we are not interested in the comparison result itself we choose to assume a form of comparison theorem as a hypothesis.
\[D4deterministiccomparison\] There exists a set $\mathcal{G}\subseteq C([0,T]\times\mathcal{H})$ such that:
- the value function $V$ is in $\mathcal{G}$;
- if $v_1, v_2 \in \mathcal{G}$, $v_1$ is a subsolution of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) and $v_2$ is a supersolution of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) then $v_1\leq v_2$.
Note that from $(i)$ and $(ii)$ we know that $V$ is the only solution of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) in $\mathcal{G}$.
We will use the following lemma whose proof can be found in [@YongZhou], page 270.
\[lemmaYZ\] Let $g\in C([0,T];\mathbb{R})$. We extend $g$ to a function (still denoted by $g$) on $(-\infty,+\infty)$ by setting $g(t)=g(T)$ for $t>T$ and $g(t)=g(0)$ for $t<0$. Suppose there is a function $\rho \in L^1(0,T;\mathbb{R})$ such that $$\limsup_{h\to 0^+} \frac{g(t+h) - g(t)}{h}\leq \rho(t) \;\;\; a.e.
\; t\in[0,T].$$ Then $$g(\beta)-g(\alpha) \leq \int_\alpha^\beta \limsup_{h\to 0^+}
\frac{g(t+h) - g(t)}{h} {\mathrm{d}}t\;\;\;\; \forall \;
0\leq\alpha\leq\beta\leq T.$$
We will denote by $B_R$ the open ball of radius $R$ centered at $0$ in $\mathcal{H}$.
The verification theorem
========================
We first introduce a set related to a subset of the superdifferential of a function in $C((0,T)\times\mathcal{H})$. Its definition is suggested by the definition of a sub/super solution. We recall that the superdifferential $D^{1,+}v(t,x)$ of $v \in
C((0,T)\times\mathcal{H})$ at $(t,x)$ is given by the pairs $(q,p)\in \mathbb{R}\times \mathcal{H}$ such that $v(s,y) - v(t,x)
- \left\langle p, y-x \right\rangle - q(s-t) \leq o(\|x-y\| + |t-s|)$, and the subdifferential $D^{1,-}v(t,x)$ at $(t,x)$ is the set of all $(q,p)\in \mathbb{R}\times \mathcal{H}$ such that $v(s,y) - v(t,x) -
\left\langle p, y-x \right\rangle - q(s-t) \geq o(\|x-y\| + |t-s|)$.
\[defE\] Given $v\in C((0,T)\times\mathcal{H})$ and $(t,x)\in(0,T)\times \mathcal{H}$ we define $E^{1,+} v(t,x)$ as $$\begin{array}{ll}
E^{1,+}v(t,x)= \{ (q,p_1,p_2)\in \mathbb{R}\times D(A^*)
\times\mathcal{H} : &
\exists \varphi\in test1, \; g\in test2\; s.t.\\
& v-\varphi-g \text{ attains a local}\\
& \text{maximum at } (t,x),\\
& \partial_t(\varphi+g)(t,x)=q,\\
& D\varphi(t,x)=p_1, \;\; Dg(t,x)=p_2\\
& and \; v(t,x)= \varphi(t,x)+g(t,x) \}
\end{array}$$
If we define $$E^{1,+}_1v(t,x) =\{(q,p)\in \mathbb{R}\times \mathcal{H} \; : \;
p=p_1+p_2 \; with \; (q,p_1,p_2) \in E^{1,+}v(t,x) \}$$ then $E^{1,+}_1v(t,x) \subseteq D^{1,+}v(t,x)$ and in the finite dimensional case we have $E^{1,+}_1v(t,x) =
D^{1,+}v(t,x)$. Here we have to use $E^{1,+}v(t,x)$ instead of $E^{1,+}_1v(t,x)$ because of the different roles of $g$ and $\varphi$. It is not clear if the sets $E^{1,+}v(t,x)$ and $E^{1,+}_1v(t,x)$ are convex. However if we took finite sums of functions $\eta(t)g_0(\|x\|)$ as $test2$ functions then they would be convex. All the results obtained are unchanged if we use the definition of viscosity solution with this enlarged class of $test2$ functions.
A trajectory-strategy pair $\left(x(\cdot), u(\cdot) \right)$ will be called an [admissible couple]{} for $(t,x)$ if $u\in{\cal
U}[t,T]$ and $x(\cdot)$ is the corresponding solution of the state equation (\[sydeterministicstate\]).
A trajectory-strategy pair $\left(x^*(\cdot),u^*(\cdot) \right)$ will be called an [optimal couple]{} for $(t,x)$ if it is admissible for $(t,x)$ and if we have $$-\infty < J(t,x;u^*(\cdot))\leq J(t,x;u(\cdot))$$ for every admissible control $u(\cdot) \in {\cal U}[t,T]$.
We can now state and prove the verification theorem.
\[thdeterministicverification\] Let Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\], \[hpD3onLandh\] and \[D4deterministiccomparison\] hold. Let $v\in\mathcal{G}$ be a subsolution of the HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) such that $$\label{terminalconditionvertheorem} v(T,x)=h(x) \;\;\; for\; all\;
x\; in \; \mathcal{H}.$$
\(a) We have $v(t,x) \leq V(t,x) \leq J(t,x,u(\cdot))\;\;
\forall(t,x) \in (0,T]\times\mathcal{H},
\;u(\cdot)\in\mathcal{U}[t,T]$.
\(b) Let $(t,x)\in (0,T)\times H$ and let $(x_{t,x}(\cdot),
u(\cdot))$ be an admissible couple at $(t,x)$. Assume that there exist $q\in L^1(t,T;\mathbb{R})$, $p_1\in L^1(t,T;D(A^*))$ and $p_2\in L^1(t,T;\mathcal{H})$ such that $$\label{condE} (q(s),p_1(s),p_2(s)) \in E^{1,+}v(s,x_{t,x}(s)) \;
\;\; \text{for almost all } s\in (t,T)$$ and that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{condmin} \int_t^T ({\left\langle}p_1(s) + p_2(s), b(s,x_{t,x}(s),u(s))
{\right\rangle}+ q(s) +
{\left\langle}A^* p_1(s),x_{t,x}(s){\right\rangle}){\mathrm{d}}t \\
\leq \int_t^T - L(s,x_{t,x}(s),u(s)) {\mathrm{d}}s.
$$ Then $(x_{t,x}(\cdot), u(\cdot))$ is an optimal couple at $(t,x)$ and $v(t,x)=V(t,x)$. Moreover we have equality in (\[condmin\]).
It is tempting to try to prove, along the lines of Theorem 3.9, p.243 of [@YongZhou], that a condition like (\[condmin\]) can also be necessary if $v$ is a viscosity solution (or maybe simply a supersolution). However this is not an easy task: the main problem is that $E^{1,+}$ and the analogous object $E^{1,-}$ are fundamentally different so a natural generalization of a result like Theorem 3.9, p.243 of [@YongZhou] does not seem possible. Moreover our verification theorem has some drawbacks. Condition (\[condmin\]) implicitly implies that $<p_2(r),Ax_{t,x}(r)>=0$ a.e. if the trajectory is in the domain of $A$. This follows from the fact that we would then have an additional term $<p_2(r),Ax_{t,x}(r)>$ in the integrand of the middle line of (\[acbd\]) so (\[condmin\]) would also have to be an equality with this additional term. Therefore the applicability of the theorem is somehow limited as in practice (\[condmin\]) may be satisfied only if the function is “nice" (i.e. its superdifferential should really only consist of $p_1$). Still it applies in some cases where other results fail (see Remarks \[remliyo\] and \[rm:controesempio\]). Many issues are not fully resolved yet and we plan to work on them in the future.
The first statement ($v\le V$) follows from Hypothesis \[D4deterministiccomparison\], it remains to prove second one. The function $$\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
[t,T]\to \mathcal{H}\times\mathbb{R}\\
s \mapsto (b(s,x_{t,x}(s),u(s)), L(s,x_{t,x}(s),u(s))
\end{array}
\right.$$ in view of Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\] and \[hpD3onLandh\] is in $L^1(t,T;\mathcal{H}\times\mathbb{R})$ (in fact it is bounded). So the set of the right-Lebesgue points of this function that in addition satisfy (\[condE\]) is of full measure. We choose $r$ to be a point in this set. We will denote $y= x_{t,x}(r)$.
Consider now two functions $\varphi^{r,y}\in test1$ and $g^{r,y}\in
test2$ such that (we will avoid the index $^{r,y}$ in the sequel) $v\leq \varphi +g$ in a neighborhood of $(r,y)$, $v(r,y) -
\varphi(r,y) - g(r,y) =0$,$(\partial_t)(\varphi+g)(r,y))=q(r)$, $D\phi(r,y)=p_1(r)$ and $D g(r,y)=p_2(r)$. Then for $\tau\in(r,T]$ such that $(\tau-r)$ is small enough we have by Lemmas \[lemmaphi\] and \[lemmag\] $$\frac{v(\tau,x_{t,x}(\tau)) - v(r,y)}{\tau-r} \leq
\frac{g(\tau,x_{t,x}(\tau)) - g(r,y) }{\tau-r} +
\frac{\varphi(\tau,x_{t,x}(\tau)) - \varphi(r,y)}{\tau-r}$$ $$\begin{gathered}
\leq g_t(r,y) + \frac{\int_r^\tau {\left\langle}D g(r,y) , b(r,y,u(s)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}s}{\tau-r}
\\
+ \varphi_t(r,y) + \frac{\int_r^\tau {\left\langle}D\varphi(r,y) ,
b(r,y,u(s)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}s}{\tau-r}+ {\left\langle}A^*D\varphi(r,y),y{\right\rangle}+ o(1).\end{gathered}$$ In view of the choice of $r$ we know that $$\frac{\int_r^\tau {\left\langle}D g(r,y) , b(r,y,u(s)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}s}{\tau-r}
\xrightarrow{\tau\to r} {\left\langle}D g(r,y) , b(r,y,u(r)) {\right\rangle}$$ and $$\frac{\int_r^\tau {\left\langle}D \varphi(r,y) , b(r,y,u(s)) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}s}{\tau-r} \xrightarrow{\tau\to r} {\left\langle}D \varphi(r,y) , b(r,y,u(r))
{\right\rangle}.$$ Therefore for almost every $r$ in $[t,T]$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
\limsup_{\tau\downarrow r} \frac{v(\tau,x_{t,x}(\tau))
- v(r,x_{t,x}(r)))}{\tau-r}\\
\leq {\left\langle}D g(r,x_{t,x}(r)) + D \varphi(r,x_{t,x}(r)),
b(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)){\right\rangle}\\
+ g_t(r,x_{t,x}(r))+ \varphi_t(r,x_{t,x}(r)) +{\left\langle}A^* D
\varphi(r,x_{t,x}(r)),x_{t,x}(r){\right\rangle}\\
= {\left\langle}p_1(r)+p_2(r), b(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)){\right\rangle}+ q(r) + {\left\langle}A^*
p_1(r),x_{t,x}(r){\right\rangle}.\end{gathered}$$ We can then use Lemma \[lemmaYZ\] and (\[condmin\]) to obtain $$\begin{gathered}
\label{acbd} v(T,x_{t,x}(T)) - v(t,x)
\\
\leq \int_t^T ({\left\langle}p(r), b(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)){\right\rangle}+ q(r) + {\left\langle}A^*
p_1(r),x_{t,x}(r){\right\rangle}){\mathrm{d}}r
\\
\leq \int_t^T -L(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)) {\mathrm{d}}r.\end{gathered}$$ Thus, using (a), we finally arrive at $$\begin{gathered}
V(T,x_{t,x}(T)) - V(t,x) = h(x_{t,x}(T)) - V(t,x) \leq h(x_{t,x}(T))
- v(t,x)
\\
= v(T,x_{t,x}(T))-v(t,x) \leq \int_t^T -L(r,x_{t,x}(r),u(r)) {\mathrm{d}}r\end{gathered}$$ which implies that $(x_{t,x}(\cdot), u(\cdot))$ is an optimal pair and that $v(t,x)=V(t,x)$.
\[remliyo\] In the book [@LiYong] (page 263, Theorem 5.5) the authors present a verification theorem (based on a previous result of [@CaFr2], see also [@CaFr1] for similar results) in which it is required that the trajectory of the system remains in the domain of $A$ a.e. for the admissible control $u(\cdot)$ in question. This is not required here and in fact this is not satisfied in the example of the next section.
It is shown in [@LiYong] (under assumptions similar to Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\] and \[hpD3onLandh\]) that the couple $x(\cdot), u(\cdot))$ is optimal if and only if $$\begin{gathered}
u(s) \in \bigg\lbrace u\in U \, : \, \lim_{\delta \to 0}
\frac{V((s+\delta), x(s)+ \delta(Ax(s) + b(s,x(s),u)) ) - V(s,x(s))
}{\delta} \\
= -L(s,x(s),u) \bigg\rbrace\end{gathered}$$ for almost every $s\in[t,T]$, where $V$ is the value function.
An example
----------
We present an example of a control problem for which the value function is a nonsmooth viscosity solution of the corresponding HJB equation, however we can apply our verification theorem. The problem can model a number of phenomena, for example in age-structured population models (see [@Iannelli95; @Anita01; @Iannelli06]), in population economics [@FeichtingerPrskwetzVeliov04], optimal technology adoption in a vintage capital context [@BarucciGozzi98; @BarucciGozzi01].
Consider the state equation $$\label{example1stateequation} \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
\dot{x}(s) = Ax(s) + Ru(s)\\
x(t)=x
\end{array}
\right.$$ where$A$ is a linear, densely defined maximal dissipative operator in $\mathcal{H}$, $R$ is a continuous linear operator $R\colon
\mathbb{R}\to \mathcal{H}$, so it is of the form $R\colon u\mapsto u
\beta$ for some $\beta\in\mathcal{H}$. Let $B$ be an operator as in Section \[subsuper\] satisfying (\[bcond\]). We will be using the notation of Section \[subsuper\].
We will assume that $A^*$ has an eigenvalue $\lambda$ with an eigenvector $\alpha$ belonging to the range of $B$.
We consider the functional to be minimized $$\label{example1costfunctional} J(x,u(\cdot))= \int_t^T
-\left|\left\langle \alpha,x(s)\right\rangle \right| +
\frac{1}{2}u(s)^2 {\mathrm{d}}s.$$ We define $$\bar\alpha(t){\stackrel{def}{=}}\int_t^T e^{(s-t)A^*} \alpha {\mathrm{d}}s$$ and we take $M{\stackrel{def}{=}}\sup_{t\in[0,T]} |{\left\langle}\bar\alpha(t), \beta
{\right\rangle}|$. We consider as control set $U$ the compact subset of $\mathbb{R}$ given by $U=[-M-1, M+1]$. So we specify the general problem characterized by (\[deterministicstateequation\]) and (\[deterministiccostfunctional\]) taking $b(t,x,u)=Ru$, $L(t,x,u)=
-\left|\left\langle \alpha,x(s)\right\rangle \right| + 1/2 u(t)^2$, $h=0$, $U=[-M-1, M+1]$.
The HJB equation (\[deterministicHJB\]) becomes $$\label{example1HJB} \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{l}
v_t + {\left\langle}Dv, Ax {\right\rangle}-\left|\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle
\right|+\inf_{u\in U} \left ( {\left\langle}u,R^*Dv{\right\rangle}_{\mathbb{R}} + \frac{1}{2} u^{2} \right)=0\\
v(T,x)=0
\end{array}
\right.$$ Note that the operator $R^*\colon \mathcal{H} \to \mathbb{R}$ can be explicitly expressed using $\beta$ which was used to define the operator $R$: $R^*x=\left\langle\beta,x\right\rangle$.
Now we observe that for $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle<0$ (respectively $>0$) the HJB equation is the same as the one for the optimal control problem with the objective functional $\int_t^T
\left\langle \alpha,x(s)\right\rangle + \frac{1}{2}u(s)^2 {\mathrm{d}}s$ (respectively $\int_t^T -\left\langle \alpha,x(s)\right\rangle +
\frac{1}{2}u(s)^2 {\mathrm{d}}s$) and it is known in the literature (see [@FaggianGozzi] Theorem 5.5) that its solution is $$v_1(t,x)= \left\langle \bar\alpha(t),x \right\rangle - \int_t^T
\frac{1}{2} \left( R^*\bar\alpha(s)\right)^2 {\mathrm{d}}s$$ (respectively $$v_2(t,x)= -\left\langle \bar\alpha(t),x
\right\rangle - \int_t^T \frac{1}{2} \left(
R^*\bar\alpha(s)\right)^2 {\mathrm{d}}s).$$ Note that on the separating hyperplane $\left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle=0$ the two functions assume the same values. Indeed, since $\alpha$ an eigenvector for $A^*$, $$\bar\alpha(t) = G(t) \alpha$$ where $$G(t)= \int_t^T e^{\lambda(s-t)}{\mathrm{d}}s$$ So, if $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle=0$, $${\left\langle}\bar \alpha (t) ,x {\right\rangle}=0\;\;\;\; \text{ for all $t\in [0,T]$}.$$ Therefore we can glue $v_1$ and $v_2$ writing $$W(t,x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} v_1(t,x) & \hbox{if } \left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle \le 0 \\
v_2(t,x) & \hbox{if } \left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle>0
\end{array}\right.$$ It is easy to see that $W$ is continuous and concave in $x$. We claim that $W$ is a viscosity solution of (\[example1HJB\]). For $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle<0$ and $\left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle>0$ it follows from the fact that $v_1$ and $v_2$ are explicit regular solutions of the corresponding HJB equations.
For the points $x$ where $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle=0$ it is not difficult to see that $$\left \{
\begin{array}{l}
D^{1,+} W(t,x)= \left \{\left(\frac{1}{2}\left(
R^*\bar\alpha(t)\right)^2,
\gamma G(t) \alpha \right) \; : \; \gamma \in [-1,1] \right \} \subseteq D(A^*)\\
D^{1,-} W(t,x)= \emptyset
\end{array}
\right .$$
So we have to verify that $W$ is a subsolution on $\left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle=0$. If $W - \varphi - g$ attains a maximum at $(t,x)$ with $\left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle=0$ we have that $p{\stackrel{def}{=}}(p_1 + p_2){\stackrel{def}{=}}D(\varphi
+ g)(t,x)\in \left \{ \gamma G(t) \alpha \; : \; \gamma \in [-1,1]
\right \} \subseteq D(A^*)$. From the definition of test1 function $p_1=D\varphi(t,x)\in D(A^*)$ so $\eta(t)g_0'(|x|)\frac{x}{|x|}=p_2=Dg(t,x)\in D(A^*)$. $W(\cdot,x)$ is a $C^1$ function and then, recalling that ${\left\langle}\bar \alpha (t)
,x {\right\rangle}_t={\left\langle}G'(t) \alpha ,x {\right\rangle}=0$, we have $$\label{eq:exampleestimate0}
\partial_t (\varphi +g)(t,x)=\partial_t W(t,x)=\frac{1}{2}\left( R^*\bar\alpha(t)\right)^2,$$ and for $p=\gamma \bar\alpha(t)$ we have $$\label{eq:exampleestimate1} \inf_{u\in U} \left ( {\left\langle}Ru,p{\right\rangle}+
\frac{1}{2} u^{2} \right) = - \frac{1}{2} \gamma^2 \left(
R^*\bar\alpha(t)\right)^2$$ Moreover, recalling that $g_0'(|x|)\geq 0$ and $-A^*$ is monotone, we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:exampleestimate2} {\left\langle}A^* p_1, x {\right\rangle}= {\left\langle}A^*(p-p_2),
x {\right\rangle}= {\left\langle}A^* \gamma G(t) \alpha, x {\right\rangle}- \frac{g_0'(|x|)}{|x|}
{\left\langle}A^* x, x {\right\rangle}\geq\\ \geq \gamma G(t) {\left\langle}A^* \alpha, x {\right\rangle}=
0\end{gathered}$$ So, by (\[eq:exampleestimate0\]), (\[eq:exampleestimate1\]) and (\[eq:exampleestimate2\]), $$\begin{gathered}
\partial_t (\varphi +g)(t,x) + {\left\langle}A^* p_1 ,x{\right\rangle}- \left| \left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle\right| + \\
+\inf_{u\in U} \left ( {\left\langle}Ru,D(\varphi +g)(t,x){\right\rangle}+ \frac{1}{2}
u^{2} \right) \geq \frac{1}{2} (1-\gamma^2) \left(
R^*\bar\alpha(s)\right)^2 \geq 0\end{gathered}$$ and so the claim in proved.
It is easy to see that both $W$ and the value function $V$ for the problem are continuous on $[0,T]\times \mathcal{H}$ and moreover $\psi=W$ and $\psi=V$ satisfy $$|\psi(t,x)-\psi(t,y)|\le C\|x-y\|_{-1} \quad\hbox{for
all}\,\,t\in[0,T], x,y\in \mathcal{H}$$ for some $C\ge 0$. In particular $W$ and $V$ have at most linear growth as $\|x\|\to\infty$. By Theorem \[thexistence\], the value function $V$ is a a viscosity solution of the HJB equation (\[example1HJB\]) in $(0,T]\times\mathcal{H}$. Moreover, since $\alpha=By$ for some $y\in \mathcal{H}$, comparison holds for equation (\[example1HJB\]) which yields $W=V$ on $[0,T]\times\mathcal{H}$. (Comparison theorem can be easily obtained by a modification of techniques of [@CL5] but we cannot refer to any result there since both $V$ and $W$ are unbounded. However the result follows directly from Theorem 3.1 together with Remark 3.3 of [@Kel]. The reader can also consult the proof of Theorem 4.4 of [@KeSw]. We point out that our assumptions are different from the assumptions of the uniqueness Theorem 4.6 of [@LiYong], page 250).
Therefore we have an explicit formula for the value function $V$ given by $V(t,x)=W(t,x)$. We see that $V$ is differentiable at points $(t,x)$ if $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle \ne 0$ and $$DV(t,x)=\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
\bar \alpha(t) & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle < 0\\
-\bar \alpha(t) & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle > 0
\end{array}
\right.$$ and is not differentiable whenever $\left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle = 0$. However we can apply Theorem \[thdeterministicverification\] and prove the following result.
\[propqui\] The feedback map given by $$u^{op}(t,x)
= \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
- \left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle \le 0\\
\left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle & if \; \left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle > 0
\end{array}
\right.$$ is optimal. Similarly, also the feedback map $$\bar u^{op}(t,x)
= \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
- \left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle < 0\\
\left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle & if \; \left\langle
\alpha,x\right\rangle \ge 0
\end{array}
\right.$$ is optimal.
Let $(t,x)\in (0,T]\times \mathcal{H}$ be the initial datum. If $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle \le 0$, taking the control $-\left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle$ the associated state trajectory is $$x^{op}(s)= e^{(s-t)A}x - \int_t^{s}e^{(s-r)A} R(\left\langle
\beta,\bar\alpha(r) \right\rangle) {\mathrm{d}}r$$ and it easy to check that it satisfies $\left\langle
\alpha,x^{op}(s) \right\rangle \le 0 $ for every $s\ge t$. Indeed, using the form of $R$ and the fact that $\alpha $ is eigenvector of $A^*$ we get $$\left\langle \alpha,x^{op}(s) \right\rangle = e^{\lambda(s-t)}
\left\langle \alpha, x \right\rangle
- \left\langle \alpha, \beta \right\rangle
\int_t^{s}e^{\lambda(s-r)} \left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(r)
\right\rangle {\mathrm{d}}r$$ $$=e^{\lambda(s-t)}\left\langle \alpha, x \right\rangle
- \left\langle \alpha, \beta \right\rangle^2
\int_t^{s}e^{\lambda(s-r)} G(r) {\mathrm{d}}r.$$
Similarly if $\left\langle \alpha,x\right\rangle > 0$, taking the control $\left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(t) \right\rangle$ the associated state trajectory is $$x^{op}(s)= e^{(s-t)A}x + \int_t^{s}e^{(s-r)A} R(\left\langle
\beta,\bar\alpha(r) \right\rangle) {\mathrm{d}}r$$ and it easy to check that it satisfies $\left\langle
\alpha,x^{op}(s) \right\rangle > 0 $ for every $s\ge t$.
We now apply Theorem \[thdeterministicverification\] taking $q(s)=\partial_t V(s, x^{op}(s))$, $$p_1(s)=\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
\bar \alpha(s) & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x^{op}(s)\right\rangle \le 0\\
-\bar \alpha(s) & if \; \left\langle \alpha,x^{op}(s)\right\rangle
>0
\end{array}
\right.$$ and $p_2(s)=0$. It is easy to see that $(q(s), p_1(s), p_2(s)) \in
E^{1,+}V(s,x^{op}(s))$. The argument for $\bar u^{op}$ is completely analogous.
We continue by giving a specific example of the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$, the operator $A$, and the data $\alpha$ and $\beta$. This example is related to the vintage capital problem in economics, see e.g. [@BarucciGozzi01; @BarucciGozzi98]. Let $\mathcal{H}=L^2(0,1)$. Let $\{e^{tA}; \; t \ge 0\}$ be the semigroup that, if we identify the points $0$ and $1$ of the interval $[0,1]$, “rotates” the function: $$e^{tA}f(s) = f(t+s - [t+s])$$ where $[\cdot]$ is the greatest natural number $n$ such that $n\leq
t+s$. The domain of $A$ will be $$D(A)= \left\lbrace f\in W^{1,2}(0,1) \; : \; f(0)=f(1) \right\rbrace$$ and for all $f$ in $D(A)$ $A(f)(s) = \frac{{\mathrm{d}}}{{\mathrm{d}}s} f (s)$. We choose $\alpha$ to be the constant function equal to $1$ at every point of the interval $[0,1]$. (We can take for instance $B=(I-\Delta)^{-\frac{1}{2}}$.) Moreover we choose $\beta(s)=\chi_{[0,\frac{1}{2}]}(s) - \chi_{[0,\frac{1}{2}]}(s)$ ($\chi_{\Omega} $ is the characteristic function of a set $\Omega$). Consider an initial datum $(t,x)$ such that $\left\langle \alpha,
x\right\rangle =0$. In view of Proposition \[propqui\] an optimal strategy $u^{op}$ is $$u^{op}(s)=-\left\langle \beta,\bar\alpha(s) \right\rangle =0$$ The related optimal trajectory is $$x^{op}(s)= e^{(s-t)A}y.$$
\[rm:controesempio\] We observe that, using such strategy, $\left\langle
\alpha,x^{op}(t)\right\rangle = 0$ for all $s\geq t$. So the trajectory remains for a whole interval in a set in which the value function is not differentiable. Anyway, applying Theorem \[thdeterministicverification\], the optimality is proved. Moreover $x$ can be chosen out of the domain of $A$ and so the assumptions of the verification theorem given in [@LiYong] (page 263, Theorem 5.5) are not verified in this case.
Sub- and superoptimality principles and construction of $\epsilon$-optimal controls {#subsuper}
===================================================================================
Let $B$ be a bounded linear positive self-adjoint operator on $\mathcal{H}$ such that $A^*B$ bounded on $\mathcal{H}$ and let $c_0\leq 0$ be a constant such that $$\label{bcond} {\left\langle}(A^* B + c_0 B)x,x {\right\rangle}\leq 0 \;\;\;\;\;\; for
\; all \; x\in\mathcal{H}.$$ Such an operator always exists [@Renardy95] and we refer to [@CL4] for various examples. Using the operator $B$ we define for $\gamma>0$ the space $\mathcal{H}_{-\gamma}$ to be the completion of $\mathcal{H}$ under the norm $$\|x\|_{-\gamma}=\|B^{\frac{\gamma}{2}}x\|.$$ We need to impose another set of assumptions on $b$ and $L$.
\[hp:section4\] There exist a constant $K>0$ and a local modulus of continuity $\omega(\cdot,\cdot)$ such that: $$\|b(t,x,u)-b(s,y,u)\| \leq K \|x-y \|_{-1} + \omega(|t-s|, \|x\|
\vee \|y\|)$$ and $$|L(t,x,u)-L(s,y,u)| \leq \omega( \|x-y \|_{-1} + |t-s|, \|x\| \vee
\|y\|)$$
Let $m\geq 2$. Modifying slightly the functions introduced in [@CL5] we define for a function $w:(0,T)\times \mathcal{H}\to
\mathbb{R}$ and $\epsilon,\beta,\lambda>0$ its sup- and inf-convolutions by $$w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)=\sup_{(s,y)\in(0,T)\times
\mathcal{H}} \left\{w(s,y)-\frac{\|x-y\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
-\frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta}-\lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m\right\},$$ $$w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)=\inf_{(s,y)\in(0,T)\times
\mathcal{H}} \left\{w(s,y)+\frac{\|x-y\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
+\frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta}+\lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m\right\}.$$
\[lem2\] Let $w$ be such that $$\label{aaa2} w(t,x)\leq C(1+\|x\|^k)\quad(\hbox{respectively,}\,\,\,
w(t,x)\geq -C(1+\|x\|^k))$$ on $(0,T)\times \mathcal{H}$ for some $k\geq 0$. Let $m>k$. Then:
- For every $R>0$ there exists $M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$ such that if $v=w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ (respectively, $v=w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$) then $$\label{aaa6} |v(t,x)-v(s,y)|\leq
M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}(|t-s|+\|x-y\|_{-2})\quad
\hbox{on}\,\,\,(0,T)\times B_R$$
- The function $$w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)+\frac{\|x\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
+\frac{t^2}{2\beta}$$ is convex (respectively, $$w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)-\frac{\|x\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
-\frac{t^2}{2\beta}$$ is concave).
- If $v=w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ (respectively, $v=w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$) and $v$ is differentiable at $(t,x)\in (0,T)\times B_R$ then $|v_t(t,x)|\leq
M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$, and $Dv(t,x)=Bq$, where $\|q\|\leq
M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$
**(i)** Consider the case $v=w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}$. Observe first that if $\|x\|\le R$ then $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:suponacompact}
w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}(t,x) =\\
= \sup_{(s,y)\in(0,T)\times \mathcal{H} , \; \|y\|\leq N}
\left\{w(s,y)-\frac{\|x-y\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
-\frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta}-\lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m\right\},\end{gathered}$$ where $N$ depends only on $R$ and $\lambda$.
Now suppose $w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}(t,x)\geq w^{\lambda,
\epsilon, \beta}(s,y)$. We choose a small $\sigma>0$ and $(\tilde t,
\tilde x)$ such that $$w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}(t,x) \leq \sigma + w(\tilde t, \tilde
x) - \frac{\| x-\tilde x\|^2_{-1}}{2\epsilon} - \frac{(t-\tilde
t)^2}{2\beta} - \lambda e^{2mK(T-\tilde t)} \| \tilde x \|^m.$$ Then $$\begin{gathered}
|w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}(t,x)-w^{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}(s,y)| \leq \sigma - \frac{\| x-\tilde x\|^2_{-1}}{2\epsilon} - \frac{(t-\tilde t)^2}{2\beta} + \frac{\|\tilde x - y \|^2_{-1}}{2\epsilon} + \frac{(\tilde t -s)^2}{2\beta} \\
\leq \sigma - \frac{{\left\langle}B(x-y), x+y{\right\rangle}}{2\epsilon} + \frac{{\left\langle}B(x-y), \tilde x {\right\rangle}}{\epsilon} + \frac{(2\tilde t -t -s)(t-s)}{2\beta} \\
\leq \frac{(2R+N)}{2\epsilon} \|B(x-y)\| + \frac{2T}{2\beta} |t-s| +
\sigma\end{gathered}$$ and we conclude because of the arbitrariness of $\sigma$. The case of $w_{\lambda, \epsilon, \beta}$ is similar.
**(ii)** It is a standard fact, see for example the Appendix of [@Userguide].
**(iii)** The fact that $|v_t(t,x)|\leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$ is obvious. Moreover if $\alpha>0$ is small and $\|y\|=1$ then $$\alpha M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}\|y\|_{-2}\geq |v(t,x+\alpha y)-v(x)|=
\alpha |{\left\langle}Dv(t,x),y{\right\rangle}|+o(\alpha)$$ which upon dividing by $\alpha$ and letting $\alpha\to 0$ gives $$|{\left\langle}Dv(t,x),y{\right\rangle}|\leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}\|y\|_{-2}$$ which then holds for every $y\in \mathcal{H}$. This implies that ${\left\langle}Dv(t,x),y{\right\rangle}$ is a bounded linear functional in $\mathcal{H}_{-2}$ and so $Dv(t,x)=Bq$ for some $q\in \mathcal{H}$. Since $|{\left\langle}q,By{\right\rangle}|\leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}\|By\|$ we obtain $\|q\|\leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$.
\[lem1\] Let Hypotheses \[hpD2onb\], \[hpD3onLandh\] and \[hp:section4\] be satisfied. Let $w$ be a locally bounded viscosity subsolution (respectively, supersolution) of (\[deterministicHJB\]) satisfying (\[aaa2\]). Let $m>k$. Then for every $R,\delta>0$ there exists a non-negative function $\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)$, where $$\label{aaa3} \lim_{\lambda\to 0}\limsup_{\epsilon\to
0}\limsup_{\beta\to 0} \gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)=0,$$ such that $w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ (respectively, $w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$) is a viscosity subsolution (respectively, supersolution) of $$\label{aaa4} v_t(t,x) +{\left\langle}Dv(t,x), Ax {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,Dv(t,x))=
-\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)\quad\hbox{in}\,\,\,
(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R$$ (respectively, $$\label{aaa5} v_t(t,x) +{\left\langle}Dv(t,x), Ax {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,Dv(t,x))=
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)\quad\hbox{in}\,\,\,
(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R)$$ for $\beta$ sufficiently small (depending on $\delta$).
The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition 5.3 of [@CL5]. We notice that $w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ is bounded from above.
Let $(t_0,x_0)\in (\delta, T-\delta)\times \mathcal{H}$ be a local maximum of $w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}-\phi-g$. We can assume that the maximum is global and strict (see Proposition 2.4 of [@CL5]) and that $w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}-\phi-g\to -\infty$ as $\|x\|\to\infty$ uniformly in $t$. In view of these facts and (\[eq:suponacompact\]) we can choose $S>2\|x_0\|$, depending on $\lambda$ such that, for all $\|x\|+\|y\| >S-1$ and $s,t\in (0,T)$, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:lessthen-1} w(s,y) - \frac{1}{2\epsilon} \|(x-y)\|_{-1}^2
- \frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta} - \lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m - \phi(t,x) -
g(t,x)
\\
\leq w(t_0,x_0) - \lambda e^{2mK(T-t_0)}\|x_0\|^m -\phi(t_0,x_0) -
g(t_0,x_0) -1.\end{gathered}$$ We can then use a perturbed optimization technique of [@CL5] (see page 424 there) which is a version of the Ekeland-Lebourg Lemma [@EkelandLebourg77] to obtain for every $\alpha>0$ elements $p,q\in\mathcal{H}$ and $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$ with $\|p\|, \|q\|\leq
\alpha$ and $|a|,|b|\leq \alpha$ such that the function $$\begin{gathered}
\psi(t,x,s,y) {\stackrel{def}{=}}w(s,y) - \frac{1}{2\epsilon} \|(x-y)\|_{-1}^2 -
\frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta} - \lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m
\\
-g(t,x)-\phi(t,x) - {\left\langle}Bp,y {\right\rangle}-{\left\langle}Bq, x {\right\rangle}- at - bs\end{gathered}$$ attains a local maximum $(\bar t, \bar x, \bar s, \bar y)$ over $[\delta/2,T-\delta/2]\times B_S \times [\delta/2,T-\delta/2]\times
B_S$. It follows from (\[eq:lessthen-1\]) that if $\alpha$ is sufficiently small then $\|\bar x\|, \|\bar y\| \leq S-1$.
By possibly making $S$ bigger we can assume that $(0,T)\times B_S$ contains a maximizing sequence for $$\sup_{(s,y)\in(0,T), \; \|y\|\leq N}
\left\{w(s,y)-\frac{\|x_0-y\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon}
-\frac{(t_0-s)^2}{2\beta}-\lambda e^{2mK(T-s)}\|y\|^m\right\}.$$ Then $$\psi(\bar t, \bar x, \bar s, \bar y) \geq w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}
(t_0, x_0) - \phi(t_0, x_0) - g(t_0, x_0) -C\alpha$$ where the constant $C$ does not depend on $\alpha >0$, and $$\psi(\bar t, \bar x, \bar s, \bar y) \leq w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}
(\bar t, \bar x) - \phi(\bar t, \bar x) - g(\bar t, \bar x) +
C\alpha.$$ Therefore, since $(t_0, x_0)$ is a strict maximum, we have that $(\bar t, \bar x)\xrightarrow{\alpha\downarrow 0} (t_0, x_0)$ and so for small $\alpha$ $\bar t\in(\delta , T-\delta)$. It then easily follows that if $\beta$ is big enough (depending on $\lambda$ and $\delta$) then $\bar s \in (\delta/2,T-\delta/2)$.
Moreover, standard arguments (see for instance [@I]) give us
$$\label{eq:stimasuepsilon} \lim_{\beta\to 0}\limsup_{\alpha\to 0}
\frac{|\bar s -\bar t|^2}{2\beta} =0,$$
$$\label{eq:stimasuepsilon1} \lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\limsup_{\beta\to
0}\limsup_{\alpha\to 0} \frac{|\bar x -\bar y|^2_{-1}}{2\epsilon}=0.$$
We can now use the fact that $w$ is a subsolution to obtain $$\begin{gathered}
-\frac{(\bar t-\bar s)}{\beta} - 2\lambda mKe^{2mK(T- \bar s)}\|\bar y\|^m + b - \frac{{\left\langle}A^*B(\bar x - \bar y), \bar y {\right\rangle}}{\epsilon} + {\left\langle}A^*Bp, \bar y {\right\rangle}\\
+ H \left (\bar s, \bar y, \frac{1}{\epsilon}B(\bar y - \bar x) +
\lambda m e^{2mK(T-\bar s)} \|y\|^{m-1} \frac{y}{\|y\|} + Bp \right
) \geq 0.\end{gathered}$$ We notice that $$-\frac{(\bar t-\bar s)}{\beta}=\phi_t(\bar t , \bar x) + g_t(\bar t,
\bar x) +a$$ and $$\frac{1}{\epsilon}B(\bar y - \bar x) = D\phi (\bar t, \bar x) +
Dg(\bar t, \bar x) + Bq$$ which in particular implies that $Dg(\bar t, \bar x)\in D(A^*)$, i.e. $\bar x\in D(A^*)$, and so it follows that ${\left\langle}A^*\bar
x,Dg(\bar t, \bar x){\right\rangle}\le 0$. Therefore using this, the assumptions on $b$ and $L$, and (\[eq:stimasuepsilon\]) and (\[eq:stimasuepsilon1\]) we have $$\begin{gathered}
\phi_t(\bar t , \bar x) + g_t(\bar t, \bar x) + {\left\langle}\bar x, A^*D\phi(\bar t,\bar x){\right\rangle}+ H \left (\bar t, \bar x, D\phi (\bar t, \bar x) + Dg(\bar t, \bar x) \right ) \\
\geq 2\lambda mKe^{2mK(T- \bar s)}\|\bar y\|^m - {\left\langle}A^*Bp, \bar y {\right\rangle}-a -b\\
- {\left\langle}(\bar y - \bar x), A^*\frac{1}{\epsilon}B(\bar y - \bar x){\right\rangle}- {\left\langle}\bar x, A^*Dg(\bar t, \bar x) + A^*Bq){\right\rangle}\\
+ H \left (\bar t, \bar x, \frac{1}{\epsilon}B(\bar y - \bar x) -Bq \right ) - H \left (\bar s, \bar y, \frac{1}{\epsilon}B(\bar y - \bar x) + \lambda m e^{2mK(T-\bar s)} \|y\|^{m-1} \frac{y}{\|y\|} \right ) \\
\geq 2\lambda mKe^{2mK(T- \bar s)}\|\bar y\|^m
-C_{\lambda,\epsilon}\alpha
+\frac{c_0}{\epsilon} \|\bar x - \bar y \|_{-1}^2 \\
-K\|\bar x - \bar y \|_{-1}\frac{\|B(\bar x - \bar y) \|}{\epsilon}
-\gamma_{\lambda,\epsilon}(|\bar t-\bar s|)
-\lambda m(M+K\|\bar y\|)e^{2mK(T- \bar s)}\|\bar y\|^{m-1}\\
\geq -C_{\lambda,\epsilon}\alpha
-\gamma(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta,\alpha)\end{gathered}$$ for some $\gamma(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta,\alpha)$ such that $$\lim_{\lambda\to 0}\limsup_{\epsilon\to 0}\limsup_{\beta\to 0}
\limsup_{\alpha\to 0} \gamma(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta,\alpha)=0.$$ We obtain the claim by letting $\alpha\to 0$. The proof for $w_{\lambda,\beta,\epsilon}$ is similar.
Similar argument would also work for problems with discounting if $w$ was uniformly continuous in $|\cdot|\times\|\cdot\|_{-1}$ norm uniformly on bounded sets of $(0,T)\times\mathcal{H}$. Moreover in some cases the function $\gamma_{R,\delta}$ could be explicitly computed. For instance if $w$ is bounded and $$\label{aaa12} |w(t,x)-w(s,y)|\leq
\sigma(\|x-y\|_{-1})+\sigma_1(|t-s|;\|x\|\vee\|y\|)$$ for $t,s\in(0,T), \|x\|,\|y\|\in \mathcal{H}$, we can replace $\lambda e^{2mK(T- \bar s)}\|\bar y\|^m$ by $\lambda\mu(y)$ for some radial nondecreasing function $\mu$ such that $D\mu$ is bounded and $\mu(y)\to+\infty$ as $\|y\|\to\infty$ (see [@CL5], page 446). If we then replace the order in which we pass to the limits we can get an explicit (but complicated) form for $\gamma_{R,\delta}$ satisfying $$\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\limsup_{\lambda\to 0}\limsup_{\beta\to 0}
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\epsilon,\lambda,\beta)=0.$$ The proofs of Theorem 3.7 and Proposition 5.3 in [@CL5] can give hints how to do this.
\[lem3\] Let the assumptions of Lemma \[lem1\] be satisfied. Then:
- If $(a,p)\in D^{1,-}w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)$ for $(t,x)\in
(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R$ then $$\label{eq:lem3a} a +{\left\langle}A^*p, x {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,p) \geq
-\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)$$ for $\beta$ sufficiently small.
- If in addition $H(s,y,q)$ is weakly lower-semicontinuous with respect to the $q$-variable and $(a,p)\in
D^{1,+}w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)$ for $(t,x)\in
(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R$ is such that $Dw_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t_n,x_n)\rightharpoonup p$ for some $(t_n,x_n)\to (t,x)$, $(t_n,x_n)\in(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R$, then $$a +{\left\langle}A^*p, x {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,p) \leq
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)$$ for $\beta$ sufficiently small.
The Hamiltonian $H$ is weakly lower-semicontinuous with respect to the $q$-variable for instance if $U$ is compact. To see this we observe that thanks to the compactness of $U$ the infimum in the definition of the Hamiltonian is a minimum. Let now $q_n\rightharpoonup q$ and let $$H(s,y,q_n)= {\left\langle}q_n, b(s, y, u_n){\right\rangle}+ L(s, y, u_n)$$ for some $u_n\in U$. Passing to a subsequence if necessary we can assume that $u_n\longrightarrow \bar u$, and then passing to the limit in the above expression we obtain $$\liminf_{n\to\infty}H(s,y,q_n)= {\left\langle}q, b(s, y, \bar u){\right\rangle}+ L(s,
y,\bar u) \geq H(s,y,q).$$ We also remark that since $H$ is concave in $q$ it is weakly upper-semicontinuous in $q$. Therefore in (b) the Hamiltonian $H$ is assumed to be weakly continuous in $q$.
[*(of Lemma \[lem3\])*]{} Recall first that for a convex/concave function $v$ its sub/super-differential at a point $(s,z)$ is equal to $$\overline{\hbox{conv}}\{((a,p):v_t(s_n,z_n)\to a,
Dv(s_n,z_n)\rightharpoonup p, s_n\to s, z_n\to z\}$$ (see [@Pr], page 319).
**(a)** **Step 1**: Denote $v=w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$. At points of differentiability, it follows from Lemma \[lem2\](iii) and the “semiconvexity" (see Lemma \[lem2\](ii)) of $w^{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ that there exists a test1 function $\varphi$ such that $v-\varphi$ has a local maximum and the result then follows from Lemma \[lem1\].
**Step 2**: Consider first the case $Dv(t_n,x_n)\rightharpoonup
p$ with $(t_n,x_n)\to (t,x)$. From Lemma \[lem2\] (iii) $Dv(t_n,x_n)=Bq_n$ with $\|q_n\|\leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$, so, it is always possible to extract a subsequence $q_{n_k}\rightharpoonup
q$ for some $q\in \mathcal{H}$. Then $Dv(t_{n_k},x_{n_k})=Bq_{n_k}\rightharpoonup Bq$ and $Bq=p$. Therefore $${\left\langle}A^*B q_{n_k},x_{n_k} {\right\rangle}= {\left\langle}q_{n_k},(A^*B)^*x_{n_k} {\right\rangle}\longrightarrow {\left\langle}q,(A^*B)^*x {\right\rangle}= {\left\langle}A^*B q,x {\right\rangle}= {\left\langle}A^*p,x {\right\rangle}$$ Moreover, since $H$ is concave in $p$ it is weakly upper-semicontinuous so we have $$H(t,x,p)\geq \limsup_{k\to +\infty} H(t_{n_k},x_{n_k},Dv(t_{n_k},x_{n_k}))$$ and we conclude from Step 1.
**Step 3**: If $p$ is a generic point of $\overline{\hbox{conv}}\{p:Dv(t_n,x_n)\rightharpoonup p,
(t_n,x_n)\to (t,x)\}$, i.e. $p=\lim_{n\to\infty}
\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i^nBq_i^n$, where $\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i^n=1,
\|q_i^n\| \leq M_{R,\epsilon,\beta}$, and the $Bq_i^n$ are weak limits of gradients. By passing to a subsequence if necessary we can assume that $\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i^nq_i^n\rightharpoonup q$ and $p=Bq$. But then $${\left\langle}A^*\left(\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i^nBq_i^n\right), x_n{\right\rangle}={\left\langle}A^*B\left(\sum_{i=1}^n\lambda_i^nq_i^n\right), x_n{\right\rangle}\to {\left\langle}A^*Bq, x {\right\rangle}={\left\langle}A^*p, x {\right\rangle}$$ as $n\to\infty$. The result now follows from Step 2 and the concavity of $$p\mapsto {\left\langle}A^*p, x {\right\rangle}+ H(t,x,p).$$
**(b)** As in (a) at the points of differentiability the claim follows from Lemmas \[lem2\] and \[lem1\]. Denote $v=w_{\lambda,
\epsilon, \beta}$. If $Dv(t_n, x_n)\rightharpoonup p$ for some $(t_n,x_n)\to (t,x)$, $(t_n,x_n)\in(\delta,T-\delta)\times B_R$ we have that $$\label{aabba} v_t(t_n, x_n)+{\left\langle}A^*Dv(t_n, x_n), x_n{\right\rangle}+
H(t_n,x_n,Dv(t_n, x_n)) \leq
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta).$$ Observing as in Step 2 of (a) that $${\left\langle}A^*Dv(t_n, x_n), x_n{\right\rangle}\to {\left\langle}A^* p ,x {\right\rangle}$$ we can pass to the limit in (\[aabba\]), using the weak lower semicontinuity of $H$ with respect to the third variable, to get $$a+ {\left\langle}A^* p ,x {\right\rangle}+ H(t, x, p) \leq
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta).$$
\[th1\] Let the assumptions of Lemma \[lem1\] be satisfied and let $w$ be a function such that for every $R>0$ there exists a modulus $\sigma_R$ such that $$\label{aaa1} |w(t,x)-w(s,y)|\leq
\sigma_R(|t-s|+\|x-y\|_{-1})\quad\hbox{for}\,\,\, t,s\in(0,T),
\|x\|,\|y\|\leq R.$$ Then:
- If $w$ is a viscosity subsolution of (\[deterministicHJB\]) satisfying (\[aaa2\]) for subsolutions then for every $0<t<t+h<T$, $x\in \mathcal{H}$ $$\label{aaa7} w(t,x)\leq \inf_{u(\cdot) \in \mathcal{U}[t,T]}
\left\{\int_t^{t+h} L(s,x(s),u(s)) {\mathrm{d}}s +w(t+h,x(t+h))\right\}.$$
- Assume in addition that $H(s,y,q)$ is weakly lower-semicontinuous in $q$ and that for every $(t,x)$ there exists a modulus $\omega_{t,x}$ such that $$\label{aaa8} \|{x}_{t,x}(s_2)-{x}_{t,x}(s_1)\|\leq
\omega_{t,x}(s_2-s_1)$$ for all $t\leq s_1\leq s_2\leq T$ and all $u(\cdot)\in
\mathcal{U}[t,T]$, where ${x}_{t,x}(\cdot)$ is the solution of (\[sydeterministicstate\]). If $w$ is a viscosity supersolution of (\[deterministicHJB\]) satisfying (\[aaa2\]) for supersolutions then for every $0<t<t+h<T, x\in H$, and $\nu>0$ there exists a piecewise constant control $u_{\nu}\in\mathcal{U}[t,T]$ such that $$\label{aaa9} w(t,x)\geq \int_t^{t+h} L(s,x(s),u_{\nu}(s)) {\mathrm{d}}s
+w(t+h,x(t+h))-\nu.$$ In particular we obtain the superoptimality principle $$\label{aaa10} w(t,x)\geq \inf_{u(\cdot) \in \mathcal{U}[t,T]}
\left\{\int_t^{t+h} L(s,x(s),u(s)) {\mathrm{d}}s +w(t+h,x(t+h))\right\}$$ and if $w$ is the value function $V$ we have existence (together with the explicit construction) of piecewise constant $\nu$-optimal controls.
We will only prove $(b)$ as the proof of $(a)$ follows the same strategy after we fix any control $u(\cdot)$ and is in fact much easier. We follow the ideas of [@sw] (that treats the finite dimensional case).
**Step 1**. Let $n\geq 1$. We approximate $w$ by $w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ with $m>k$. We notice that for any $u(\cdot)$ if $x_{t,x}(\cdot)$ is the solution of (\[sydeterministicstate\]) then $$\sup_{t\le s\le T}\|x_{t,x}(s)\|\le R=R(T,\|x\|).$$
**Step 2**. Take any $(a,p)\in
D^{1,+}w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)$ as in Lemma \[lem3\]$(b)$ (i.e. $p$ is the weak limit of derivatives nearby). Such elements always exist because $w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ is “semiconcave". Then we choose $u_1\in U$ such that $$\label{aaa11} a +{\left\langle}A^*p, x {\right\rangle}+ {\left\langle}p, b(t,x,u_1) {\right\rangle}+
L(t,x,u_1) \leq
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)+\frac{1}{n^2}.$$ By the “semiconcavity" of $w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}$ $$\label{aaa121} w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(s,y)\leq
w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x) +a(s-t)+{\left\langle}p, y-x {\right\rangle}+\frac{\|x-y\|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon} +\frac{(t-s)^2}{2\beta}.$$ But the right hand side of the above inequality is a test1 function so if $s\geq t$ and $x(s)= x_{t,x}(s)$ with constant control $u(s)=u_1$, we can use (\[eq:explicitphi\]) and write $$\begin{gathered}
\label{aaa13} \bigg | \frac{a(s-t) + {\left\langle}p, x(s) - x {\right\rangle}+
\frac{\| x(s) - x \|_{-1}^2}{2\epsilon} + \frac{(s-t)^2}{2\beta}}{s-t}
\\ - \left ( a+ {\left\langle}p, b(t,x,u_1) {\right\rangle}+ {\left\langle}A^* p , x {\right\rangle}\right ) \bigg |
\\
\leq\frac{|t-s|}{2\beta}
+
\left | \frac{\int_t^s {\left\langle}A^*p, x(r) - x {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r}{s-t} \right |
\\
+ \left| \frac{\int_t^s {\left\langle}p, b(r,x(r),u_1) - b(t,x,u_1)
{\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r}{s-t} \right | + \left | \frac{\int_t^s {\left\langle}A^*B(x(r) -x), x(r) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r}{\epsilon(s-t)} \right |
\\
+ \left | \frac{\int_t^s {\left\langle}B(x(r) -x), b(r,x(r),u_1) {\right\rangle}{\mathrm{d}}r}
{\epsilon(s-t)} \right | \\
\leq \omega_{t,x}' (|s-t| + \sup_{t\le r\le s}\|x(r) - x\|) \leq
\tilde\omega_{t,x}(s-t)\end{gathered}$$ for some moduli $\omega'_{t,x}$ and $\tilde\omega_{t,x}$ that depend on $(t,x),\epsilon,\beta$ but not on $u_1$. We can now use (\[aaa11\]), (\[aaa121\]) and (\[aaa13\]) to estimate $$\begin{gathered}
\label{wzwza}
\frac{w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t+\frac{h}{n},x(t+\frac{h}{n}))-
w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)}{h/n}
\\
\leq \tilde\omega_{t,x}\left(\frac{h}{n}\right) +
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)+\frac{1}{n^2}- L(t,x,u_1)\end{gathered}$$
**Step 3**. Denote $t_i=t+\frac{(t-1)h}{n}$ for $i=1,...,n$. We now repeat the above procedure starting at $x(t_2)$ to abtain $u_2$ satisfying (\[wzwza\]) with $(t_2,x(t_2))$ replaced by $(t_3,x(t_3))$, $(t,x)=(t_1,x(t_1))$ replaced by $(t_2,x(t_2))$, and $u_1$ replaced by $u_2$. After $n$ iterations of this process we obtain a piecewise constant control $u^{(n)},$ where $u^{(n)}(s)=u_i$ if $s\in [t_i,t_{i+1})$. Then if $x(r)$ solves (\[sydeterministicstate\]) with the control $u^{(n)}$ we have
$$\begin{gathered}
\frac{w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t+{h},x(t+{h}))-
w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)}{h/n}\\
\leq \tilde\omega_{t,x}\left(\frac{h}{n}\right)n +
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)n+\frac{n}{n^2}-
\sum_{i=1}^n L(t_{i-1},x(t_{i-1}),u_i).\nonumber\end{gathered}$$
We remind that (\[aaa8\]) is needed here to guarantee that $\sup_{t_{i-1}\le r\le t_i}\|x(r)-x(t_{i-1})\|$ is independent of $u_i$ and $x(t_{i-1})$ and depends only on $x$ and $t$. We then easily obtain $$\begin{gathered}
{w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t+{h},x(t+{h}))-
w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(t,x)} \\
\leq \tilde\omega_{t,x}\left(\frac{h}{n}\right)h +
\gamma_{R,\delta}(\lambda,\epsilon,\beta)h +\frac{h}{n^2}-
\int_t^{t+h} L(r,x(r),u^{(n)}) {\mathrm{d}}r + \tilde\omega'_{t,x}
\left(\frac{h}{n}\right)h\end{gathered}$$ for some modulus $\tilde\omega'_{t,x}$, where we have used Hypothesis \[hp:section4\] and (\[aaa8\]) to estimate how the sum converges to the integral. We now finally notice that it follows from (\[aaa1\]) that $$|w_{\lambda,\epsilon,\beta}(s,y)-w(s,y)|\leq \tilde\sigma_R(\lambda
+ \epsilon + \beta;R) \quad\hbox{for}\,\,\,
s\in(\delta,T-\delta),\|y\|\leq R,$$ where the modulus $\tilde\sigma_R$ can be explicitly calculated from $\sigma_R$. Therefore, choosing $\beta,\lambda, \epsilon$ small and then $n$ big enough, and using (\[aaa3\]), we arrive at (\[aaa9\]).
We show below one example when condition (\[aaa8\]) is satisfied.
Condition (\[aaa8\]) holds for example if $A=A^*$, it generates a differentiable semigroup, and $\|Ae^{tA}\|\le C/t^\delta$ for some $\delta<2$. Indeed under these assumptions, if $u(\cdot)\in
\mathcal{U}[t,T]$ and writing $x(s)=x_{t,x}(s)$, we have $$\|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}x(s)\|\leq \|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{(s-t)A}x\|
+\int_t^s\|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{(s-\tau)A}b(\tau,x(\tau),u(\tau))\|d\tau$$ However for every $y\in H$ and $0\leq \tau\leq T$ $$\|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\tau A}y\|^2\leq \|(A+I)e^{\tau A}y\| \;
\|y\| \leq \frac{C_1}{\tau^{\delta}}\|y\|^2.$$ This yields $$\|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{\tau A}\|\leq \frac{\sqrt{C_1}}
{\tau^{\frac{\delta}{2}}}$$ and therefore $$\|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}x(s)\|\leq
C_2\left(\frac{1}{(s-t)^{\frac{\delta}{2}}}
+(s-t)^{1-\frac{\delta}{2}}\right)\leq
\frac{C_3}{(s-t)^{\frac{\delta}{2}}}.$$ We will first show that for every $\epsilon>0$ there exists a modulus $\sigma_\epsilon$ (also depending on $x$ but independent of $u(\cdot)$) such that $\|e^{(s_2-s_1)A}x(s_1)-x(s_1)\| \leq
\sigma_\epsilon(s_2-s_1)$ for all $t+\epsilon\le s_1 < s_2\leq T$. This is now rather obvious since $$e^{(s_2-s_1)A}x(s_1)-x(s_1)=\int_0^{s_2-s_1}Ae^{sA}x(s_1)ds$$ $$=
\int_0^{s_2-s_1}(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{sA}(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}x(s_1)ds
-\int_0^{s_2-s_1}e^{sA}x(s_1)ds$$ and thus $$\|e^{(s_2-s_1)A}x(s_1)-x(s_1)\|\leq \|(A+I)^{\frac{1}{2}}x(s_1)\|
\int_0^{s_2-s_1}\frac{\sqrt{C_1}}{s^{\frac{\delta}{2}}}ds
+(s_2-s_1)\|x(s_1)\|$$ $$\leq
\frac{C_4}{\epsilon^{\frac{\delta}{2}}}(s_2-s_1)^{1-\frac{\delta}{2}}
+C_5(s_2-s_1).$$ We also notice that there exists a modulus $\sigma$, depending on $x$ and independent of $u(\cdot)$, such that $$\|x(s)-x\|\le \sigma(s-t).$$ Let now $t\le s_1 <s_2\leq T$. Denote $\bar s=\max(s_1,t+\epsilon)$. If $s_2\le t+\epsilon$ then $$\|x(s_2)-x(s_1)\|\le 2\sigma(\epsilon).$$ Otherwise $$\begin{gathered}
\|x(s_2)-x(s_1)\|\le 2\sigma(\epsilon)+ \|x(s_2)-x(\bar s)\|
\\
\le 2\sigma(\epsilon)+ \|e^{(s_2-\bar s)A}x(s_1)-x(\bar s)\|
+\int_{\bar s}^{s_2}\|e^{(s_2-\tau)A}b(\tau,x(\tau),u(\tau))\|d\tau
\\
\le 2\sigma(\epsilon)+\sigma_\epsilon(s_2-s_1)+C_4(s_2-s_1)\end{gathered}$$ for some constant $C_4$ independent of $u(\cdot)$. Therefore (\[aaa8\]) is satisfied with the modulus $$\omega_{t,x}(\tau)=\inf_{0<\epsilon<T-t}
\left\{2\sigma(\epsilon)+\sigma_\epsilon(\tau)+C(\tau)\right\}.$$
[99]{}
S. Ani[ţ]{}a, [*Analysis and control of age-dependent population dynamics*]{}, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, (2001).
, [*Optimal feedback controls for a class of nonlinear distributed parameter systems*]{} [SIAM J. Control Optim.]{} 21 (1983), no. 6, 871–894.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations and nonlinear control problems*]{}, [J. Math. Anal. Appl]{} 120 (1986), no. 2, 494–509.
, [*Analysis and control of nonlinear infinite-dimensional systems*]{}, Mathematics in Science and Engineering, 190. Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1993.
, [*Approximation Hamilton-Jacobi equations and suboptimal feedback controllers*]{}, Nonlinear analysis and applications (Warsaw, 1994), 27–47, GAKUTO Internat. Ser. Math. Sci. Appl., 7, Gakkōtosho, Tokyo, 1996.
, [*The necessary conditions for optimal control in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [J. Math. Anal. Appl.]{} 133 (1988), no. 1, 151–162.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in Hilbert spaces*]{}, Research Notes in Mathematics 86, Pitman, Boston, MA, 1983.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations and synthesis of nonlinear control processes in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [J. Differential Equations]{} 48 (1983), no. 3, 350–372.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in Hilbert spaces: variational and semigroup approach*]{}, [Ann. Mat. Pura Appl.]{} (4) 142 (1985), 303–349 (1986).
, [*A note on a Hamilton-Jacobi equation in Hilbert space*]{} [Nonlinear Anal.]{} 9 (1985), no. 12, 1337–1345.
, [*Existence and uniqueness of the dynamic programming equation in Hilbert space*]{} [Nonlinear Anal.]{} 7 (1983), no. 3, 283–299.
, [*Optimal control and viscosity solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equations*]{}, Systems & Control: Foundations & Applications, Birkhauser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1997.
, [*Optimal investment in a vintage capital model*]{}, [Res. Econ.]{} 52 (1998), [159-188]{}.
, [*Technology adoption and accumulation in a vintage capital model*]{}, [J. Econ.]{} 74 (2001) no. 1, [1-30]{}.
, [*Regularity properties of solutions to Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions and nonlinear optimal control*]{}, [Differential Integral Equations]{} 2 (1989), no. 4, 479–493.
, [*On the Bellman equation for the minimum time problem in infinite dimensions*]{}, [SIAM J. Control Optim.]{} 43 (2004), no. 2, 532–548
, [*G. Nonlinear optimal control with infinite horizon for distributed parameter systems and stationary Hamilton-Jacobi equations*]{}, [SIAM J. Control Optim.]{} 27 (1989), no. 4, 861–875.
, [*Some results on nonlinear optimal control problems and Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions*]{}, [J. Funct. Anal.]{} 90 (1990), no. 1, 27–47.
, [*A direct approach to infinite-dimensional Hamilton-Jacobi equations and applications to convex control with state constraints*]{} [Differential Integral Equations]{} 8 (1995), no. 2, 225–246.
, [*A dynamic programming approach to nonlinear boundary control problems of parabolic type*]{} [J. Funct. Anal.]{} 117 (1993), no. 1, 25–61.
, [*Value function and optimality conditions for semilinear control problems*]{}, [Appl. Math. Optim.]{} 26 (1992), no. 2, 139–169.
, [*Value function and optimality condition for semilinear control problems. II. Parabolic case*]{}, [Appl. Math. Optim.]{} 33 (1996), no. 1, 1–33.
, [*Optimality conditions for boundary control problems of parabolic type*]{}, Control and estimation of distributed parameter systems: nonlinear phenomena (Vorau, 1993), 79–96, Internat. Ser. Numer. Math., 118, Birkhauser, Basel, 1994.
, [*Infinite dimensional Hamilton–Jacobi equations and Dirichlet boundary control problems of parabolic type*]{}, [SIAM J. Control Optim.]{} 34 (1996), no. 6, pp. 1831-1847.
, [*Asymptotic controllability implies feedback stabilization*]{}, [IEEE Trans. Automat. Control]{} 42 (1997), no. 10, 1394–1407.
, [*Nonsmooth Analysis and Control Theory*]{}, Springer, New York, 1998.
, [*User’s guide to viscosity solutions of second order partial differential equations*]{}, [Bull. Am. Math. Soc., New Ser.]{} 27 (1992), no. 1, [1-67]{}.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions. IV. Hamiltonians with unbounded linear terms*]{}, [J. Funct. Anal.]{} 90, (1990), [237-283]{}.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions. V. Unbounded linear terms and $B$-continuous solutions*]{}, [J. Funct. Anal.]{} 97, (1991), [417-465]{}.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions. VI: Nonlinear A and Tataru’s method refined*]{}, Evolution equations, control theory, and biomathematics (Han sur Lesse, 1991), pp. 51-89, Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., 155, Dekker, New York, 1994.
, [*Hamilton-Jacobi equations in infinite dimensions. VII: The HJB equation is not always satisfied*]{}, [ J. Funct. Anal.]{} 125 (1994) pp. 111-148.
, [*Global solutions for a class of Hamilton-Jacobi equations in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim.]{} 8 (1985/86), no. 3-4, 261–300.
, [*Generic Frechet-differentiability and perturbed optimization problems in Banach spaces.*]{}, [Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.]{}, 224, (1977), 193-216.
, [*On the dynamic programming approach for optimal control problems of PDE’s with age structure*]{}, [Math. Popul. Stud.]{} 11 (2004), no. 3-4, 233-270.
, [*Age-structured optimal control in population economics*]{}, [Math. Popul. Stud.]{} 65 (2004), no. 4, 373-387.
, [*Deterministic and stochastic optimal control*]{}, Applications of Mathematics, No. 1. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1975.
, [*Controlled Markov processes and viscosity solutions*]{}, Second edition, Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability, 25, Springer, New York, 2006.
, [*Viscosity solutions of dynamic-programming equations for the optimal control of the two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations*]{}, [Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.]{} 163 (2002), no. 4, 295–327.
, [*Mathematical theory of age-structured population dynamics*]{}, Giardini, Pisa, (1995)
, [*Gender-structured population modeling*]{}, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, (2005)
, [*Viscosity solutions for a class of Hamilton–Jacobi equations in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [J. Funct. Anal.]{}, 105 (1992), pp. 301–341.
, [*On $\epsilon$-optimal controls for state constraint problems*]{}, [Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineaire]{} 17 (2000), no. 4, 473–502.
D. Kelome, [*Viscosity solutions of second order equations in a separable Hilbert space and applications to stochastic optimal control*]{}, Ph.D. Thesis, 2002.
, [*Perron’s method and the method of relaxed limits for “unbounded" PDE in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [Studia Math.]{} 176 (2006), no. 3, 249–277.
, [*A viscosity approach to infinite-dimensional Hamilton-Jacobi equations arising in optimal control with state constraints*]{}, [SIAM J. Control Optim.]{} 36 (1998), 1348–1375.
, [*Optimal control theory for infinite-dimensional systems*]{}, Birkhauser Boston, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
, [*Optimal control via nonsmooth analysis*]{}, CRM Proceedings & Lecture Notes, 2. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1993. x+153 pp.
, [*Differentiability of Lipschitz functions on Banach spaces*]{}, [J. Funct. Anal.]{} 91 (1990), no. 2, 312-345.
, [*Polar decomposition of positive operators and problem od Crandall and Lions*]{}, [Appl. Anal.]{}, 57-3 (1995), [383-385]{}
, [*A class of Hamilton-Jacobi equations with unbounded coefficients in Hilbert spaces*]{}, [Appl. Math. Optim.]{} 45 (2002), no. 1, 75–98.
, [*Dynamic programming of the Navier-Stokes equations*]{}, [Systems Control Lett.]{} 16 (1991), no. 4, 299–307.
, [*Sub- and superoptimality principles of dynamic programming revisited*]{}, [Nonlinear Anal.]{} 26 (1996), no. 8, 1429-1436.
, [*Viscosity solutions of Hamilton–Jacobi equations with unbounded linear terms*]{}, [J. Math. Anal. Appl.]{} 163 (1992), pp. 345–392.
, [*Viscosity solutions for the dynamic programming equation*]{}, [Appl. Math. Optim.]{}, 25 (1992), pp. 109–126.
, [*Optimal control*]{}, Systems & Control: Foundations & Applications. Birkhauser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2000.
, [*Stochastic controls*]{}, Springer, New York, (1999).
, [*Verification theorems within the framework of viscosity solutions*]{}, [J. Math. Anal. Appl.]{} 177 (1993), no. 1, 208–225.
[^1]: DPTEA, Università *LUISS - Guido Carli* Roma and School of Mathematics and Statistics, UNSW, Sydney e-mail: [email protected], G.Fabbri was supported by the ARC Discovery project DP0558539.
[^2]: Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche ed Aziendali, Università *LUISS - Guido Carli* Roma, e-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332, U.S.A., e-mail: [email protected]. A. Świȩch was supported by NSF grant DMS 0500270.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We describe a software toolbox for the configuration of deep neural networks in the domain of skin cancer classification. The implemented software architecture allows developers to quickly set up new convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures and hyper-parameter configurations. At the same time, the user interface, manageable as a simple spreadsheet, allows non-technical users to explore different configuration settings that need to be explored when switching to different data sets. In future versions, meta leaning frameworks can be added, or AutoML systems that continuously improve over time. Preliminary results, conducted with two CNNs in the context melanoma detection on dermoscopic images, quantify the impact of image augmentation, image resolution, and rescaling filter on the overall detection performance and training time.'
author:
- Fabrizio Nunnari
- Daniel Sonntag
bibliography:
- 'SkinCare.bib'
title: A CNN toolbox for skin cancer classification
---
Introduction
============
The skin cancer death rate has escalated sharply in the USA, Europe and Australia [@celebi_dermoscopy_2019]. However, with proper early detection, the survival rate after surgery (wide excision) reaches 98%. For this reason, the research community has put a significant effort in the early detection of skin cancer through the inspection of images [@masood_computer_2013]. Recently, the best results has been achieved using transfer learning on Convolutional Neural Networks (e.g., [@esteva_dermatologist-level_2017; @haenssle_man_2018; @fujisawa_deep-learning-based_2018]).
As reported by Brinker et al. [@brinker_skin_2018], regardless of the similarities in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and ROC AUC, those works are hardly comparable with each other because they are all based on different datasets (often proprietary), and use different CNN architectures and hyper-parameters.
Hence, given a new dataset, characterised for example by its own resolution, settings (lenses and light conditions), type (dermoscopic or clinical), and ethnicity (caucasian, asiatic, worldwide), choosing for the best CNN architecture and hyper-parameters is not straightforward. For example, one of the mostly recent influencing works (Esteva et. al [@esteva_dermatologist-level_2017]) showed a CNN that matches the accuracy of expert dermatologists when trained on more than 126k images. However, Fujisawa et al. [@fujisawa_deep-learning-based_2018] showed that, with a higher image augmentation (24x) and image resolution (1k), the same performances can be achieved using less than 5000 images. This is very important to the general area under study with less data material.
Also, we have reports from the pre-CNN era, when features were extracted manually and image pre-processing was required, about the importance of extended segmentation [@burdick_rethinking_2018] and color filtering [@barata_two_2014] to improve the performance of classification. However, such techniques have not been applied in conjunction with deep learning approaches, where performance gains are mostly pursued by increasing the size of the training sets.
We try to enhance the infrastructure for research based on previous implementations [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1803-04818; @DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1709-01476] to explore a number of options that require a considerable amount of software development. To address the two above-mentioned issues (lack of cross-CNN comparison and lack of integration of pre-processing techniques) we develop a software platform for the easy and systematic exploration of (hyper-)parameters governing the performances of image augmentation and CNNs.
Our platform (which will be released as open-source software once out of beta stage) has two target user groups: *Developers*, who need a structured and extensible software architecture to experiment with new image processing techniques and CNN architectures, and *Practitioners* in the field of dermatology, who do not necessarily have the competencies to script new software, but do need to explore the performances of existing techniques when new datasets become available.
Training and Testing Pipeline
=============================
![Training/Testing pipeline of the proposed architecture[]{data-label="fig:pipeline"}](pipeline.pdf){width="\textwidth"}
Figure \[fig:pipeline\] shows the pipeline for the training and testing procedure of the proposed architecture. Starting from left, a dataset is chosen, and all images are (optionally) segmented and the mask is extended. The segmented images then go through an augmentation procedure, which includes the possibility to resize (using different filters), transform (flip/rotate), modulate brightness and saturation, and change the color space. Images are augmented on-the-fly. The augmented images are then sent to a CNN which can output a binary classification (e.g., malignant vs. benign lesion), a multi-class probability distribution, or a pixel-level mask for the identification of featured image areas.
**Training Input** The source data consist of a single CSV file (comma-separated values), and is thus easily manageable as a spreadsheet with MS Excel or OpenOffice. Table \[tab:input-sample\] shows an input example.
method dataset split imgaug
-------- --------- ------- ---- ----- -------------- ---- ----- ---------- ----- -------------
VGG16 pre 10 -1 hflip\_rot24 12 450 nearest RGB \[0.2,0.8\]
SC19 n=100 15 0.1 hflip\_rot4 64 227 bilinear HSV compute
: Input example
\[tab:input-sample\]
The `method` column specifies the CNNs configuration. The `dataset` column contains the name of another CSV file having a column with the image file names and a second column with ground truth labels. In future versions, we plan to simplify this procedure even more, bringing it to the level of filesystem management, where the input will be a folder whose subfolders represent the classes to predict. The `split` column specifies whether the validation and test sets are pre-split on different files (with extra suffix) or alternatively to sample $n$ elements from the training set. The `segment` is a float value that, if positive, enables segmentation and specifies the extension factor of the masking area. The `epochs` column specifies the number of training epochs, while the `imgaug` column contains a preset for image augmentation, both affecting training time. The `batchsize` column is the training batch size, while `imgsize` is the (square) resolution at which each input image will be rescaled, both affecting the quantity of GPU RAM needed. The `resize filter` specifies the resize sampling strategy (nearest, bilinear, bicubic, or lanczos). The `colorspace` specifies whether the images should be kept in their original `RGB` format or should be converted into [HVS]{}, [LAB]{}, or [YCbCr]{}. Finally, `classweights` specifies the weight factors for each class, used as compensation factors in unbalanced datasets. Such weights can also be computed automatically from the input dataset.
**Segmentation** This is the process of automatically detecting the contour separating the lesion from the surrounding skin. Masking out surrounding skin regions, together with a procedural mask extension, has the potential to improve classification results [@burdick_rethinking_2018]. This processing step is optional because there is not guarantee that the segmentation will be correct.[^1] Currently, the segmentation of the input images is performed by a CNN based of the UNET architecture [@navab_u-net:_2015] and trained on the ISIC 2017 challenge dataset [@codella_skin_2018; @tschandl_ham10000_2018]. On a pixel-by-pixel test, we achieved 73% sensitivity, 98% specificity, and a Jaccard Index (aka Intersection over Union, IoU) of 0.69. This compares well with the top results of the ISIC 2017 challenge [@yuan_automatic_2019] (83% sensitivity, 98% specificity, and 0.76 Jaccard Index).
**Data Augmentation** This is the process of procedurally deriving several alterations of an image that look plausible to augment the original dataset. Our image augmentation module has been implemented using a *Decorator* design pattern [@gamma_design_1994]. An abstract `ImageProvider` class exposes the methods to query for the number of available images and get an image by integer index. A direct concrete subclass `DiskImageProvider` reads images from files, optionally changing the color space and resizing each image. The `ImageAugmenter` abstract class (subclass of `ImageProvider`) provides the base for augmentation. Several augmenters (`HFlip`, `Rotation`, `Brightness`, `Saturation`) can be concatenated in any order to provide a custom and controlled augmentation chain.
A *Factory Method* [@gamma_design_1994] provides a mapping between a mnemonic name and an augmentation configuration. For example, we are experimenting with three augmentation presets: with `hflip` every image is flipped horizontally, thus doubling the number of images; with `hflip_rot4` every image is flipped and also rotated by 0, 90, 180, and 270 degrees (augmentation 8x); finally, `hflip_rot24` (following the schema of [@fujisawa_deep-learning-based_2018]) leads to an augmentation factor of 48x.
The image augmentation is performed entirely via CPU, possibly on multiple threads, hence leaving the GPU for the training task only. Whether this is an advantage or not depends on other training parameters. For example, when training images at 227x227 resolution on a machine with only 4 cores, the augmentation process is actually a bottleneck. However, when training with 450x450 resolution on a 8-core machine, the CPUs are just about 20% loaded while the GPU is 100% loaded on training.
**CNNs** New CNN architectures can be inserted in the main software by implementing the abstract class `Classifier` and giving a concrete implementation for the method `def build_model() -> keras.Model`. By design choice, the hyper-parameters of the specific architecture, such as the learning rate, or the type of optimiser and its parameters, are left to the software engineers and hence to the Python code. In future versions, meta leaning frameworks can be added, or AutoML systems that continuously improve over time. Only specific pre-sets are visible for the end user. Again, a *Factory Method* manages the mapping between a mnemonic string and an CNN architecture and some of its parameters.
We are currently experimenting with transfer learning using the `VGG16` [@simonyan_very_2014] network, pre-trained on ImageNet [@deng_imagenet:_2009], on which we substituted the last layers with 2x 2048 fully connected layers and a final softmax. The default optimizer is SGD, but other configurations are available: `VGG16_Nadam`, `VGG16_Adadelta`, and `VGG16_RMSProp`. Soon, we will perform more tests using `InceptionV3` [@szegedy_rethinking_2016]. Also, we prepared two non pre-trained networks, one based on VGG16 (`VGG16_random`) and the second (`SC19`) as custom modified version of AlexNet [@krizhevsky_imagenet_2012] on the Github distribution. For the feature extraction, we are preparing a CNN based on UNET [@navab_u-net:_2015], trained on the ISIC 2018 challenge [@codella_skin_2019] dataset, that is able to extract masks for five features (pigment network, negative network, streaks, milia-like cysts, globules).
**Training Output** The output of a training session is written into a directory where a `train_output.csv` file contains the same columns of the input file plus a number of columns with the output information, such as the size of validation and test set, class proportions, training time, accuracy, specificity and sensitivity for both validation and test sets, and the ROC AUC for the test set. An additional column is filled with an error message if an exception occurred during the training for the input line (e.g., out of GPU memory). Additionally, for each input line, the system generates plots for validation and training losses as function of epoch training, together with ROC graphs for both the validation and the test sets.
**Implementation** The whole architecture is implemented with the Python language and uses the Keras[^2] framework (Tensorflow[^3] backend). All image processing is based on the Pillow[^4] package. The reference hardware for our experiments is an 8-core i9-9900K CPU, 64GB RAM, and an 11GB nVidia RTX 2080 Ti GPU.
Preliminary results and Lessons Learned
=======================================
We ran experiments on the ISIC dataset, as retrieved in February 2019, from which we removed the SONIC subset (whose images contains coloured markers) and the “2018 JID Editorial Images” subset (very high resolution, lossless). The resulting datasets counts 12319 images.\
**Experiments at 277x277 pixel resolution** With the VGG16 model, SGD optimiser, images resolution at 277x277 pixels (no cropping, only scaling of the full original image), and image augmentation hflip\_rot24 (48x augmentation), we achieved 0.649 specificity, 0.813 sensitivity, and 0.819 ROC AUC. The training of two epochs lasted about 4 hours and a half. This result is already satisfactory compared to other state-of-the-art approaches like Esteva et al. [@esteva_dermatologist-level_2017], who reached AUC ROC 0.96, but training on a dataset of 120k+ images and augmentation 720x, and like Fujisawa et al. [@fujisawa_deep-learning-based_2018], who reached 0.895, specificity and 0.963 sensitivity but using 1000x1000 pixel resolution images and 24x augmentation. With all the other optimisers (Nadam, Adadelta, RMSProp) the network was not training properly. More tests are needed to tune the parameters of the optimisers in combination with the other parameters of the pipeline.
**Experiments without transfer learning** Since training on a dataset like ImageNet requires months of training on high-end hardware, transfer learning might not be an option when investigating on new architecture, possibly simpler, specialised on the skin lesion domain. To have a baseline without transfer learning, we trained the `VGG16_random` configuration. The network, however, wasn’t able to converge after 10 epochs, suggesting that pre-training is not only an option to speed up training, but a necessary condition (at least with this dataset size).
The randomly initialised SC19 architecture showed worse results than VGG16, lacking in sensitivity, with 0.845 specificity, 0.492 sensitivity, and 0.803 ROC AUC. The training lasted about 21 hours for 7 epochs. However, the loss plot showed a possible overfitting occurring already during the first epoch. By switching to a lower augmentation policy `hflip_rot4` (augmentation 8x), the results improved to 0.814 specificity, 0.674 sensitivity, and 0.835 ROC AUC in 11 epochs, using 1/6th of the computational resources.
**Experiments at 450x450 pixel resolution** We increased the images size to 450x450 pixels, which is the lowest resolution available as height of the ISIC images. Results improved, achieving 0.763 specificity, 0.798 sensitivity, and 0.862 ROC AUC. The drawback is an increased train time of 27 hours for 6 epochs. The same configuration (VGG16, 450px, 48x augmentation) was tested against human performance using the 100-image MClass-D test set [@brinker_comparing_2019], on which dermatologists reached 0.600 specificity, 0.741 sensitivity, and 0.671 ROC AUC. Our system performed better, reaching 0.762 specificity, 0.850 sensitivity, and 0.846 ROC AUC. Changing the operating value (malignant vs. benign threshold) from 0.5 to 0.6 leads to 0.862 specificity, 0.750 sensitivity. This latest results closely match with the performances measured by Brinker et al. themselves with their own CNN on the same test set [@brinker_deep_2019].
**No impact of image resize filters** Reducing the size of the ISIC dermoscopic images into 227x227 or 450x450 pixels implies information loss. We investigated on the impact of the resizing filter over the classification results. For the following three conditions, VGG16 at 227x227, SC19 at 227x227, and VGG16 at 450x450 pixels, we tried 4 rescaling filters: nearest, bilinear, bicubic, and lanczos (as exposed by the PIL Python package). Our results show no significant difference in the all the metrics, suggesting that the resizing filter can be left to the default (nearest) for the sake of performances.
Conclusions
===========
We described a software toolbox the configuration of deep neural networks in the domain of skin cancer classification. The results suggest that interactive machine learning (IML) design principles should be applied to train effective models in an explorative way. We provided means for the research community to quickly refine skin cancer classification pipelines by tuning (hyper-)parameters and get feedback as quickly as possible. Interface components need to be simple to end user groups to remain focussed on the machine learning problem at hand. The software platform can be used for other (medical) image processing tasks as well, where iterative processes are needed, and users’ control on the behaviour of the learning system and latency is sensitive for training. In the future, we investigate the visualisation of image features (aforementioned pigment network, negative network, streaks, milia-like cysts, globules). Alternatively, future work can explore meta leaning frameworks, or AutoML systems that continuously improve over time.
[^1]: According to interactive machine learning (IML) goals, we plan to implement the detection of “anomalies” (e.g., too many contours in the same image which blocks shape detection, or too small/big areas) to proactively warn and alarm the user to manually correct the pipeline.
[^2]: <https://keras.io/> – 23 May 2019
[^3]: <https://www.tensorflow.org/> – 23 May 2019
[^4]: <https://pillow.readthedocs.io/> – 23 May 2019
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A potential version of the UrQMD (UrQMD/M) transport model and a traditional coalescence model are combined to calculate the production of $^3$He fragments in central Pb+Pb collisions at SPS energies 20-80 GeV/nucleon. It is found that the Lorentz transformation in the afterburner influences visibly the $^3$He yield and should be considered in calculations. The rapidity distribution of $^3$He multiplicities (including the concave shape) can be described well with UrQMD/M when it stops during t$_{\rm cut}$=100$\pm$25 fm$/c$ and the coalescence afterburner with one parameter set of ($R_0$,$P_0$)=(3.8 fm, 0.3 GeV$/$c) is taken into use afterwards.'
author:
- 'Qingfeng Li$\, ^{1}$[^1], Yongjia Wang$\, ^{1}$, Xiaobao Wang$\, ^{1}$, and Caiwan Shen$\, ^{1}$,'
title: 'Helium-3 production from Pb+Pb collisions at SPS energies with the UrQMD model and the traditional coalescence afterburner'
---
Motivation and model settings
=============================
The production and decay properties of nuclei are fundamental many-body problems in the evolution of the universe, which can be studied in artificial laboratories with heavy ion collisions (HICs). Besides the HICs at low and intermediate energies for the synthesis of (super-)heavy nuclei or the multi-fragmentation through a possible liquid gas phase transition, the production mechanism of nuclei in ultra-relativistic HICs deserves more investigation since it may give important message on the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) phase transition from quark-gluon plasma (QGP) to hadron gas (HG) [@Arsenescu:2003eg]. In addition, if nuclei are formed through a coalescence process one can use their yield ratios to measure the volume of the particle source from which they emerge. This offers important information on the space-time evolution of the reaction, and implies a close relation of space-time structure between the coalescence and the the so-called “femtoscopy” or “HBT” (in reference to Hanbury-Brown and Twiss¡¯s original work with photons) correlation [@Anticic:2004yj].
In past two decades, profited from some experimental measurements e.g., [@Johnson:1997gh; @Anticic:2004yj; @Chekanov:2007mv; @Anticic:2011ny; @Newman:2013ada], the light fragment production mechanism has being investigated more deeply but mainly with a coalescence afterburner in which a Wigner-function method is in use (called Wigner-coalescence) [@Mattiello:1995xg; @Nagle:1996vp; @Monreal:1999mv]. However, it has the substantial disadvantage of not conserving baryon number in the projection. Therefore, we employ the traditional phase-space coalescence approach frequently used for HICs at low and intermediate energies [@Kruse:1985pg; @Li:2005kqa; @Wang:2013wca] and in this paper as well. In Ref. [@Li:2015aa], the method has been used for describing rapidity distributions of both the E895 proton data at AGS energies and the NA49 net proton data at SPS energies with the help of the Ultra-relativistic Quantum Molecular Dynamics (UrQMD) model supplemented by potentials for both pre-formed hadrons and confined baryons (called UrQMD/M) [@Li:2007yd; @Li:2008ge], taking the similar density-dependent (Skyrme-like) terms. It is found that, using only one parameter set of ($R_0$, $P_0$)=(3.8 fm, 0.3 GeV$/$c) in the afterburener (where $R_0$ and $P_0$ are parameters of relative distance and relative momentum between two particles for constructing clusters), both sets of experimental data can be described reasonably well. This success encourages us to examine further the production yields of light fragments from HICs at high energies. It is noticed that some experimental data related to the production of light clusters such as deuterons, tritons, and $^3$He have been available [@Anticic:2004yj; @Blume:2007kw; @Kolesnikov:2007ps]. In this paper, the $^3$He production from central Pb+Pb reactions at SPS energies 20-80 GeV/nucleon is taken as an example.
The UrQMD microscopic transport model was originally developed to study particle production at high energies such as AGS, SPS, and RHIC energies [@Bass98; @Bleicher99; @urqmdhomepage]. Recently, it has been updated for simulating HICs at both lower, such as SIS energies [@Li:2011zzp; @Guo:2012aa; @Wang:2012sy; @Wang:2013wca; @Wang:2014aba] and higher, such as LHC energies [@Li:2012ta; @Graef:2012za; @Graef:2012sh]. It is interesting to see that the potentials always play an important role on the particle emission from HICs at whatever low or high energies. Especially, with the consideration of mean-field potentials for pre-formed hadrons, some quantities such as the HBT of two particles (especially the time-related HBT-puzzle), the elliptic flow (in the cascade mode calculations, it is known as a flow-puzzle), and the yields of strange baryons or anti-baryons (a puzzle related to the strangeness enhancement) can be better described or explained [@Li:2007yd; @Li:2008ge; @Li:2010ie]. Although a thorough explanation of all existing ¡°puzzles¡± is still awaiting since a complete description of the multi-particle collision dynamics crossing a possible phase transition and/or a consistency with the first-principle lattice QCD calculations has not arrived yet, the current version of UrQMD (UrQMD/M) is nice for the investigation of the light fragment production mechanism if a suitable afterburner is linked when the UrQMD stops at a certain time t$_{\rm cut}$.
In the afterburner, as stated in Ref. [@Li:2015aa] for protons, the relativistic effect ought to be examined when calculating relative distance $\delta r$ and relative momentum $\delta p$ between two baryons. It was found that, due to the large cancellation between the coordinate-spatial expansion and the momentum-spatial shrinkage by the Lorentz transformation (LT) in the afterburner, the proton yield with LT is close to that without LT, although some minor difference between them is still observed. It is interesting to see how the minor difference in proton yield influences the yield of light fragment such as $^3$He. Fig. \[fig1\] depicts the rapidity $y$ ($=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}(\frac{E_{\mathrm{cm}}+p_{//}}{E_{\mathrm{cm}}-p_{//}})$, where $E_{\mathrm{cm}}$ and $p_{//}$ are the energy and longitudinal momentum of the observed particle in the center-of-mass system, respectively) distribution of $^3$He from central ($<5\%$ of the total cross section $\sigma_T$) Pb+Pb collisions with beam energies $E_b=20$ and $80$ GeV$/$nucleon. t$_{\rm cut}$=100 fm$/c$ is chosen. For each beam energy, results with and without consideration of LT are shown for comparison. It is clear that the influence of LT is larger for light fragments than for free nucleons, which is mainly due to their much smaller yields. In addition, the consideration of LT in the afterburner drives further down the yield of $^3$He, which is attributed to the larger relativistic effect for the momentum difference $\delta p$ than for the distance difference $\delta r$, as discussed in Ref. [@Li:2015aa]. Hence, in the following discussions, the LT effect is always taken into account in the coalescence model.
![\[fig1\] (Color online) Rapidity distribution of $^3$He from central Pb+Pb collisions with beam energies $E_b=20$ (lines with squares) and $80$ GeV$/$nucleon (lines with circles). t$_{\rm cut}$=100 fm$/c$ is chosen. For each beam energy, results with (solid symbols) and without (open symbols) LT are shown. ](fig1.eps){width="80.00000%"}
Time dependence of $^3$He multiplicities
========================================
![\[fig2\] (Color online) Rapidity distribution of $^3$He multiplicities at two beam energy points: $20$ (top plot) and $80$ GeV$/$nucleon (bottom plot). In each plot, results at t$_{\rm cut}$=25 (solid line), 50 (dashed line), 75 (dotted line), 100 (dash-dotted line), and 125 fm$/c$ (dash-dot-dotted line) are compared to the NA49 experimental data taken from Ref. [@Blume:2007kw].](fig2.eps){width="70.00000%"}
For a systematic survey, the same parameter set ($R_0$, $P_0$)=(3.8 fm, 0.3 GeV$/$c) in the phase-space coalescence model used for protons is still adopted for the current calculations. But, the t$_{\rm cut}$ dependence of the $^3$He multiplicity should be addressed since it might partly produced later than protons due to the sequential decay of highly-excited heavier fragments. In Fig. \[fig2\] we demonstrate the rapidity distribution of $^3$He multiplicities at two beam energy points $20$ (top plot) and $80$ GeV$/$nucleon (bottom plot) and at several stopping times 25, 50, 75, 100, and 125 fm$/c$ (different lines), respectively. Correspondingly, the NA49 experimental data are taken from Ref. [@Blume:2007kw] (scattered stars). At t$_{\rm cut}$=25 fm$/c$, which is known that the high-density compression phase has disappeared for a long time [@Li:2010ie], a large amount of nucleons and light fragments are frozen out due to the following low-density environment, which is seen with the solid lines at both beam energies. However, it is clear that at this time the multiplicities of $^3$He are at least one order of magnitude larger than experimental data. In addition, the concave shape shown in data can not be described by calculations. It implies that most of the $^3$He “constructed” at the early times will decay to lighter clusters such as deuterons and nucleons. With the time increasing from 25 to 75 fm$/c$, it is seen clearly that the $^3$He multiplicities are reduced quickly and approach to the data. Meanwhile, the concave shape emerges. Due to larger stopping and more energy deposition, more excited $^3$He fragments at mid-rapidity decay than those at projectile-target rapidities. As the time increases further, the $^3$He multiplicities is seen to reduce continuously but with much lower speed. Due to the lack of a statistic treatment for the very late stage, the NA49 data are described well enough within the stopping time t$_{\rm cut}$=100$\pm$25 fm$/c$ for UrQMD/M together with the phase-space coalescence model using the parameter set ($R_0$, $P_0$)=(3.8 fm, 0.3 GeV$/$c). One also finds that it takes longer time for $^3$He fragments lying away from mid-rapidity to meet the data which is due to the fact that much more heavier fragments exist in these areas and decay to lighter ones such as $^3$He.
![\[fig3\] (Color online) Rapidity-integrated ($|y|<1.7$) multiplicities of $^3$He fragments as a function of beam energy, calculated with stopping times 75(line with squares), 100 (line with circles), and 125 fm$/c$ (line with up-triangles) for UrQMD/M. The NA49 data are taken from Ref. [@Blume:2007kw]. ](fig3.eps){width="80.00000%"}
This time dependence can also been seen from the rapidity-integrated ($|y|<1.7$) multiplicity of $^3$He fragments which is shown in Fig. \[fig3\], as a function of SPS beam energies. Calculations with t$_{\rm cut}$=75, 100, and 125 fm$/c$ (lines with different symbols) are shown for comparison to the NA49 data [@Blume:2007kw] (scattered stars). With the increase of beam energy, the calculated $^3$He yield decreases and follows data reasonable well. Further, it is interesting to see that it requires a longer time to reach the experimental data of light fragments at higher beam energies. At first glance, it is hard to understand since higher excitation should lead to earlier emission. It is true if we take a look at the decrease of absolute values at one fixed time with beam energies increasing from 20 to 80 GeV$/$nucleon, as seen in Fig. \[fig2\]. However, meanwhile, the higher energy of heavier fragments leads to the more sequential decay to lighter fragments which will certainly take a longer time. Therefore, the competition between production and decay of excited $^3$He fragments at different rapidities determines the quantity and time scale of its final production, during which a proper dynamic treatment is obviously important since it determines the phase-space evolution and the final stability of a fragment. Meanwhile, the production of clusters other than $^3$He should be also investigated in a systematic manner so that a more complete prospect could be established, which is in progress.
Summary
=======
In summary, with a potential version of the UrQMD (UrQMD/M) transport model, and a traditional coalescence model in which one parameter set of ($R_0$,$P_0$)=(3.8 fm, 0.3 GeV$/$c) is used, both the rapidity distribution and the rapidity-integrated multiplicity of $^3$He fragments in central Pb+Pb collisions at SPS energies 20-80 GeV/nucleon are calculated at several stopping times of the transport program, and with or without considering the Lorentz transformation in the afterburner. It is found that the Lorentz transformation influences visibly the $^3$He yield and should be considered in the analysis. The rapidity distribution of $^3$He multiplicities (including the concave shape) can be described well with UrQMD/M when it stops during t$_{\rm cut}$=100$\pm$25 fm$/c$ and the coalescence afterburner is linked together. The finding that the $^3$He cluster can only escape at the later freeze-out stage within a dilute environment supports the production mechanism of light fragment via coalescence as well. The universal competition between sequential production and decay of light fragments asks us to consider more carefully both the stiffness of the dynamic evolution and the statistical sequential decay.
We thank Prof. M. Bleicher for valuable suggestions and acknowledge support by the computing server C3S2 in Huzhou University. The work is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11375062, 11275068, 11505056, and 11505057), the project sponsored by SRF for ROCS, SEM, the Education Bureau of Zhejiang Province (Y201533176) and the Doctoral Scientific Research Foundation (No. 11447109).
[0]{}
R. Arsenescu [*et al.*]{} \[NA52 Collaboration\], New J. Phys. [**5**]{}, 150 (2003). T. Anticic [*et al.*]{} \[NA49 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. C [**69**]{}, 024902 (2004). S. C. Johnson, UMI-98-22959. S. Chekanov [*et al.*]{} \[ZEUS Collaboration\], Nucl. Phys. B [**786**]{}, 181 (2007) \[arXiv:0705.3770 \[hep-ex\]\].
T. Anticic [*et al.*]{} \[NA49 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. C [**85**]{}, 044913 (2012) \[arXiv:1111.2588 \[nucl-ex\]\]. P. Newman and M. Wing, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**86**]{}, no. 3, 1037 (2014) \[arXiv:1308.3368 \[hep-ex\]\].
R. Mattiello, A. Jahns, H. Sorge, H. Stoecker and W. Greiner, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 2180 (1995). J. L. Nagle, B. S. Kumar, D. Kusnezov, H. Sorge and R. Mattiello, Phys. Rev. C [**53**]{}, 367 (1996). B. Monreal, S. A. Bass, M. Bleicher, S. Esumi, W. Greiner, Q. Li, H. Liu and W. J. Llope [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. C [**60**]{}, 031901 (1999) \[nucl-th/9904080\].
H. Kruse, B. V. Jacak, J. J. Molitoris, G. D. Westfall and H. Stoecker, Phys. Rev. C [**31**]{}, 1770 (1985). Q. Li, Z. Li, S. Soff, M. Bleicher and H. Stoecker, Phys. Rev. C [**72**]{}, 034613 (2005) \[nucl-th/0506030\]. Y. Wang, C. Guo, Q. Li, H. Zhang, Z. Li and W. Trautmann, Phys. Rev. C [**89**]{}, 034606 (2014) \[arXiv:1305.4730 \[nucl-th\]\]. Q. Li, Y. Wang, X. Wang, and C. Shen, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. [**??**]{}, ?? (??).
Q. Li, M. Bleicher and H. Stocker, Phys. Lett. B [**659**]{}, 525 (2008) \[arXiv:0709.1409 \[nucl-th\]\]. Q. Li, M. Bleicher and H. Stocker, Phys. Lett. B [**663**]{}, 395 (2008) \[arXiv:0802.3618 \[nucl-th\]\]. C. Blume \[Na49 Collaboration\], J. Phys. G [**34**]{}, S951 (2007) \[nucl-ex/0701042\]. V. I. Kolesnikov \[NA49 Collaboration\], J. Phys. Conf. Ser. [**110**]{}, 032010 (2008) \[arXiv:0710.5118 \[nucl-ex\]\].
S. A. Bass [*et al.*]{}, \[UrQMD-Collaboration\], Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. [**41**]{}, 255 (1998).
M. Bleicher [*et al.*]{}, \[UrQMD-Collaboration\], J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. [**25**]{}, 1859 (1999).
see UrQMD homepage, www.urqmd.org.
Q. Li, C. Shen, C. Guo, Y. Wang, Z. Li, J. Lukasik and W. Trautmann, Phys. Rev. C [**83**]{}, 044617 (2011). C. Guo, Y. Wang, Q. Li, W. Trautmann, L. Liu and L. Wu, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. [**55**]{}, 252 (2012).
Y. Wang, C. Guo, Q. Li and H. Zhang, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. [**55**]{}, 2407 (2012).
Y. Wang, C. Guo, Q. Li and H. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. A [**51**]{}, 37 (2015) \[arXiv:1407.7625 \[nucl-th\]\]. Q. Li, G. Graf and M. Bleicher, Phys. Rev. C [**85**]{}, 034908 (2012) \[arXiv:1203.4104 \[nucl-th\]\]. G. Graef, Q. Li and M. Bleicher, J. Phys. G [**39**]{}, 065101 (2012) \[arXiv:1203.4421 \[nucl-th\]\]. G. Graef, M. Bleicher and Q. Li, Phys. Rev. C [**85**]{}, 044901 (2012) \[arXiv:1203.4071 \[nucl-th\]\].
Q. Li and Z. Li, Mod. Phys. Lett. A [**27**]{}, 1250004 (2012) \[arXiv:1010.2570 \[nucl-th\]\].
[^1]: E-mail address: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'For a Dynkin quiver, we establish a connection between the cohomology of quiver Grassmannians and the canonical bases of the negative half of the quantized enveloping algebra associated with the quiver. By the categorification of quantized enveloping algebras via KLR algebras, we describe the cohomology of a rigid quiver Grassmannian in term of the corresponding graded dimension of a proper standard module on the corresponding KLR algebra.'
address: |
School of Mathematical Sciences\
Beijing Normal University\
Beijing 100875 P.R.China
author:
- Yingjin Bi
title: Cohomology of quiver Grassmannians of Dynkin quivers
---
Introduction
============
The quiver Grassmannians was introduced to describe the categorification of cluster algebras, for their Euler characteristics play an important role on the categorifiaction of cluster algebras. Hence the geometry of quiver Grassmannians gives rise to a great interest for mathematicians, especially: the geometry of rigid quiver Grassmannians, which enjoy some good properties as the flag varieties； such as cellular decomposition(still as a conjecture). Among these properties of quiver Grassmannians, the cohomology(homology) of a quiver Grassmannian is one of the most important topics, for it can directly calculate the Euler characteristic of a quiver Grassmannian. There are some wonderful results related with this questions; such as [@IEFR].
However, to calculate the cohomology of a quiver Grassmannian explicitly is not clear. There are few works on this topic, which just focus on a specific example of quiver Grassmannian–degeneration of the complete flag variety. For example, in [@FR] Fang and Reineke described the support of the family of linear degenerations by the methods of the PBW basis of quantum groups. Meanwhile, in [@LS] Lanini and Strickland discovered the cohomology of PBW degeneration of the flag variety surjects onto the cohomology of the original flag variety. In light of their works, we calculate the cohomology of quiver Grassmannians in term of the canonical bases of quantized enveloping algebras.
Let us to illustrate this idea. Let $Q$ be a Dynkin quiver with the set of vertices $I$ and the set of arrows $\Omega$. Denote the source(target) of an arrow $h$ by $s(h)$(resp: $t(h)$). Fix a field to be complex number field $\mathbb{C}$. Given a dimension vector $\nu+\mu=((\nu+\mu)_i)\in \mathbb{N}^I$, we define the representation space with dimension vector $\nu+\mu$ as $$E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)：=\mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{\tiny h\in \Omega}Hom(V_{s(h)},V_{t(h)})$$ where $dim V_i=(\nu+\mu)_i$ for all $i\in I$. If both of dimension vectors $\mu$ and $\nu$ also lie in $\mathbb{N}^I$, then we define a smooth variety as
$E_{\nu,\mu}:=\{(W,y)\mid \text{ $y\in E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$, $y_h(W_{s(h)})\subseteq W_{t(h)}$ and $\underline{dim}W=\mu$ }\}$
The constant sheaf $\mathbb{C}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}[dim E_{\nu,\mu}]$ is a perverse sheaf on $E_{\nu,\mu}$, which is denoted by $\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}$. We construct a map as follows: $$\begin{split}
q: &\ E_{\nu,\mu} \to E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)\\
& (W,y)\mapsto y
\end{split}$$ The map $q$ is proper. Given a representation $M\in E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$, the quiver Grassmannians is defined by $q^{-1}(M)$ which is denoted as $Gr_\mu(M)$. Following from the results in [@CG], we have that
For a representation $M$ with a dimension vector ${\mu+\nu}$, we have that $$\begin{split}
H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}(i_M^*q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}),\\
H_\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong H^{dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)-\bullet}(i_M^!q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}})
\end{split}$$ where $\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}$ is the constant perverse sheaf over $E_{\nu,\mu}$ and $i_M: \{M\}\hookrightarrow E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$
By the [@Schi] the complex $q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}$ can be viewed as the multiplication of two canonical bases in the quantum group associated with the quiver. Moreover, by the categorification Theorem we can describe the cohomology of quiver Grassmannians by the irreducible modules on a KLR algebra. We set $Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))): =\sum_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}dim H^i(Gr_\mu(M))q^i$
Let $M=M((\nu+\mu)^0)$ be a rigid representation for the $Q$(all rigid representations are of this form), we have that:
$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$
where $t_{\nu,\mu}=dim E_\nu(Q)+dim E_\mu(Q)$, $\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$ is a proper standard module corresponding the element $(\nu+\mu)^0$ on the corresponding KLR algebra, and $Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$ is the graded dimension of the module $1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$.
As a result, we implictly generalize the results given by Lanini and Strickland in [@LS].
Suppose that a rigid representation $M$ is degenerate to a representation $N$, it follows $$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(N)))=Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))+ f(q)$$ where $f(q)\in \mathbb{N}[q,q^{-1}]$.
The representation of Dynkin quivers {#first}
====================================
We first recall some basic facts on Dynkin quivers. Let $\overrightarrow{Q}=(I,\Omega)$ be a Dynkin quiver, where $I$ is the set of vertices of the quiver and $\Omega$ is the set of the arrows of the quiver. We denote the underlying graph of the quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}$ by $Q$. For $h\in \Omega$ we write $s(h)$ and $t(h)$ for the source of $h$ and the target of $h$, respectively. One can define a representation of the quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}$ over a field $k$ in the following way: it is a tuple $((M_i)_{i\in I},(M_h)_{h\in \Omega})$ where $M_i$ is a vector space over $k$ and $M_h:M_{s(h)}\to M_{t(h)}$ is a linear map. We denote the category of representations of the quiver by $Rep_k(\overrightarrow{Q})$. Given two representations $M,N\in Rep_k(\overrightarrow{Q})$, we denote $Hom_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M,N)$ by the vector space of $\overrightarrow{Q}$-morphisms between $M$ and $N$ and write $[M,N]$ (resp: $[M,N]^1$) for $dim(Hom_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M,N))$ (resp: $dim(Ext^1_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M,N))$).
For a representation $M\in Rep_k(\overrightarrow{Q})$, we write $\underline{dim}M$ for the tuple $(dim(M_i))_{i\in I}$. Given two representations $M,N$ of the quiver, we define an integral bilinear form $\langle M,N\rangle$ as
$$\label{2.1}
\langle M,N\rangle =\langle\underline{dim}M,\underline{dim}N\rangle: =\sum_{i\in I}dim M_i dim N_i-\sum_{h\in \Omega}dim M_{s(h)} dim N_{t(h)}$$
For an acyclic and connected quiver(such as a Dynkin quiver), one can get the following equation:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.2}
\langle M,N\rangle=[M,N]-[M,N]^1\end{aligned}$$
Based on the above notations, we define the Cartan matrix $A_Q=(a_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$ for a quiver $Q$ (which only depends on the underlying graph) by
$a_{i,j}=\begin{cases}
2&\text{$i=j$}\\
-\langle S(i), S(j)\rangle - \langle S(j), S(i)\rangle&\text{$i\neq j$}
\end{cases}$
where $S(k)$ denotes the simple module corresponding $k\in I$.
It is known that a quiver is a Dynkin quiver if and only if its Cartan matrix $A_Q$ is positive definite. One also defines the Kac-Moody algebra associated with the Cartan matrix $A_Q$, which generated by a vector space $\mathfrak{b}$, elements $\{e_i\}_{i\in I}$ and $\{f_i\}_{i\in I}$ with some conditions. It is known that the Kac-Moody algebras associated with Dynkin quivers are finite dimensional Lie algebras and simple Lie algebras.
The Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}_Q$ associated with the Dynkin quiver $Q$ could be decomposed into
$\mathfrak{g}_Q=\mathfrak{n^+}\oplus \mathfrak{b}\oplus \mathfrak{n^-}=\bigoplus_{\alpha\in \mathfrak{b}^*}\mathfrak{g}_\alpha \bigoplus \mathfrak{b}$
where $\mathfrak{n^+}$ and $\mathfrak{n^-}$ is generated by $\{e_i\}_{i\in I}$ and $\{f_i\}_{i\in I}$, respectively, and
$\mathfrak{g}_\alpha=\{u\in \mathfrak{g}_Q: [h,u]=\langle h,\alpha\rangle u, \forall h\in \mathfrak{b}\}$
We write $R^+=\{\alpha\in \mathfrak{b}^*: \mathfrak{n^+}\supseteq \mathfrak{g}_\alpha\neq 0\}$. The Gabriel’s Theorem is given as follows.
\[theom2.1\] Let $\overrightarrow{Q}$ be a Dynkin quiver, then the map $[V]\mapsto \underline{dim}V$ gives a bijection between the set $Ind(\overrightarrow{Q})$ of isomorphism classes of nonzero indecomposable objects of $Rep_k(\overrightarrow{Q})$ and the set $R^+$
Note that the number and the dimension of indecomposable representations of a Dynkin quiver do not depend on the orientation $\Omega$ of a Dynkin graph $Q$ and the ground field $k$.
For the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}_Q$, its Weyl group $W$ contains an unique longest element $w_0$. Lusztig discovered that an orientation of a fixed Dynkin graph $Q$ could be given by a reduced expression of $w_0=s_{i_N}\ldots s_{i_2} s_{i_1}\in W$, then one can construct an ordering on the positive roots $R^+$ as $$\begin{split}
\alpha_1 &=\alpha_{i_1} \\
\alpha_2 &=s_{i_1}(\alpha_{i_2})\\
&\cdots \\
\alpha_N &=s_{i_1}s_{i_2}\ldots s_{i_{N-1}}(\alpha_{i_N})
\end{split}$$ so that $\alpha_k>\alpha_l$ if and only if $k>l$, where the roots $\alpha_{i_j}$ are the simple roots. There is an indecomposable representation $M(\alpha_k)$ of the quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}=(I,\Omega)$ corresponding the root $\alpha_k$ for each $1\leq k\leq \mid R^+\mid$. For these indecomposable representations, it follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.3}
Hom_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M(\alpha_a),M(\alpha_b))=Ext_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M(\alpha_b),M(\alpha_a))=0 \qquad \text{for $a> b$}\end{aligned}$$
Lusztig’s geometric construction of canonical bases
===================================================
Lusztig’s geometric construction of canonical bases of negative half of quantum groups is a powerful tool for our paper. The original results concerning geometric construction are given in the cases of the closure field of a finite field. However, the same results are obtained over the complex number field by the works in chapter 6 of [@BBD Chapter 6] via Hall category (see [@Schi Remark 3.27] ). Thus unless specified otherwise, we assume the ground field is the complex number field $\mathbb{C}$ and replace the field $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}_l$ with $\mathbb{C}$. We fix a Dynkin quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}$ and its underlying graph $Q$ in the rest of this section. Due to the results of this section just depend on the underlying graph $Q$, we abbreviate the $\overrightarrow{Q}$ as $Q$ if there is no confusion.
Perverse sheaves on representation spaces
-----------------------------------------
Given a vector $\nu \in \mathbb{N}^I$, we set the vector space $E_\nu(Q):=\bigoplus_{ h\in \Omega}Hom(V_{s(h)},V_{t(h)})$ and the linear algebraic group $GL(\nu):=\Pi_{i\in I}GL(V_i)$ where the vector spaces $V_i$ satisfy $dim V_i=\nu_i$. Lusztig has constructed a family of $GL(\nu)$-equivalent perverse sheaves $\mathcal{P}_\nu$ over $E_\nu(Q)$ to describe the canonical bases of the half-part of the quantum group associated with the quiver $Q$. For the case of Dynkin quivers, by [@Schi Theorem 2.8] it is known that $\mathcal{P}_\nu=\{IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)\}$ where the $\mathcal{O}_\lambda$ runs over the $GL(\nu)$-orbits in the space $E_\nu(Q)$ and the $IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)$ is the intersection homology corresponding the orbit $\mathcal{O}_\lambda$. We write $KP(\nu)$ for the set of the $GL(\nu)$-orbits in the space $E_\nu(Q)$
\[exam3.1\] Given a vector $\nu \in \mathbb{N}^I$, the perverse sheaf $\mathbb{C}_{E_\nu(Q)}[dim E_\nu(Q)]$ on $E_\nu(Q)$ is contained in $\mathcal{P}_\nu$ (*see [@Schi Example 2.5]*). Then
$\mathbb{C}_{E_\nu(Q)}[dim E_\nu(Q)]_{\mid \mathcal{O}_{max}}=\mathbb{C}_{\mathcal{O}_{max}}[dim E_\nu(Q)]=IC(\mathcal{O}_{max})_{\mid \mathcal{O}_{max}}$
where the $\mathcal{O}_{max}$ is a unique open orbit in $E_\nu(Q)$, thus we have $\mathbb{C}_{E_\nu(Q)}[dim E_\nu(Q)]=IC(\mathcal{O}_{max})$
From now on, we denote $\mathbb{C}_{E_\nu(Q)}[dim E_\nu(Q)]$ as $\mathbb{I}_\nu$.
Lusztig also defined the multiplication of the perverse sheaves, for the details one should see [@Lubook] and [@Lu]. The simple vision is given as follows: Given two vector $\nu,\mu \in \mathbb{N}^I$, we define the variety
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.1}
E_{\nu,\mu}: =\{(W,y)\mid \ \text{ $y\in E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$; $y_h(W_{s(h)})\subseteq W_{t(h)}$ and $\underline{dim}W=\mu$ }\}
\end{aligned}$$
Then we construct a map: $$\begin{split}
q: & E_{\nu,\mu} \to E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)\\
& (W,y)\mapsto y
\end{split}$$
The map $q$ is a proper morphism, and then we define the multiplication of $\mathbb{I}_\nu$ and $\mathbb{I}_\mu$ by
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.2}
\mathbb{I}_\nu\star \mathbb{I}_\mu=q_{!}\mathbb{C}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}[dim E_{\nu,\mu}+dim E_\mu(Q)+dim E_\mu(Q)]\end{aligned}$$
This definition of the multiplication coincides with the original Lusztig’s definition ([@Schi Section 1.4]).
We write $\textbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ for the Lusztig’s integral form of the negative half of the quantum universal enveloping algebra associated with the quiver $Q$, where $\mathcal{A}=\mathbb{Z}[q,q^{-1}]$. Given a number $n\in \mathbb{N}$, we set
$$\begin{aligned}
[n]:=\frac{q^n-q^{-n}}{q-q^{-1}} &\qquad [n]!:=\prod_{1\leq k\leq n} [k]\end{aligned}$$
The algebra $\textbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ is a $\mathbb{N}^I$-graded algebra and is generated by elements $\{\theta_i\}_{i\in I}$ subject to the quantum Serre relations
$$\begin{aligned}
\mathop{\sum}\limits_{r+s=1-a_{ij}}(-1)^r\theta_i^{(r)}\theta_j\theta_i^{(s)}=0\end{aligned}$$
for all $i,j\in I$ and $r\geq 1$, where $\theta_i^{(r)}$ denotes the *divided power* $\theta_i^{r}/[r]!$.
The Lusztig’s geometric construction of canonical bases is given as follows.
\[theom3.2\] Given a vector $\nu\in \mathbb{N}^I$, let $\mathcal{Q}_\nu$ be the semisimple subcategory of derived category $D_{GL(\nu)}(E_\nu(Q))$ generated by $\mathcal{P}_\nu$, then there exists an bijection between the Grothendick group of $\mathcal{Q}_\nu$ and $\mathbf{f}_{\mathcal{A},\nu}$. Moreover, we have that algebraic isomorphism $\bigoplus_{\nu\in \mathbb{N}^I}K(\mathcal{Q}_\nu)\cong \mathbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ under the operation of the multiplication. The elements in $\mathbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ corresponding the elements in $\mathcal{P}_\nu$ is called canonical bases.
Note that category $\mathcal{Q}_\nu$ doesn’t depend on the ground field $k$. By the facts in [@BBD], we know the category defined over $\mathbb{C}$ is equivalent to the category defined over algebraic closed fields $\overline{\mathbb{F}_q}$, or see [@Schi Remark 3.27].
From now on, we write $b_\lambda$ for the canonical base in $\textbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ corresponding the perverse sheaf $IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)$. Specially, we write $b_{\nu^0}$ for the canonical base in $\textbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}$ corresponding the perverse sheaf $\mathbb{I}_\nu$ in $\mathcal{P}_\nu$.
As a corollary, we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.5}
b_{\nu^0}\star b_{\mu^0}=\sum_{\lambda\in KP(\mu+\nu)}\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}b_\lambda\end{aligned}$$
where $\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}\in \mathbb{N}[q,q^{-1}]$. There is another way to describe the coefficients $\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}\in \mathbb{N}[q,q^{-1}]$ by Hall algebra of the category $\mathcal{Q}_{Q}=\bigoplus_{\nu\in \mathbb{N}^I}\mathcal{Q}_\nu$ as follows(see [@Schi]).
Hall category
-------------
In the rest of this section, We assume the ground field is the algebraic closed field $\overline{\mathbb{F}_q}$ of a finite field $\mathbb{F}_q$ and write $X$ for the space $E_\nu(Q)$. There is the Frobenius element $F$ in the Galois group $Gal(\overline{\mathbb{F}_q}/\mathbb{F}_q)$ which acts on the variety $X$ and its derived category. Then $X^F=X^0$
A Weil structure on a constructible complex $\mathbb{P}$ over $X$ is an isomorphism $j:\mathbb{P}\xrightarrow{\thicksim} F^*\mathbb{P}$. It is easy to see that a Weil complex $(\mathbb{P},j)$ gives rise to an action of $F$ on the stalk $\mathbb{P}_{x_0}$ of $\mathbb{P}$ at each point $x_0\in X^0(\mathbb{F}_q)$, thus the trace map of $\mathbb{P}$ is given by
$$\begin{split}
Tr(\mathbb{P})&:X^0(\mathbb{F}_q)\to \mathbb{C} \\
& \quad x_0 \mapsto \sum_i(-1)^iTr(F:H^i(\mathbb{P})_{\mid x_0})
\end{split}$$ where we fix an identification $\overline{\mathbb{Q}_l}\cong \mathbb{C}$.
Let $\mathbb{P}^\prime,\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}\in \mathcal{P}_{Q}$ and let us write $$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.6}
\mathbb{P}^{\prime}\star\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}=\mathop{\bigoplus}_{\mathbb{P}}M_{\mathbb{P}^\prime,\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}^\mathbb{P}\bigotimes \mathbb{P}\end{aligned}$$ where $M_{\mathbb{P}^\prime\star\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}^\mathbb{P}=Hom(\mathbb{P}^\prime\star\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime},\mathbb{P})$ is the multiplicity complex. Lusztig has showed that $M_{\mathbb{P}^\prime,\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}^\mathbb{P}$ has a Weil structure and the Frobenius eigenvalues over $H^i(M_{\mathbb{P}^\prime,\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}^\mathbb{P})$ are all equal to $\sqrt{q}^i$
We define the algebra $\mathfrak{U}_{Q}=\bigoplus_{\nu}\mathfrak{U}^{\nu}$ where $\mathfrak{U}^{\nu}=\mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{\mathbb{P}\in \mathcal{P}_{\nu}}\mathbb{C}b_{\mathbb{P}}$. The multiplication is given by
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.7}
b_{\mathbb{P}^\prime}\star^\prime b_{\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}=\mathop{\sum}\limits_{\mathbb{P}} Tr(M_{\mathbb{P}^\prime,\mathbb{P}^{\prime\prime}}^\mathbb{P})b_{\mathbb{P}}\end{aligned}$$
In [@Schi] there is an isomorphism between $(\textbf{f}_\mathcal{A})_{\text{-}\sqrt{q}}$ and $\mathfrak{U}_{Q}$ where $(\textbf{f}_\mathcal{A})_{\textnormal{-}\sqrt{q}}$ is obtained by replacing the indeterminate of the algebra $\textbf{f}_\mathcal{A}$ with $\textnormal{-}\sqrt{q}$.
In this way, the coefficient $\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}$ could be obtained by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{3.8}
\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}(\textnormal{-}\sqrt{q})=Tr(M_{\mathbb{I}_\nu,\mathbb{I}_\mu}^{IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)})
\end{aligned}$$
Note that the above perverse sheaves defined over $\overline{\mathbb{F}_q}$ rather than over $\mathbb{C}$.
Quantum shuffle algebras and KLR-algebras
=========================================
Another way to categorify the half-part of quantum groups is by Khovanov-Lauda-Rouquier algebras (or quiver Hecke algebras).
Quantum shuffle algebras
------------------------
Given a finite set $I$, we set $\langle I \rangle$ be the free monoid on $I$, that is, the set of all words $\textbf{i}=[i_1\cdots i_n]$ for $n\geq 0$ and $i_1,\cdots, i_n\in I$ with multiplication given by concatenation of words.
For a word $\textbf{i}=[i_1\cdots i_n]$ of length $n$ and a permutation $w\in S_n$, we let $$\begin{split}
\mid \textbf{i}\mid:=\alpha_{i_1}+\cdots +\alpha_{i_n}, & \qquad w(\textbf{i}):= [i_{w^{-1}(1)}\cdots i_{w^{-1}(n)}] \\
\theta_{\textbf{i}}:=\theta_{i_1}\cdots\theta_{i_n}, & \qquad deg(w;\textbf{i}):= -\mathop{\sum}\limits_{\mathop{1\leq j<k\leq n}\limits_{w(j)>w(k)}}\alpha_{i_j}\cdot\alpha_{i_k}
\end{split}$$ Setting $\langle I\rangle_\alpha:=\{\textbf{i}:\mid \textbf{i}\mid=\alpha\}$, the monomials $\{\theta_{\textbf{i}}: \textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle_\alpha\}$ span $\textbf{f}_\alpha$. The *quantum shuffle algebra* is free $\mathcal{A}$-module $\mathcal{A}\langle I\rangle=\bigoplus_{\alpha\in Q^+}\mathcal{A}\langle I\rangle_\alpha$ on basis $\langle I\rangle$, viewed as an $\mathcal{A}-$algebra via the shuffle product $\circ$ defined on words $\textbf{i}$ and $\textbf{j}$ of length $m$ and $n$, respectively, by $$\textbf{i}\circ\textbf{j}:=\mathop{\sum}\limits_{\mathop{w\in S_{n+m}}\limits_{\mathop{w(1)<\cdots<w(m)}\limits_ {w(m+1)<\cdots<w(m+n)}}} q^{deg(w;\textbf{ij})}w(\textbf{ij})$$ There is an injective $\mathcal{A}$-algebra homomorphism $$\begin{split}
Ch: &\textbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}^*\to \mathcal{A}\langle I\rangle \\
& x\mapsto \mathop{\sum}\limits_{\textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle}(\theta_{\textbf{i}},x)\textbf{i}
\end{split}$$ See [@Lec]. Generally, we can define the map $Ch: \textbf{f}^*\to \mathbb{Q}(q)\langle I\rangle$ as well. The map is also injective.
Next we fix an arbitrary total order on the set $\Pi =\{\alpha_1,\cdots \alpha_r\}$ of simple roots of $\mathfrak{g}_{Q}$, we set $I=\Pi$, then $\langle I\rangle$ is given the lexicographic order which will be denoted by $<$
A word $\textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle$ is called good word, if there exists an element $x\in \mathbf{f}^*$ such that $\textbf{i}=max(Ch(x))$. Denote by $\langle I\rangle^+$ the set of all good words.
A word $\textbf{i}=[i_1\cdots i_n]\in \langle I\rangle$ is called Lyndon word, if it satisfies the condition $$[i_1\cdots i_n]< [i_j\cdots i_k]\qquad \text{for all $1\leq j< k\leq n$}$$
For Cartan data of finite type (such as Dynkin quivers), the good Lyndon words can be classified by the following fact in [@Lec].
\[lemm4.3\] If the Cartan data is of finite type then the map $\textbf{i}\mapsto \mid \textbf{i}\mid$ is bijection between the set of good Lyndon words and the set $R^+$ of positive roots.
Given a good word $\textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle^+$, we can decompose it as $\textbf{i}=\textbf{j}_1\cdots\textbf{j}_k$ where $\textbf{j}_l$ are good Lyndon words with the condition $\textbf{j}_1\succ\textbf{j}_2\cdots\succ\textbf{j}_k$. The above bijection transports the lexicographic order on good Lyndon words to a total order on the set $R^+$ inducing a total order $\succ$ on $Q^+:=\{\mid \textbf{i}\mid: \textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle\}$
The induced order $R^+=\{\mid \textbf{i}\mid: \textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle\}$ is a convex order, that is, $$\beta,\gamma,\beta+\gamma\in R^+,\ \beta\succ\gamma \quad \Rightarrow \beta\succ\beta+\gamma\succ\gamma.$$
By [@Papi], there is a bijection between convex orderings of $Q^+$ and reduced expression for the longest element $w_0\in W$: given a reduced expression $w_0=s_{i_1}\cdots s_{i_N}$ then corresponding convex ordering on $\Delta_+$ is given by $$\alpha_{i_1}\prec s_{i_1}(\alpha_{i_2})\prec \cdots\prec s_{i_1}\cdots s_{i_{N-1}}(\alpha_{i_N})$$
Kostant partition
-----------------
In [@BKM], a *Kostant partition* of $\alpha\in Q^+$ is a sequence $\lambda=(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_l)$ of positive roots such that $\lambda_1\succ\cdots\succ\lambda_l$ and $\lambda_1+\cdots+\lambda_l=\alpha$. Set $\lambda_k^\prime=\lambda_{l+1-k}$. If we construct a convex order on positive root system $R^+$, we define an order $\succ$ on $KP(\alpha):=\{\lambda=(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_l):\lambda_1+\cdots+\lambda_l=\alpha\}$ so that $\lambda\succ\kappa$ if and only if both of the following hold:
$\lambda_1=\kappa_1,\cdots,\lambda_{k-1}=\kappa_{k-1}$ and $\lambda_k\succ\kappa_k$ for some $k$ such that $\lambda_k$ and $\kappa_k$ are both defined.
$\lambda_1^\prime=\kappa_1^\prime,\cdots,\lambda_{k-1}^\prime=\kappa_{k-1}^\prime$ and $\lambda_k^\prime\prec\kappa_k^\prime$ for some $k$ such that $\lambda_k^\prime$ and $\kappa_k^\prime$ are both defined.
For $\lambda=(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_l)\in KP(\alpha)$, we set $$\begin{aligned}
\label{4.1}
s_{\lambda}:=\mathop{\sum}\limits_{\beta\in R^+}\frac{1}{2}m_{\beta}(\lambda)(m_{\beta}(\lambda)-1)\end{aligned}$$ where $m_{\beta}$ denotes the multiplicity of $\beta$ in $\lambda$.
If the ordering of the root system $R^+$ is deduced from the good Lyndon words, then the map $\textbf{i}\mapsto \mid \textbf{i}\mid$ induces a bijection between the set $KP(\alpha)$ and the set $$\{(\textbf{j}_1,\cdots,\textbf{j}_k):\ \textbf{j}_1\succ\textbf{j}_2\cdots\succ\textbf{j}_k \
\text{such that each $\textbf{j}_l$ is good Lyndon word and $\mid\textbf{j}_1\cdots\textbf{j}_k\mid= \alpha$}\}$$
Each word $\textbf{i}$ in $\langle I\rangle^+_\alpha$ has the unique decomposition $\textbf{i}=\textbf{j}_1\cdots\textbf{j}_k$ such that all $\textbf{j}_l$ are good Lyndon words with the condition $\textbf{j}_1\succ\textbf{j}_2\cdots\succ\textbf{j}_k$. So there is a bijection between $KP(\alpha)$ and $\langle I\rangle^+_\alpha$ $$\begin{split}
\Psi:& KP(\alpha)\to \langle I\rangle^+_\alpha \\
&(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_l)\mapsto \textbf{i}(\lambda_1)\cdots \textbf{i}(\lambda_l)
\end{split}$$
Next we define the KLR algebras. See [@KL]
Let $Q$ be a Dynkin quiver and $\alpha\in Q^+$ with $n=ht(\alpha)$. We define the KLR algebra $R_\alpha$ as a unital algebra generated by the elements $$\{1_{\textbf{i}}\mid \textbf{i}\in\langle I\rangle_\alpha\}\cup\{x_1,\ldots,x_n \} \cup\{ \tau_1,\ldots,\tau_{n-1}\}$$
subject to the following relation:
- $ x_k x_l=x_l x_k$;
- the elements $\{1_{\textbf{i}}\mid \textbf{i}\in\langle I\rangle_\alpha\}$ are mutually orthogonal idempotents whose sum is the identity $1_\alpha\in R_\alpha$;
- $x_k 1_{\textbf{i}}=1_{\textbf{i}}x_k$ and $\tau_k 1_{\textbf{i}}=1_{(k,k+1)\textbf{i}}\tau _k$;
- $(\tau_k x_l-x_{(k,k+1)(l)}\tau_k)1_{\textbf{i}}=\begin{cases}
1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_k=i_{k+1}$ and $l=k+1$,} \\
-1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_k=i_{k+1}$ and $l=k$,}\\
0 &\text{otherwise};
\end{cases} $
- $\tau_k^2 1_{\textbf{i}}=\begin{cases}
0 &\text{if $i_k=i_{k+1}$,} \\
(x_{k+1}-x_k)1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_k\to i_{k+1}$ in the quiver $Q$ ,}\\
(x_k-x_{k+1})1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_{k+1}\to i_k$ in the quiver $Q$ ,}\\
1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{otherwise};
\end{cases} $
- $\tau_k \tau_l =\tau_l \tau_k \ \text{if $\mid k-l\mid> 1$} $
- $(\tau_{k+1}\tau_k\tau_{k+1}-\tau_k\tau_{k+1}\tau_k)1_{\textbf{i}}=\begin{cases}
-1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_k=i_{k+2}$, and $i_k\to i_{k+1}$ in the quiver $Q$,} \\
1_{\textbf{i}} &\text{if $i_k=i_{k+2}$, and $ i_{k+1}\to i_k$ in the quiver $Q$,}\\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases} $
The algebra $R_\alpha$ is $\mathbb{Z}$-graded with $1_{\textbf{i}} $ in degree zero, $x_k 1_{\textbf{i}}$ in degree $2$ and $\tau_k 1_{\textbf{i}}$ in degree $-\alpha_{i_k}\cdot \alpha_{i_{k+1}}$.
For $\beta,\gamma\in Q^+$, there is an evident non-unital algebra embedding $R_\beta\otimes R_\gamma\hookrightarrow R_{\beta+\gamma}$. We denote the image of the identity $1_\beta\otimes1_\gamma\in R_\beta\otimes R_\gamma$ by $1_{\beta,\gamma}\in R_{\beta+\gamma}$. Then for an $R_{\beta+\gamma}$-module $U$ and an $R_\beta\otimes R_\gamma$-module $V$, we set $$\mathrm{res}_{\beta,\gamma}^{\beta+\gamma}U:=1_{\beta,\gamma}U; \qquad \mathrm{ind}_{\beta,\gamma}^{\beta+\gamma}V:=R_{\beta+\gamma}1_{\beta,\gamma}\bigotimes_{R_\beta\otimes R_\gamma}V$$
More generally, given $\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_k\in Q^+$ such that $\sum_{1\leq i\leq k}\alpha_k=\alpha$, there are induction and restriction functors $$\mathrm{Ind}_{\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_k}: \mathop{\bigotimes}\limits_{1\leq i\leq k}R_{\alpha_i}\text{-mod}\longrightarrow R_{\alpha}\text{-mod}$$ and $$\mathrm{Res}_{\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_k}: R_{\alpha}\text{-mod}\longrightarrow \mathop{\bigotimes}\limits_{1\leq i\leq k}R_{\alpha_i}\text{-mod}$$
The following Mackey-style result is given in [@KL] or [@Mac].
\[pro4.5\] Let $\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_k,\beta_1,\cdots,\beta_k\in Q^+$ be such that $\sum_{1\leq i\leq k}\alpha_i=\sum_{1\leq i\leq k}\beta_i$,Then the composite functor $\mathrm{Res}_{\beta_1,\cdots,\beta_k}\circ \mathrm{Ind}_{\alpha_1,\cdots,\alpha_k}$ has a filtration indexed by tuples $\nu_{ij}$ satisfying $\alpha_i=\sum_{j}\nu_{ij}$ and $\beta_j=\sum_{i}\nu_{ij}$.The subquotients of this filtration are isomorphic, up to a grading shift, to the composition $\mathrm{Ind}_{\nu}^{\beta}\circ\tau\circ \mathrm{Res}_{\nu}^{\alpha}$ where $\mathrm{Res}_{\nu}^{\alpha}:\bigotimes_iR_{\alpha_i}-\text{mod}\to \bigotimes_i(\bigotimes_jR_{\nu_{ij}})-\text{mod}$ is the tensor product of the $\mathrm{Res}_{\nu_{i\bullet}}$, $\tau:\bigotimes_i(\bigotimes_jR_{\nu_{ij}})-\text{mod}\to \bigotimes_j(\bigotimes_iR_{\nu_{ij}})-\text{mod}$ is given by permuting the tensor factors and $\mathrm{Ind}_{\nu}^{\beta}: \bigotimes_j(\bigotimes_iR_{\nu_{ij}})-\text{mod}\to \bigotimes_jR_{\beta_j}-\text{mod}$ is the tensor product of the $\mathrm{Ind}_{\nu_{\bullet i}}$
The categorification Theorem
----------------------------
Let $\mathrm{Rep}(R_\alpha)$ denote the abelian category of finite dimensional $R_\alpha$-modules and set $$\mathrm{Rep}(H):=\mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{\alpha\in Q^+}\mathrm{Rep}(R_\alpha)$$ This is a graded $k$-linear monoidal category under the induction $V\circ U:=\mathrm{ind}_{\beta,\gamma}^{\beta+\gamma}(U\boxtimes V)$ for $U\in \mathrm{Rep}(R_\beta)$ and $V\in \mathrm{Rep}(R_\gamma)$. Denote by $[\mathrm{Rep}(R)]=\bigoplus_{\alpha\in Q^+}[\mathrm{Rep}(R_\alpha)]$ its Grothendieck ring which we make into an $\mathcal{A}$-algebra so that $q[V]=[V[1]]$. Moreover, we define $Dim V:=\sum_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}dim V_i q^i$ and write $hom(W,V)$ for the space of $R$-morphisms between $W$ and $V$ preserving their degrees. Dually, we have the additive category $\mathrm{Proj}(R_\alpha)$ of finitely generated projective $R_\alpha$-modules and set $$\mathrm{Proj}(R):= \mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{\alpha\in Q^+}\mathrm{Proj}(R_\alpha)$$ This is also a graded $k$-linear monoidal category under the induction, and again the split Grothendieck group $[\mathrm{Proj}(R)]=\bigoplus_{\alpha\in Q^+}[\mathrm{Proj}(R_\alpha)]$ is an $\mathcal{A}-$algebra. Moreover there is a non-degenerate pairing
$(\cdot,\cdot):[\mathrm{Proj}(R)]\times [\mathrm{Rep}(H)] \to \mathcal{A}$
$$\begin{split}
(P,V):=\begin{cases}
\mathrm{Dim}Hom(P,V) &\text{if $P\in\mathrm{Proj}(R_\alpha) $ and $V\in\mathrm{Rep}(R_\alpha)$}\\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{split}$$ where $$Hom(P,V):=\mathop{\sum}\limits_{n\in \mathbb{N}}hom(P[n],V)$$ For $P_1\in \mathrm{Proj}(R_\beta)$, $P_2\in \mathrm{Proj}(R_\gamma)$ and $V\in \mathrm{Rep}(R_{\beta+\gamma})$, we have that $$(\mathrm{res}_{\beta,\gamma}P_1\boxtimes P_2,\ V)=(P_1\boxtimes P_2, \ \mathrm{ind}_{\beta,\gamma}V)$$ The categorification Theorem is given in [@KL] and [@VV],et.
\[theorm4.6\] There is a unique adjoint pair of $\mathcal{A}-$algebra isomorphism $$\Phi:\mathbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}\xrightarrow{\thicksim}[\mathrm{Proj}(R)],\qquad \Phi^*: \mathbf{f}_{\mathcal{A}}^*\xrightarrow{\thicksim}[\mathrm{Rep}(R)]$$ such that $\Phi$ transports the canonical bases to the self-dual indecomposable projective modules in $\mathrm{Proj}(R)$ and $\Phi^*$ transports the dual canonical basis to the the self-dual irreducible modules in $\mathrm{Rep}(R)$.
For an element $\lambda \in KP(\nu)$, there exists the corresponding canonical base $b_\lambda\in\mathbf{f}_\nu$. By the above theorem, we denote the indecomposable projective module corresponding $\lambda$ by $P_\lambda$ and the irreducible module corresponding $\lambda$ by $L(\lambda)$. Moreover, in [@BKM] or [@Mac] they define a proper standard module $\overline{\Delta}(\lambda)$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{4.2}
\overline{\Delta}(\lambda):=q^{s_{\lambda}}L(\lambda_1)\circ\cdots \circ L(\lambda_l)\end{aligned}$$
\[rema4.7\] In [@BKM] we have that $L(\lambda)=\overline{\Delta}(\lambda)=q^{s_{\lambda}}L(\lambda_1)\circ\cdots \circ L(\lambda_l)$, if $\lambda$ is a smallest element of $KP(\nu)$.
\[4.3\] Recalling the equation (3.5), we have the following equation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{4.3}
P_{\nu^0}\circ P_{\mu^0}=\sum_{\lambda\in KP(\mu+\nu)}\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}P_\lambda\end{aligned}$$ Thus we have $$\begin{split}
\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda} &=(P_{\nu^0}\circ P_{\mu^0},L(\lambda))\\
&=(\mathrm{res}_{\nu,\mu}P_{\nu^0}\boxtimes P_{\mu^0}, L(\lambda))\\
&=(P_{\nu^0}\boxtimes P_{\mu^0},\mathrm{ind}_{\nu,\mu}L(\lambda))\\
&=Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0} L(\lambda)
\end{split}$$ where $1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}$ denotes the idemptent of the projective module $P_{\nu^0,\mu^0}$.
In [@KL] one defines the map
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{4.4}
Ch:&[\mathrm{Rep}(R)]\to \mathcal{A}\langle I\rangle\\
&V\mapsto \sum_{\textbf{i}\in \langle I\rangle}(Dim1_{\textbf{i}}V )\textbf{i} \notag\end{aligned}$$
then $b_{\lambda}^*=Ch(L(\lambda))$.
Quiver Grassmannians
====================
In this section, we fix an orientation $\Omega$ of a Dynkin quiver $Q$.
Cohomology of quiver Grassmannians
-----------------------------------
In the section 2, the reduced expression of the longest element $w_0$ adapting the orientation $\Omega$ gives rise to a convex ordering on $R^+$ such that $\alpha_k>\alpha_l$ for $k>l$. We set another convex ordering as $$\alpha_k\prec\alpha_l \qquad \text{for $k>l$}$$ By the equation (\[2.3\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.1}
Hom_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M(\alpha_a),M(\alpha_b))=Ext_{\overrightarrow{Q}}(M(\alpha_b),M(\alpha_a))=0 \qquad \text{for $\alpha_a\prec\alpha_b$}\end{aligned}$$
This ordering leads to a partial order on $KP(\nu)$ for each $\nu\in Q^+$ as the section 4.2. By the definition of $KP(\nu)$ and the Gabriel’s theorem, we have that the set of the isomorphism classes of representation $M$ on quiver $Q$ with $\underline{dim}(M)=\nu$ is equal to the set $KP(\nu)$, and then there is a bijection between $KP(\nu)$ and the set of the $GL(\nu)$-orbits in $E_\nu(\overrightarrow{Q})$, denoted by $ E_\nu(\overrightarrow{Q})/GL(\nu)$, as $$\begin{split}
KP(\nu)\xrightarrow{\thicksim} E_\nu(\overrightarrow{Q})/GL(\nu)\\
(\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_k)\mapsto \mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{1\leq i\leq k}[M(\lambda_i)]
\end{split}$$ where $[M(\lambda_i)]$ denotes the isomorphism class of the indecomposable module $M(\lambda_i)$ for each root $\lambda_i$. Hence for an element $\lambda\in KP(\nu)$ we denote the corresponding $GL(\nu)-$orbit as $\mathcal{O}_\lambda$ and the corresponding representation as $M(\lambda)$.
We recall a partial order on the set $E_\nu(\overrightarrow{Q})/GL(\nu)$: Given two elements $\lambda,\kappa\in KP(\nu)$, we define a partial order $\prec^1$ so that $\lambda\prec^1\kappa$ if and only if we have $\mathcal{O}_\kappa\subset \overline{\mathcal{O}_\lambda}$.
Since $\overrightarrow{Q}$ is a Dynkin quiver, the condition $\lambda\prec^1\kappa$ implies that $[N,M(\lambda)]\leq[N,M(\kappa)]$ and $[M(\lambda),N]\leq[M(\kappa),N]$ for all representations $N$ on the quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}$, see [@CB]. Denote the Konstant partition associated with the unique open orbit in $E_\nu(\overrightarrow{Q})$ by $\nu^0$. Note that representation $M(\nu^0)$ is a rigid representation.
\[lema5.1\] The partition $\nu^0$ is a smallest element of $KP(\nu)$ under the ordering $\prec$.
Suppose for the contradiction that there exists an element $\lambda\prec \nu^0$ in $KP(\nu)$. By the definition of this partial order, we have that $\lambda_k \prec\nu_k^0$ for some $k$ such that $\lambda_i =\nu_i^0$ for all $1\leq i\leq k-1$. By taking the module $M(\nu_i^0)$, we get that $$\begin{split}
[M(\nu_k^0),M(\nu^0)] &=[M(\nu_k^0),M(\nu_k^0)\oplus(\oplus_{i\leq k-1}M(\nu_i^0))]\\
&=[M(\nu_k^0),M(\nu_k^0)]+[M(\nu_k^0),(\oplus_{i\leq k-1}M(\nu_i^0))]\\
&=1+[M(\nu_k^0),(\oplus_{i\leq k-1}M(\nu_i^0))]\\
&=1+[M(\nu_k^0),(\oplus_{i\leq k-1}M(\lambda_i))]\\
&=1+[M(\nu_k^0),M(\lambda))]\\
\end{split}$$ So it contradicts the facts $[N,M(\nu^0)]\leq[N,M(\lambda)]$ for all representations $N$ on the quiver $\overrightarrow{Q}$
From now on, we abbreviate $ \overrightarrow{Q}$ as $Q$.
Next we recall the concept of quiver Grassmannians. In the section 3, there is a map
$q:E_{\nu,\mu}\to E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$
Given a point $M$ in $E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$, we call $q^{-1}(M)$ as the quiver Grassmannian with dimension vector $\mu$ for the representation $M$ and denote $q^{-1}(M)$ by $Gr_\mu(M)$. As $E_{\nu,\mu}$ is a smooth variety, we denote the perverse sheaf $\mathbb{C}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}[dim E_{\nu,\mu}]$ as $\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}$. Denote the imbedding $\{M\}\to E_{\mu+\nu}$ as $i_M$ and $dim E_\nu(Q)+dim E_\mu(Q)$ as $t_{\nu,\mu}$
\[lem5.2\] For a representation $M$ with a dimension vector ${\mu+\nu}$, we have that $$\begin{split}
H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}}(i_M^*q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}),\\
H_\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong H^{dim E_{\nu,\mu}-\bullet}(i_M^!q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}})
\end{split}$$
Follow from the Lemma 8.5.4 in [@CG]
\[lem5.3\] We have $q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}=\bigoplus_{\lambda\in KP(\nu+\mu)}V(\lambda)\boxtimes IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)$ where $V(\lambda)$ are $\mathbb{Z}-$graded vector spaces.
Follow from the BBD Decomposition Theorem [@BBD].
As the equations (\[3.2\]) and (\[3.5\]), if we define the $Dim(V(\lambda)):=\sum_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}dim V(\lambda)_i q^i$, then it follows
$Dim(V(\lambda))= q^{t_{\nu,\mu}}Dim(V(\lambda)[t_{\nu,\mu}])=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}}\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}}Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}L(\lambda)$
From now on, we assume that the representation $M$ is a rigid representation, that is: $M=M((\nu+\mu)^0)$ for some dimension vectors $\nu,\mu\in Q^+$ (note that the $Q^+=\mathbb{N}^I$). Set $$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))):=\sum_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}dim H^i(Gr_\mu(M))q^i$$
\[them5.4\] Let $M=M((\nu+\mu)^0)$ be a rigid representation for the $Q$. It follows: $$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$$
By Lemma \[lem5.2\] and the fact $supp( IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda))\subset \overline{IC(\mathcal{O}_\lambda)}$, we have that
$H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong V((\nu+\mu)^0)\boxtimes H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}(i_M^*IC(\mathcal{O}_{(\nu+\mu)^0}))$
For $IC(\mathcal{O}_{(\nu+\mu)^0})_{\mid \mathcal{O}_{(\nu+\mu)^0}}=\mathbb{C}_{\mathcal{O}_{(\nu+\mu)^0}}[dim E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)]$, we have that
$H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))\cong V((\nu+\mu)^0)[dimE_{\nu+\mu}(Q)-dimE_{\nu,\mu}]$
Note that $dimE_{\nu,\mu}-dimE_{\nu+\mu}(Q)=\langle \mu, \nu\rangle$. Thus $$\begin{split}
Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))) &=\sum_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}dim H^i(Gr_\mu(M))q^i\\
&=q^{-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Dim V((\nu+\mu)^0)\\
&=q^{-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle+t_{\nu,\mu}}Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}L((\nu+\mu)^0)\\
&=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Dim 1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0).
\end{split}$$ for $L((\nu+\mu)^0)=\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)$ by Lemma \[lema5.1\] and Remark \[rema4.7\].
Suppose that $N\succ^1 M$ where $M$ is a rigid representation, we have that $$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(N)))=Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))+ f(q)$$ where $f(q)\in \mathbb{N}[q,q^{-1}]$.
By the Lemma \[lem5.2\], we have that $$q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}}=\oplus_{\lambda\neq(\nu+\mu)^0}V(\lambda)\boxtimes IC(\mathcal{O})_\lambda\bigoplus (V((\nu+\mu)^0)\boxtimes \mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu+\mu}})$$ for $\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu+\mu}}$ is equal to $IC(\mathcal{O})_{(\nu+\mu)^0}$(see Example \[exam3.1\]). Hence: $$\begin{split}
H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(N))&=H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}(i_N^*q_!\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu,\mu}})\\
&=H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}(\oplus_{\lambda\neq(\nu+\mu)^0}V(\lambda)\boxtimes i_N^* IC(\mathcal{O})_\lambda\bigoplus (V((\nu+\mu)^0)\boxtimes i_N^*\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu+\mu}})\\
&=H^{\bullet-dim E_{\nu,\mu}(Q)}(\oplus_{\lambda\neq(\nu+\mu)^0}V(\lambda)\boxtimes i_N^*IC(\mathcal{O})_\lambda)\bigoplus H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M))
\end{split}$$ for $\mathbb{I}_{E_{\nu+\mu}}$ is the constant perverse sheaf. Thus we have that $$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(N)))=Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))+ f(q)$$ where $f(q)\in \mathbb{N}[q,q^{-1}]$.
Let us fix an algebraic closed field $\overline{\mathbb{F}_q}$. Given a rigid representation $M=M((\nu+\mu)^0)$, it follows $$\mid Gr_\mu(M)(\mathbb{F}_{q})\mid=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Tr(M_{\mathbb{I}_\nu,\mathbb{I}_\mu}^{\mathbb{I}_{\nu+\mu}})_{q^2}$$ Where $Tr(M_{\mathbb{I}_\nu,\mathbb{I}_\mu}^{\mathbb{I}_{\nu+\mu}})_{q^2}$ means it is defined over the field $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}$
By [@IEFR Theorem 1 and Corollary 2], the equations (\[3.7\]) and (\[3.8\]), we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\mid Gr_\mu(M)(\mathbb{F}_{q})\mid &=\mathop{\sum}\limits_{i}dim H^i(Gr_\mu(M))q^i \\
&=Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))\\
&=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\mathbb{I}_{\nu+\mu}}\\
&=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle}Tr(M_{\mathbb{I}_\nu,\mathbb{I}_\mu}^{\mathbb{I}_{\nu+\mu}})_{q^2}\end{aligned}$$
The ordering arising from an order of set of vertices $I$
---------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we assume the ordering of positive roots $R^+$ arises from an order of Lyndon words via an order of the set vertices $I$. Denote the simple roots(the vertices) by $\{\delta_i\}_{i\in \mid I\mid}$.
If there exists an arrow going from $i$ to $j$, then by the equations (\[2.1\]) and (\[2.2\]), it follows $$\begin{split}
\langle \delta_i,\delta_j\rangle &= -\mathop{\sum}\limits_{\mathop{h\in \Omega}\limits_{s(h)=i,t(h)=j}}1\\
&=[M(\delta_i),M(\delta_j)]-[M(\delta_i),M(\delta_j)]^1\\
&=-[M(\delta_i),M(\delta_j)]^1
\end{split}$$ By the equation (\[5.1\]), we have that $\delta_i\prec\delta_j$. From now on, we order the simple roots $\{\delta_i\}_{i\in \mid I\mid}$ so that $\delta_i\prec\delta_j$ if and only if $i<j$. Following from [@Schi Example 2.5]
For each dimension vector $\nu=\sum_i \nu_i \delta_i$, we write $E_\nu(Q)$ for its representation space, and then the perverse sheaf $\mathbb{I}_\nu=\mathbb{C}_{E_\nu(Q)}[dim E_\nu(Q)]$ is $$L_{\nu_1\delta_1,\cdots ,\nu_n \delta_n}=\mathbb{I}_\nu$$ where $L_{\nu_1\delta_1,\cdots ,\nu_n \delta_n}$ is introduced in [@Lu].
If we set $$\textbf{i}_\nu=(\delta_1,\cdots ,\delta_1,\delta_2,\cdots ,\delta_n,\cdots,\delta_n)$$ where the entry $\delta_i$ has the multiplicity $\nu_i$ in $\textbf{i}_\nu$. By [@VV Remark 1.5], we have an isomorphism of complexes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.2}
L_{\textbf{i}_\nu}=\mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{w\in S_{\nu}}\mathbb{I}_\nu[-2l(w)]\end{aligned}$$ This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.3}
P_{\textbf{i}_\nu}=\mathop{\bigoplus}\limits_{w\in S_{\nu}}P_{\nu^0}[-2l(w)]\end{aligned}$$ The Poincare polynomial of $S_n$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.4}
\mathop{\sum}\limits_{w\in S_n}q^{2l(w)}=q^{\frac{1}{2}n(n-1)}[n]!\end{aligned}$$ We set $$S_\nu:= \prod_{1\leq i\leq n} S_{\nu_i}; \quad s_\nu:= \prod_{1\leq i\leq n} \frac{1}{2}(\nu_i-1)\nu_i; \quad [\nu]!:= \prod_{1\leq i\leq n} [\nu_i]!$$ Thus we have the following lemma: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.5}
\mathop{\sum}\limits_{w\in S_\nu}q^{2l(w)}=q^{s_\nu}[\nu]!\end{aligned}$$
\[lemm5.8\] From the equation (\[4.3\]), we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{5.6}
Dim1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}L(\lambda)=q^{s_\nu+s_\mu}[\mu]![\nu]!\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}\end{aligned}$$
By the equation (\[5.3\]) and the fact $1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}L(\lambda)=(P_{\textbf{i}_\nu}\star P_{\textbf{i}_\mu},L(\lambda))$, it follows. $$\begin{aligned}
Dim1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}L(\lambda)&=Dim(P_{\textbf{i}_\nu}\star P_{\textbf{i}_\mu},L(\lambda))\\
&=Dim(P_{\textbf{i}_\nu}\boxtimes P_{\textbf{i}_\mu},\mathrm{res}L(\lambda))\\
&=Dim(\mathop{\oplus}\limits_{w\in S_{\nu}}P_{\nu^0}[-2l(w)]\boxtimes \mathop{\oplus}\limits_{v\in S_{\mu}}P_{\mu^0}[-2l(v)],\mathrm{res}L(\lambda))\\
&=q^{s_\nu}[\nu]!q^{s_\mu}[\mu]!Dim(P_{\nu^0}\boxtimes P_{\mu^0},\mathrm{res}L(\lambda))\\
&=q^{s_\nu+s_\mu}[\mu]![\nu]!\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\lambda}\end{aligned}$$
\[theorem5.9\] Let $M=M((\nu+\mu)^0)$ be a rigid representation with a dimension vector $\nu+\mu$. Denote $(\nu+\mu)^0$ as $\kappa=(\kappa_1,\cdots,\kappa_k)$. We have that:
$Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))=q^{t_{\nu,\mu}-\langle \mu, \nu\rangle-s_\nu-s_\mu}Dim 1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}\overline{\Delta}(\kappa)/ [\mu]![\nu]!$
By the equation (\[5.6\]) and the Theorem \[them5.4\], we have that $$\begin{aligned}
Dim 1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}\overline{\Delta}(\kappa)&=q^{s_\nu+s_\mu}[\mu]![\nu]!\chi_{\nu,\mu}^{\kappa}\\
&=q^{s_\nu+s_\mu}[\mu]![\nu]!q^{\langle \mu, \nu\rangle-t_{\nu,\mu}}Ch_q(H^\bullet(Gr_\mu(M)))\end{aligned}$$
Given two dimension vectors $\mu,\nu\in \mathbb{N}^{I}$, we have that
the map $q:E_{\nu,\mu}\to E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$ is surjective, then $\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu \leq \mathbf{i}((\mu+\nu)^0) $
If the map $q:E_{\nu,\mu}\to E_{\nu+\mu}(Q)$ is surjective, then by Theorem \[them5.4\] we have
$1_{\nu^0,\mu^0}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)\neq 0$.
It is equivalent to $1_{\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu}\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0)\neq 0$ by Lemma \[lemm5.8\]. By [@KR Corollary 5.4], it follows that the word $\mathbf{i}((\mu+\nu)^0)$ is the largest word in the $Ch(\overline{\Delta}((\nu+\mu)^0))$. Hence $\textbf{i}_\nu\textbf{i}_\mu \leq \mathbf{i}((\mu+\nu)^0)$
[CPS3]{} A. Beilinson , J. Bernstein and P. Deligne, Faisceaux pervers, [Ast[é]{}risque]{}, [**100**]{}, 1983.
J. Brundan, A.Kleshchev and P, McNamara, Homological properties of finite-type [Khovanov–Lauda–Rouquier]{} algebras, [ *Duke Mathematical Journal*]{} [**163**]{} (2014), 1353–1404.
B. Crawley-Boevey, [*Geometry of representations of algebras*]{}, Lecture notes,(1993)
N. Chriss and V. Ginzburg, [*Representation theory and complex geometry*]{}, Springer Science & Business Media,(1997)
X. Fang and M. Reineke, Supports for linear degenerations of flag varieties, [`arXiv:1805.09797`]{}, (2018).
G.C.Irelli, F. Esposito, H. Franzen and M. Reineke, Cell decompositions and algebraicity of cohomology for quiver Grassmannians, [`arXiv:1804.07736`]{}, (2018).
M. Khovanov and A. Lauda, A diagrammatic approach to categorification of quantum groups I, [ *Represent. Theory*]{} [ **13**]{} (2009), 309–347.
A. Kleshchev and A. Ram, Representations of Khovanov-Lauda-Rouquier algebras and combinatorics of Lyndon words, [ *Math. Ann.*]{} [ **349**]{} (2011), 943–975.
M. Lanini and E. Strickland, Cohomology of the flag variety under PBW degenerations, [*Transformation Groups*]{}, [**24**]{}, (2019), 835–844.
B. Leclerc, Dual canonical bases, quantum shuffles and $q$-characters, [ *Math. Z.*]{} [ **246**]{} (2004), 691–732.
G. Lusztig, Canonical bases arising from quantized enveloping algebras, [*J. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [ **3**]{} (1990), 447–498.
G. Lusztig, [ *Introduction to Quantum Groups*]{}, Birkhäuser, 1993.
P. McNamara, Finite dimensional representations of Khovanov-Lauda-Rouquier algebras I: finite type, [*Journal f[ü]{}r die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal)*]{}, (**2015**), (2015), 103–124.
P. Papi, A characterization of a special ordering in a root system, [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.* ]{} [ **120**]{} (1994), 661–665.
O. Schiffmann, Lectures on canonical and crystal bases of Hall algebras, [`arXiv:0910.4460`]{}, (2009).
M. Varagnolo and E. Vasserot, Canonical bases and KLR-algebras, [*J. Reine Angew. Math.*]{} [ **659**]{} (2011), 67–100.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
The Cauchy problem is investigeted for the parabolic type in the some finite part $\left[ t_0,t_1\right] \subset \left[ 0,\infty
\right)$ of the semi axis $t\in \left[ 0,\infty \right)$ and degenarated to Schrodinger type in the remain part of the same semi axes the second order parabolic equation.
The existence of the solution is proved under some conditions on the data and the explicit integral representation is constructed
author:
- |
H. I. Ahmadov [^1]\
Department of Mathematical Physics\
Faculty of Applied Mathematics and Cybernetics\
Baku State University, Z.Khalilov st.23, AZ-1148\
Baku, Azerbaijan
title: |
On solvability of the Cauchy problem for a second\
order parabolic equation degenerating\
into Schrodinger type
---
In the semi plane $\Pi =\left\{ (t,x)/t>0;\,-\infty <x<\infty
\right\}$ we consider the following Cauchy problem
$$p(t)\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=\frac{\partial ^2u}{\partial
x^2}+ f(x,t),\qquad (t,x)\in \Pi ,$$
$$\lim\limits_{t \to +0} u(t,x)= \varphi(x),\qquad -\infty <x<\infty$$
where $p(t), f(t,x)$ and $\varphi(x)$ are the known functions, $u=u(t,x)$ -are the desired complex valued functions.
Relatively to the coeffisients and right hand sides of problem (1), (2) it is assumed the fulfilment of the following conditions:
1$^0$.$p(t)\in C\left[0,\infty \right),$
2$^0$.$p(t)\neq 0,\,\,\,\,\,$ at $\,t\in \left[0,\infty
\right),$
3$^0$.$Re\,p(t)\geq 0,\,\,\,\,$ at $\,\,\,t\in \left[ 0,\infty
\right)$ and $\,\,\,\,Re\,\,p(0)>0,$
4$^0$. There exists $p_0=const >0$ such that $\int\limits_{0}^{t}Jmp^{-1}(\tau )\,\,d\tau \leq p_0,$
5$^0$. The function $\,\,\varphi (x)$ is continuous and bounded at $x\in (-\infty ,\infty )$
6$^0$. [*f(t,x)*]{} is continions and bounded in the layer $\Pi'(t_0,T)= \\
\hspace*{1.2cm} \left\{t_0\leq t\leq
T;\,\,\,-\infty <x<\infty \right\}$
7$^0$. [*f(t,x)*]{} satisfies in $\Pi'(t_0,T)$ the Holder condition wish respect to $x$ i.e.\
there exist the constants $B$ and $0< \alpha \leq
1$ such that $|f(t,x)- \hspace*{1.2cm} f(t,y)| \leq
B|x-y|^{\alpha}$ for any $(t,x),(t,y)\in \Pi'(t_0,T)$.
The formal solution of problems (1), (2) is constructed the help of method of integral Fourier transform and is represented in the form of
$$u(t,x)=\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty} Q(t,y-x)\varphi(y)\,dy +
\int\limits_{0}^{t} \int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty}
Q_0(t-\tau,y-x)f(\tau,y)\,d\tau\,dy$$
where
$$Q(t,y-x)=\frac{e^{-\frac{(y-x)^2}{4\omega (t)}}}{2\sqrt{\pi
\omega(t)}} ,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,Q(t-\tau
,y-x)=\frac{e^{-\frac{(y-x)^2}{4\omega _0(t,\tau )} }}{2\sqrt{\pi
\omega _0(t,\tau )}}\,$$
$$\omega (t)=\int\limits_{0}^{t}p^{-1}(\eta )\,d\eta
,\,\,\,\,\,\,\omega _0(t,\tau )=\int\limits_{\tau}^{t}
p^{-1}(\eta)\,d{\eta} .$$ Note that equation (1) in some part of the considered interval $\,t\in \left[ 0,\infty \right)$, belongs to the parabolic type, in the other parts of interval is degenerated in Schrodinger type \[1\].
Let $\left[ t_0,t_1\right] \subset \left[ 0,\infty \right)$ be a segment, where the condition
$$Re\,\,p(\tau )>0,\qquad \tau \in \left[ t_0,t_1\right]$$
is satisfied.
At fulfilment of conditions $1^0-4^0$, some estimetes for the elements of integral (3) which provide uniform convergence of this integral, are obtained.
The sollowing one is proved.
Lemma 1. Let conditions $1^0-4^0$ be fulfilled and inepualihes (4) fold. Then the following estimete is valid
$$Re\left(\int\limits_{\tau}^{t} p^{-1}(\eta )\,d\eta \right) \leq
(t-\tau )\left| H(t,\tau )\right| \cos \arg H(t,\tau )\leq (t-\tau
)\left| H(t,\tau )\right| \sin \delta ,$$
here
$$\left| \arg H(t,\tau )\right| \leq \frac \pi 2-\delta
,\,\,\,0<\delta <\frac \pi 2,\,\,\,t\geq \tau ,\,\,\,H(t,\tau
)=\frac{1}{t-\tau} \int\limits_{\tau}^{t}P^{-1}(\eta)\,d\eta$$
Lemma 2. Let conditions $1^0-4^0$ be fulfilled for some $\tau_0
\in \left[0,\infty \right)$, $Re\,p(\tau_0)>0$ then the estimate $$Re \left(\int\limits_{\tau_0}^{t} p^{-1}(\eta)\,d\eta \right) \leq
(t-\tau _0)\left| H(t,\tau _0)\right| \sin \delta$$
where
$$0<\delta <\frac \pi 2,\,\,\,\left| H(t,\tau _0)\right| >0$$
Lemma 3. Let conditions $1^0-4^0$ be fulfilled . Then the estimate
$$Re\left(\int\limits_{0}^{t}p^{-1}(\eta )\,d\eta \right) \leq
t\left| H_1(t)\right| \sin \delta$$
where $$0<\delta <\frac \pi 2,\,\,\,\,H_1(t)=\frac{1}{t}
\int\limits_{0}^{t}p^{-1}(\eta)\,d\eta$$ is valid.
Theorem. Let conditions $5^0, 6^0, 7^0$ and the conditions of lemmas 1, 2, 3 be fulfilled. Then problem (1), (2) has a classical solution belonging to the space $C^{1,2}(t>0,\,\,x\in (-\infty ,\infty
))\frown C(t\geq 0,\,\,\,\,x\in (-\infty ,\infty ))$ and this solution is represented by formula (3).
[99]{} Gelfand I.M., Shilov G.F. Some problems of theory of differential equations (generalized functions, Issue 3), Moscow., Phizmatgiz, 1958, (Russia).
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Regular logic can be regarded as the *internal language* of regular categories, but the logic itself is generally not given a categorical treatment. In this paper, we understand the syntax and proof rules of regular logic in terms of the free regular category ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ on a set ${\mathrm{T}}$. From this point of view, regular theories are certain monoidal 2-functors from a suitable 2-category of contexts—the 2-category of relations in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$—to that of posets. Such functors assign to each context the set of formulas in that context, ordered by entailment. We refer to such a 2-functor as a *regular calculus* because it naturally gives rise to a graphical string diagram calculus in the spirit of Joyal and Street. Our key aim to prove that the category of regular categories is essentially reflective in that of regular calculi. Along the way, we demonstrate how to use this graphical calculus.
Keywords: regular logic, category theory, primitive positive formula
author:
- 'Brendan Fong and David I. Spivak[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'Library20190620.bib'
title: Graphical Regular Logic
---
Introduction {#chap.intro}
============
Regular logic is the fragment of first order logic generated by equality ($=$), true (${{\mathtt{true}}}$), conjunction ($\wedge$), and existential quantification ($\exists$). A defining feature of this fragment is that it is expressive enough to define *functions* and *composition* of functions, or more generally of relations: given relations $R \subseteq X \times Y$ and $S \subseteq Y \times
Z$, their composite is given by the formula $$R {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}S = \{(x,z) \mid \exists y.R(x,y)\wedge S(y,z)\}.$$ Indeed, regular logic is the internal language of regular categories, which may in turn be understood as a categorical characterization of the minimal structure needed to have a well-behaved notion of relation.
While regular categories put emphasis on the notion of *binary* relation, the existence of finite products allows them to handle $n$-ary relations—that is, subobjects of $n$-fold products—and their composition. To organize more complicated multi-way composites of relations, many fields have developed some notion of wiring diagram. A good amount of recent work, including but not limited to control theory [@bonchi2014categorical; @baez2015categories; @fong2016categorical], database theory and knowledge representation [@bonchi2018graphical; @patterson2017knowledge], electrical engineering [@baez2018compositional], and chemistry [@baez2017compositional], all serve to demonstrate the link between these languages and categories for which the morphisms are relations.
A first goal of this paper is to clarify the link between regular logic and these various graphical languages. In doing so, we provide a new diagrammatic syntax for regular logic, the titular *graphical regular logic*. Rather than pursue a direct translation with the classical syntax for first order logic, we demonstrate a tight connection between graphical regular logic and the notion of *regular category*. A second goal, then, is to repackage the structure of a regular category into terms that cleanly reflect its underlying logical theory. We call the resulting categorical structure a *regular calculus*. Regular calculi are based on free regular categories, so let’s begin there.
We will show that the *free regular category* ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}$ on a singleton set can be obtained by freely adding a fresh terminal object to ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$. Here is a depiction of a few objects in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}$: $$\label{eqn.free_reg}
\begin{tikzcd}
0&
s\ar[l, >->]&
1\ar[l, ->>]\ar[r]&
2\ar[l, shift left=5pt]\ar[l, shift right=5pt]&
\cdots
\end{tikzcd}$$ The object $s$ is the coequalizer of the two distinct maps $2{\rightrightarrows}1$, so in a sense it prevents the unique map $1\to 0$ from being a regular epimorphism. Thus one may think of $s$ as representing the *support* of an abstract object in a regular category. In ${{{\mathsf{Set}}}}$, the support of any object is either empty or singleton, but in general the concept is more refined. For example, the topos of sheaves on a space $X$ is regular, and the support of a sheaf $r$ is the union $U{\subseteq}X$ of all open sets on which $r(U)$ is nonempty.
For any small set ${\mathrm{T}}$ of *types* (also known as *sorts*), the free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$ is then the ${\mathrm{T}}$-fold coproduct of regular categories ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\coloneqq\bigsqcup_{\mathrm{T}}{
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}$. That is, we have an adjunction $$\label{eqn.fr_ob_adj}
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=40pt]
{{{\mathsf{Set}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ which we will construct explicitly in \[thm.fr\_is\_free\]. For any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the counit provides a canonical regular functor, which we denote ${\classify{-}}\colon{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}\to{\mathcal{R}}$. Note also that this extends to a 2-functor ${\classify{-}}\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ between the associated relation bicategories.
Write ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\coloneqq {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}$ for this bicategory of relations. Just as ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}$ is closely related to the opposite of the category of finite sets (see ), the objects in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ are, at a first approximation, much like finite sets ${\underline{n}}$ equipped with a function ${\underline{n}}
\to {\mathrm{T}}$, and morphisms are much like corelations: equivalence relations on some coproduct ${\underline{n+n'}}$. We draw objects and morphisms as on the left and right below: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, minimum size = 3ex] (rho) {};
\draw (rho.180) to[pos=1] node[left] (w) {$y$} +(180:2pt);
\draw (rho.75) to[pos=1] node[above] (n) {$z$} +(75:2pt);
\draw (rho.-20) to[pos=1] node[right] (e) {$y$} +(-20:2pt);
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (rho.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of rho.270] (s) {$w,x$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
\hspace{3cm}
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (a) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=10pt, fit=(a)] (outer) {};
\node[link] (link1) at ($(a.west)!.6!(outer.west)$) {};
\node[link] (link2) at ($(a.45)!.5!(outer.45)$) {};
\node[link] (link3) at ($(a.-20)!.5!(outer.-20)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(a.100) + (110:7pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.3 of link1] {$x$};
\node[above=-.3 of link2] {$y$};
\node[above=-.2 of link3] {$y$};
\node[above=-.3 of dot] {$w$};
\draw (outer.west) -- (link1);
\draw (a.40) -- (link2);
\draw (link2) -- (outer.45);
\draw (a.-20) -- (link3);
\draw (link3) -- (outer.0);
\draw (link3) -- (outer.-45);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$$ The left-hand circle, equipped with its labeled ports and white dot, represents an object in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$; we call this picture a *shell*. Here each port represents an element of the associated finite set ${\underline{3}}$, the white dot captures aspects related to the support object $s$ of ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{blank}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(blank)}
}$, and the labels $x,y$ etc. are elements of ${\mathrm{T}}$. In the right-hand morphism, the inner shell represents the domain, outer shell represents the codomain, and the things between them—the connected components of the wires and the white dots—represent the equivalence classes of the aforementioned equivalence relation.
A regular calculus lets us think of each object $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$—each shell—as a context for formulas in some regular theory, and of each morphism, i.e. each wiring diagram $\Gamma\tickar\Gamma'$, as a method for converting $\Gamma$-formulas to $\Gamma'$-formulas, using $=$, ${{\mathtt{true}}}$,$\wedge$, and $\exists$. We next want to think about how regular categories fit into this picture.
If ${\mathcal{R}}$ is a regular category, formulas in the associated regular theory are given by relations $x{\subseteq}r_1\times\cdots\times r_n$, where $x$ and the $r_i$ are objects in ${\mathcal{R}}$, i.e. $r_\bullet\colon{\underline{n}}\to{\mathcal{R}}$. Thus we could consider $\Gamma\coloneqq r_\bullet$ as a context, and this brings us back to the free regular category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}$. The counit functor ${\classify{-}}\colon{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}\to{\mathcal{R}}$ sends $\Gamma$ to ${\classify{\Gamma}}\coloneqq r_1\times\cdots\times r_n$. A key feature of regular categories is that the subobjects ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_1\times\cdots\times r_n)$ form a meet-semilattice, elements of which we call *predicates* in context $\Gamma$. As we shall see, the collection of all these semilattices, when related by the structure of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}$, includes enough data to recover the regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$ itself.
Indeed, consider the commutative diagram $$\begin{tikzcd}
{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}\ar[r, "{\classify{-}}"]\ar[d]&
{\mathcal{R}}\ar[d]\\
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}})}\ar[r, "{\classify{-}}"']&
{\mathscr{R}}\ar[r, "{{\mathscr{R}}(I,-)}"']&[20pt]
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\end{tikzcd}$$ where the vertical maps represent inclusions of a regular 1-category into its bicategory of relations, and the hom-2-functor ${\mathscr{R}}(I,-)$ sends each object $r\in\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}=\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}}$ to the subobject lattice ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r)={\mathscr{R}}(I,r)$. We can denote the composite of the bottom maps as $$\label{eqn.construct_rels_on_obs}
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}{\longrightarrow}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}.$$ The domain ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}$ is a category of contexts and the functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{\Gamma}}$ assigns the poset of predicates to each context $\Gamma$.
As mentioned, we will show how to reconstruct ${\mathcal{R}}$—up to equivalence—from the contexts $\Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}$ and their predicate posets ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{R}}{\classify{\Gamma}}$ as in \[eqn.construct\_rels\_on\_obs\], once we give the abstract structure by which they hang together. The question is, given any set ${\mathrm{T}}$, what extra structure do we need on a functor $${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}{\longrightarrow}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$$ in order to construct a regular category from it?
Whatever the required structure on ${P}$ is, of course ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}$ needs to have that structure. First of all, ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}$ is a 2-functor, and it happens to be the composite of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{\ulcorner-\urcorner}}$ and ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{R}}$. It is not hard to check that the 2-functor ${\classify{-}}$ is strong monoidal, whereas the 2-functor ${\mathscr{R}}(I,-)$ is only lax monoidal: given objects $r_1,r_2\in{\mathcal{R}}$ the induced monotone map $\times\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_1)\times{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_2)\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_1\times r_2)$ is not an isomorphism. However, ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}$ has a bit more structure than merely being a lax functor: each laxator has a left adjoint $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
1\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathtt{true}}}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(1)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{!}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}
\qquad
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=50pt]
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_1)\times{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_2)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\times}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r_1\times r_2).\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\pair{\operatorname{im}_1,\ \operatorname{im}_2}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$
Abstractly, if ${\mathscr{R}}$ and ${\mathscr{P}}$ are monoidal 2-categories, we say that a lax monoidal functor ${\mathscr{R}} \to {\mathscr{P}}$ is *ajax* (“adjoint-lax”) if its laxators $\rho$ and $\rho_{v,v'}$ are right adjoints in ${\mathscr{P}}$. Thus we have seen that ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}{\longrightarrow}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is ajax. This is precisely the structure required to reconstruct a regular category.
Ajax functors have the important property that they preserve adjoint monoids, a notion we introduce. An *adjoint monoid* is an object with both monoid and comonoid structures, such that the monoid maps are right adjoint to their corresponding comonoid maps. In particular, we will see that each object in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ has a canonical adjoint monoid structure, and that adjoint monoids in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ are exactly meet-semilattices. This guarantees that ajax functors ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ send objects in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$—contexts—to meet-semilattices.
We now come to our main definition.
\[def.reg\_sketch\] A *regular calculus* is a pair $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$ where ${\mathrm{T}}$ is a set and ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is an ajax 2-functor.
A *morphism* $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\to({\mathrm{T}}',{P}')$ of regular calculi is a pair $(F,F^\sharp)$ where $F\colon{\mathrm{T}}\to{\mathrm{T}}'$ is a function and $F^\sharp$ is a monoidal natural transformation $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=0pt]
{\mathrm{T}}\ar[dd, "F"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\ar[dd, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(F)}}"']\ar[dr, bend left=15pt, "{P}", ""' name=T]\\
&&{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\\
{\mathrm{T}}'&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}}')}\ar[ur, bend right=15pt, "{P}'"', "" name=T']
\ar[from=T, to=T'-|T, twocell, "F^\sharp"']
\end{tikzcd}$$ that is strict in every respect: all the required coherence diagrams of posets commute on the nose. We denote the category of regular calculi by ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$.
The goal of this paper is to prove that ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ is *essentially reflective in ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$* (see \[thm.main\]). More precisely, this means:
The “predicates” mapping in \[eqn.construct\_rels\_on\_obs\] extends to a fully faithful functor $$\label{eqn.rels}
\begin{aligned}
{{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to&{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\\
{\mathcal{R}}\mapsto&\left(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}\right),
\end{aligned}$$ and this functor has a left adjoint, the “syntactic category,” $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{syn}}}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}.\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{prd}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ Moreover, for any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the counit functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}))\to{\mathcal{R}}$ is an equivalence.
In order to prove this result, we will also show that each object $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\in{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ can be understood as a graphical language for a theory in regular logic. Indeed, the usual syntactic category for that theory will be the regular category ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$.
### Related work
Regular categories were first defined by Barr [@barr:1971a], as a way to elucidate the structure present in abelian categories. Shortly thereafter, Freyd and Scedrov were the first to make the connection to regular logic. Similarly to the present work, they focused on the structure of the bicategory of relations, seeking an axiomatization through the notion of an allegory, a poset-enriched category (a *po-category*) with an identity-on-objects involution, such that every hom-poset is a meet-semilattice, and such that the modular law holds [@freyd1990categories].
Carboni and Walters also sought to axiomatize these objects, defining functionally complete cartesian bicategories of relations [@Carboni:1987a]. A cartesian bicategory is a monoidal po-category in which every object is equipped with an adjoint monoid in a coherent way. Functionally complete bicategories of relations further require that these monoids and comonoids obey the Frobenius law, and that a sensible notion of image factorization exists.
Both allegories and bicategories of relations take the structure of a regular category, and decompress it into a (locally posetal) 2-categorical expression. While regular calculi have similar features to both allegories and cartesian bicategories, such as emphasizing that the hom-posets are meet-semilattices or that there are adjoint monoid structures on each object, they represent this data in terms of a *functor* rather than a category.
In the world of databases, regular formulas correspond to conjunctive queries, and entailment corresponds to query containment. A well-known theorem of Chandra and Merlin states that (conjunctive) query containment is decidable; their proof translates logical expressions into graphical representations [@chandra1977optimal]. In more recent work, Bonchi, Seeber, and Sobociński show that the Chandra–Merlin approach permits an elegant formalization in terms of the Carboni–Walters axioms for bicategories of relations [@bonchi2018graphical]. Patterson has also considered bicategories of relations, and their Joyal-Street string calculus [@joyal1991geometry], as a graphical way of capturing the regular logical aspects knowledge representation [@patterson2017knowledge].
Presenting regular categories using monoidal maps ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ fits into an emerging pattern. In [@Spivak.Schultz.Rupel:2016a] it was shown that lax monoidal functors $1\text{--}{{\mathsf{Cob}}}_{\mathrm{T}}\to{{{\mathsf{Set}}}}$ present traced monoidal categories, and in [@fong2019hypergraph] it was shown that lax monoidal functors ${{{\mathsf{Cospan}}}}_{\mathrm{T}}\to{{{\mathsf{Set}}}}$ present hypergraph categories. But now in all three cases, the domain of the functor represents a particular language of string diagrams, and the codomain represents a choice of enriching category. The present paper can be seen as an extension of that work, showing that regular categories are something like poset-enriched hypergraph categories.
### Outline
We begin in \[chap.regular\_categories\] with a section reviewing the definition and basic properties of regular categories ${\mathcal{R}}$, emphasizing in particular the construction of the symmetric monoidal po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ of relations in ${\mathcal{R}}$. In fact, we will say that a po-category ${\mathscr{R}}$ is a *regular po-category* if it is isomorphic to the relations po-category of some regular category ${\mathscr{R}}\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$.
In \[chap.adjoint\_monoids\] we introduce the notion of adjoint monoid. We show the category of adjoint monoids in a po-category ${\mathscr{C}}$ is given by the category of ajax monoidal functors $1 \to {\mathscr{C}}$, that adjoint monoids in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ are meet-semilattices, that every object in a relations po-category has a canonical adjoint monoid structure, and that the subobject functor of a regular po-category is ajax.
In \[chap.free\_reg\] we turn our attention to free regular categories and free regular po-categories on a set. In particular, we give an explicit construction of the free regular category on a set ${\mathrm{T}}$ as the opposite of the comma category ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}\downarrow{{{\mathcal{P}}}_{f}}({\mathrm{T}})$; the free regular po-category on ${\mathrm{T}}$ is its relations po-category. At this point we can give our main definition: a regular calculus is an ajax functor from a free regular po-category to that of posets. We then give a fully faithful functor ${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$, from regular categories to regular calculi.
In \[chap.graphical\_reglog\], we introduce graphical regular logic. First, we give an explicit, graphical description of the objects, morphisms, and order in a free regular po-category. We then define the *graphical terms* of a regular calculus. Given a regular calculus $P\colon
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, a graphical term is a morphism $\omega\colon \Gamma_1 \times
\dots \times \Gamma_k \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ together with elements $\theta_i \in P(\Gamma_i)$ for each $i = 1,\dots, k$. We give rules for composing and reasoning with these. Having set up our language, we now proceed towards the construction of a regular category from a regular calculus.
In \[chap.relations\], we define the po-category of internal relations of an regular calculus. This construction is a relational version of the standard *syntactic category* constructions: an object is a context–predicate pair $(\Gamma,\varphi)$, where $\Gamma$ is an object of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ and $\varphi \in P(\Gamma)$, and a morphism $(\Gamma,\varphi) \to
(\Gamma',\varphi')$ is a predicate $\theta$ in the joint context $\Gamma \times
\Gamma'$ that entails $\varphi$ and $\varphi'$.
In \[chap.functions\], we show that the category of left adjoints in the po-category of internal relations, which we call the category of internal functions, is a regular category. We explicitly construct limits and image factorizations using graphical regular logic.
Finally, in \[chap.ess\_refl\], we construct the functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}\colon {{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\to {{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ adjoint to ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$, and show that the two form an essential reflection.
### Notation and 2-categorical background {#page.notation}
Let us fix some notation. Most is standard, but we highlight in particular our use of ${\mathbin{\fatsemi}}$ for composition, of the term *po-category* for locally posetal 2-category, and of an arrow $\Rightarrow$ pointing in the direction of the left adjoint to signify an adjunction.
- We typically denote composition in diagrammatic order, so the composite of $f\colon A\to B$ and $g\colon B\to C$ is $f{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g\colon A\to C$. We often denote the identity morphism ${{\mathrm{id}}}_c\colon c\to c$ on an object $c\in{\mathcal{C}}$ simply by the name of the object, $c$. Thus if $f\colon c\to d$, we have $(c{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f)=f=(f{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}d)$.
- We may denote the terminal object of any category by ${\star}$, and the associated map from an object $c$ as $!\colon c \to {\star}$, but we denote the top element of any poset $P$ by ${{\mathtt{true}}}\in P$.
- We denote the universal map into a product by $\pair{f,g}$ and the universal map out of a coproduct by $\copair{f,g}$.
- Given a natural number $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, define ${\underline{n}}\coloneqq\{1,2,\ldots,n\}\in{{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$; in particular ${\underline{0}}=\varnothing$.
- Given a lax monoidal functor $F\colon{\mathcal{C}}\to{\mathcal{D}}$, we denote the laxators by $\rho\colon I\to F(I)$ and $\rho_{c,c'}\colon F(c)\otimes F(c')\to F(c\otimes c')$ for any $c,c'\in{\mathcal{C}}$. We use the same notation for longer lists, e.g. we write $\rho_{c,c',c''}$ for the canonical map $F(c)\otimes F(c')\otimes F(c'')\to F(c\otimes c'\otimes c'')$.
##### Symmetric monoidal po-categories.
We use the term [*po-category*]{} to mean locally posetal 2-category, i.e. a category enriched in partially ordered sets (posets). [*Po-functors*]{} are, of course, poset-enriched functors (functors that preserve the local order). The set of po-functors ${\mathscr{C}}\to{\mathscr{D}}$ itself has a natural order, where $F\leq G$ iff $F(c)\leq G(c)$ for all $c\in{\mathscr{C}}$. We define ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Pocat}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Pocat}{1}}}}}}$ to be the po-category of po-categories and po-functors.
We use ${\mathbb{\StrLeft{Xyz}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Xyz}{1}}}}}$—with first character made blackboard bold—to denote named po-categories and ${{\mathsf{Xyz}}}$ for named 1-categories. We rely fairly heavily on this; for example our notations for the free regular category and the free regular po-category on a set ${\mathrm{T}}$ differ only in this way: ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ vs.${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$.
A po-category is, in particular, a (strict) 2-category, and po-functors are (strict) 2-functors. As such there is a forgetful functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Pocat}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Pocat}{1}}}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{Cat}}}}$ sending each po-category and po-functor to its underlying 1-category and 1-functor. A [*symmetric monoidal po-category*]{} is a po-category ${\mathscr{C}}$ together with po-functors $\otimes\colon {\mathscr{C}} \times {\mathscr{C}} \to {\mathscr{C}}$ and $I\colon {\star}\to {\mathscr{C}}$ whose underlying 1-structures form a symmetric monoidal category.
The symmetric monoidal po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ has posets $P$ as objects, monotone maps $f\colon P \to Q$ as morphisms, and order given by $f \leq g$ iff $f(p)
\leq g(p)$ for all $p$. Its monoidal structure is given by cartesian product $P\times Q$, with the terminal poset $1$ the monoidal unit.
##### Adjunctions in a 2-category.
Recall that, given a 2-category ${\mathscr{C}}$, an *adjunction in ${\mathscr{C}}$* consists of a pair of objects $c,d\in\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{C}}$, a pair of morphisms $L\colon c\to d$ and $R\colon d\to c$, and a pair of 2-morphisms $\eta\colon
d{\Rightarrow}(L{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}R)$ and $\epsilon\colon (R{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}L){\Rightarrow}c$ such that a pair of equations hold: $${{\mathrm{id}}}_L =
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=7pt, column sep=large]
c\ar[dr, "L"]\ar[dd, equal]\\
\ar[r, phantom, pos=.3, "\overset{\eta}{\Longrightarrow}" above=-6pt]&
d\ar[dl, "R" description]\ar[dd, equal]\\
c\ar[dr, "L"']\ar[r, phantom, pos=.7, "\underset{\epsilon}{\Longrightarrow}" below=-5pt]&~\\&
d
\end{tikzcd}
\end{aligned}
\qquad{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\qquad
{{\mathrm{id}}}_R =
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=7pt, column sep=large]
&
d\ar[dl, "R"']\ar[dd, equal]\\
c\ar[dd, equal]\ar[dr, "L" description]\ar[r, phantom, pos=.7, "\overset{\epsilon}{\Longrightarrow}" above=-6pt]&
~\\
\ar[r, phantom, pos=.3, "\underset{\eta}{\Longrightarrow}" below=-5pt]&
d\ar[dl, "R"]\\
c
\end{tikzcd}
\end{aligned}$$ Noting that both $\eta$ and $\epsilon$ always point in the direction of the left adjoint $L$, we write $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
c\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{L}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
d\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{R}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ to denote an adjunction, where the 2-arrow points in the direction of the left adjoint. We sometimes write $L\dashv R$ inline, but are careful to avoid the $\vdash$ symbol in this context; *the symbol $\vdash$ always means entailment*. We denote the category with the same objects and with left adjoints as morphisms as ${{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({\mathscr{C}})$.
Background on regular categories {#chap.regular_categories}
================================
Regular categories are, roughly speaking, categories that have a good notion of relations. Relations, which we sometimes call *predicates*, are subobjects of products, and composites of relations are formed using pullbacks and image factorizations; regular categories are categories that have suitably interoperable finite limits and image factorizations. We now proceed to make this precise.
Definition of regular categories and functors
---------------------------------------------
Regular categories were first defined by Barr [@barr:1971a] to isolate important aspects of abelian categories. The reader who is unacquainted with regular categories and/or regular logic may see [@butz1998regular].
A [*regular category*]{} is a category ${\mathcal{R}}$ with the following properties:
1. it has all finite limits;
2. the kernel pair of any morphism $f\colon r\to s$ admits a coequalizer $r\times_s r{\rightrightarrows}r\to{\mathrm{coeq}}(f)$, which we denote $\operatorname{im}(f)\coloneqq{\mathrm{coeq}}(f)$ and call the *image* of $f$; and
3. the pullback—along any map—of a regular epimorphism (a coequalizer of any parallel pair) is again a regular epimorphism.
A [*regular functor*]{} is a functor between regular categories that preserves finite limits and regular epis. We write ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ for the category of regular categories.
\[lemma.OFS\] For any $f\colon r\to r'$, the universal map $\operatorname{im}(f)\to r'$ is monic. Thus every map $f$ can be factored into a regular epimorphism followed by a monomorphism: $r{\twoheadrightarrow}\operatorname{im}(f){\rightarrowtail}r'$, and this constitutes an orthogonal factorization system. In particular, image factorization is unique up to isomorphism.
This is [@butz1998regular Proposition 2.4].
\[def.support\] The [*support*]{} of an object $r$ in a regular category is the image $r
{\twoheadrightarrow}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(r) {\rightarrowtail}{\star}$ of its unique map to the terminal object.
A [*subobject*]{} of an object $r$ in a category is an isomorphism class of monomorphisms $r' {\rightarrowtail}r$, where morphisms between monomorphisms are as in the slice category over $r$. This defines a partially ordered set ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)$. We write $r'{\subseteq}r$ to denote the equivalence class represented by $r'{\rightarrowtail}r$.
\[prop.sub\_ladj\] Any morphism $f\colon r\to s$ in a regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$ induces an adjunction $$\label{eqn.subobject_adj}
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{f}_!}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(s).\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{f^*}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ This extends to a functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})$.
Given a subobject $r'{\subseteq}r$ or $s'{\subseteq}s$, define ${{f}_!}(r'){\subseteq}s$ and ${f^*}(s'){\subseteq}r$ as follows: $$\begin{tikzcd}
r'\ar[r, >->]\ar[d, dashed, ->>]&
r\ar[d, "f"]\\
{{f}_!}(r')\ar[r, dashed, >->]&
s
\end{tikzcd}
\hspace{1in}
\begin{tikzcd}
{f^*}(s')\ar[r, dashed, >->]\ar[d, dashed]{\ar[dr, phantom, very near start, "\lrcorner"]}&
r\ar[d, "f"]\\
s'\ar[r, >->]&
s
\end{tikzcd}$$ The fact that these are adjoint follows from the orthogonality of the factorization system in \[lemma.OFS\], and the constructions are functorial.
The following proposition discusses some well-known properties of subobjects in a regular category. In \[rem.tangible\] we explain how these properties are 1-categorical reflections of a more elementary 2-categorical story.
\[prop.tangible\] Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category. The functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})$ satisfies the following:
1. ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)$ is a meet-semilattice for each $r\in{\mathcal{R}}$,
2. for each cospan $f\colon r'\to r{\leftarrow}s{:\!}g$, the Beck-Chevalley condition (right) holds for the pullback square (left): $$\begin{tikzcd}
r'\times_r s\ar[r, "\pi_2"]\ar[d, "\pi_1"']{\ar[dr, phantom, very near start, "\lrcorner"]}&
s\ar[d, "g"]\\
r'\ar[r, "f"']&
r
\end{tikzcd}
\qquad
\begin{tikzcd}
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r'\times_r s)\ar[d, "{{\pi_1}_!}"']&
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(s)\ar[d, "{{g}_!}"]\ar[l, "{\pi_2^*}"']\\
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r')&
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)\ar[l, "{f^*}"]
\end{tikzcd}$$
3. for each regular epimorphism $f\colon r'{\twoheadrightarrow}r$ and $\varphi\in {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)$, the following holds: $${{f}_!}\big({f^*}(\varphi)\big)=\varphi.$$
4. for each $f\colon r'\to r$, and $\varphi\in {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)$ and $\varphi'\in {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r')$, Frobenius reciprocity holds: $${{f}_!}(\varphi\wedge{f^*}(\varphi'))={{f}_!}(\varphi)\wedge\varphi'$$
A *regular functor* ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ induces a natural transformation $\alpha\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}({\mathcal{F}}-)$ such that
1. $\alpha$ is natural with respect to both adjoints, ${{f}_!}$ and ${f^*}$, for each $f\colon r'\to r$, and
2. $\alpha_r$ is a meet-semilattice map for each $r\in{\mathcal{R}}$.
For the properties of the functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}$, (1) can be easily verified by checking that that binary meets are given by pullback and the top element is given by the identity map, (2) is [@butz1998regular Lemma 2.9], (3) follows from pullback stability of regular epis and uniqueness of factorizations (\[lemma.OFS\]), and (4) is [@butz1998regular Lemma 2.6].
The properties of $\alpha\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}({\mathcal{F}}-)$ are found in/above [@butz1998regular Lemma 2.10].
The relations po-category construction
--------------------------------------
A regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$ has exactly the structure and properties necessary to construct a po-category of relations, or [*relations po-category*]{}.
Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category; its *relations po-category* ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ is the po-category with the same objects as ${\mathcal{R}}$ but whose morphisms, written $x\colon r\tickar s$, are relations $x{\subseteq}r\times s$ in ${\mathcal{R}}$ equipped with the subobject ordering $x\leq x'$ iff $x{\subseteq}x'$. The composite $x{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}y$ with a relation $y\colon s\tickar t$ is obtained by pulling back over $s$ and image factorizing the map to $r\times t$: $$\label{eqn.rel_composition}
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=small, row sep=15pt]
&[10pt]&
x\times_{s}y\ar[dl]\ar[dr]\ar[d, ->>]&&[10pt]~\\&
x\ar[d, >->]&
x{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}y\ar[d, >->]&
y\ar[d, >->]\\&
r\times s\ar[dl, bend right=8pt]\ar[dr, bend left=8pt]&
r\times t\ar[dll, bend left=12pt, crossing over]&
s\times t\ar[dl, bend right=8pt]\ar[dr, bend left=8pt]\\[-5pt]
r&&
s&&
t\ar[from=ull, bend right=12pt, crossing over]
\end{tikzcd}$$ ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{R}}$ also inherits a symmetric monoidal structure $I\coloneqq 1$ and $r_1\otimes
r_2\coloneqq r_1\times r_2$ from the cartesian monoidal structure on ${\mathcal{R}}$.
Given a regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R'}}$, mapping a relation $x {\subseteq}r \times s$ to its factorization ${\mathcal{F}}(x) {\twoheadrightarrow}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}(x) {\rightarrowtail}{\mathcal{F}}(r\times s)
\cong {\mathcal{F}}(r) \times {\mathcal{F}}(s)$ induces a (strong) symmetric monoidal po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}} \to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R'}}}}$. We refer to this po-functor as the *relations po-functor* of ${\mathcal{F}}$.
It is straightforward to check that the composition rule \[eqn.rel\_composition\] is unital and associative using the pullback stability of factorizations, and to check that ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}$ is indeed a symmetric monoidal po-functor using the fact that a regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon {\mathcal{R}} \to
{\mathcal{R'}}$ preserves pullbacks and image factorizations. Direct proofs in the literature of these two facts seem difficult to find, but see for example [@Jayewardene2000 Theorem 2.3] and [@fong2017decorated Proposition 4.1] respectively.
The relations po-category is just a repackaging of the data of the regular category: any regular category can be recovered, at least up to isomorphism, by looking at the adjunctions in its relations po-category.
\[lemma.fundamental\] Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category. Then there is an identity-on-objects isomorphism $${\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}).$$ In particular, a relation $x\colon r\tickar s$ is a left adjoint iff it is the graph $x=\pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_r,f}$ of a morphism $f\colon r\to s$ in ${\mathcal{R}}$.
This fact is well known, but since it is crucial to what follows, we provide a proof here. We shall show that there is an identity-on-objects, full, and faithful functor from ${\mathcal{R}}$ to its relations po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$, which maps a morphism $f\colon r \to s$ to its graph $\pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_r,f} {\subseteq}r \times s$. Indeed, it is straightforward to check that any pair of the form $\pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_r,f} \dashv \pair{f,{{\mathrm{id}}}_s}$ is an adjunction, and subsequently that the proposed map is functorial.
To show that it is full and faithful, we characterize the adjunctions $x \dashv
x'$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$. Suppose we have $x \stackrel{\pair{g,f}}{\rightarrowtail}r \times
s$ and $x'\stackrel{\pair{f',g'}}{\rightarrowtail}s\times r$ with unit $i\colon r{\rightarrowtail}(x{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}x')$ and counit $j\colon (x'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}x)\to s$. This gives rise to the following diagram (equations shown right): $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=small, column sep=large]
x\times_s x'\ar[rr, "\pi_s'"]\ar[ddd, "\pi_s"']&&
x'\ar[dl, "g'"']\ar[ddl, "f'"]\\&
r\ar[ul, "i"]\\&
s\\
x\ar[uur, "g"]\ar[ur, "f"']&&
x\times_r x'\ar[uuu, "\pi_r'"']\ar[ll, "\pi_r"]\ar[ul, "j"]
\end{tikzcd}
\hspace{.5in}
\parbox{1.5in}{$
i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g={{\mathrm{id}}}_r=i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g'\\
\pi_r{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f=j=\pi_r'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f'
$}$$ We shall show that $g$ and $g'$ are isomorphisms, and that $f'=g' {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g{^{-1}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f$.
We first show that $i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s$ is inverse to $g$. Since the unit already gives that $i {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g = {{\mathrm{id}}}_r$, it suffices to show that $g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s={{\mathrm{id}}}_x$. Moreover, since $\pair{g,f}\colon x\to r\times s$ is monic and $g=(g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g$, it suffices to show that $f=(g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f$. This is a diagram chase: since $g=g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g'$, we can define a morphism $q\coloneqq\pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_x,g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s'}\colon x\to x\times_r x'$, and we conclude $$f=q{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_r{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f
=q{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_r'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f'
=g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f'
=g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f.$$ Similarly, we see that $i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pi_s'$ is inverse to $g'$, and hence obtain $f'=g' {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}g{^{-1}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f$.
Note that this implies the adjunction $x \dashv x'$ is isomorphic to the adjunction $\pair{1_r,(g{^{-1}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f)} \dashv \pair{(g {^{-1}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}f),{{\mathrm{id}}}_s}$. Thus the proposed functor is full. Faithfulness amounts to the fact that the existence of a morphism $\pair{1_r,f} \to \pair{1_r,f'}$ implies $f =f'$. This proves the lemma.
\[rem.rels\_adjoint\_composites\] It follows from the proof of \[lemma.fundamental\] that $x\colon r\tickar s$ is a right adjoint iff it is the co-graph $\pair{f,{{\mathrm{id}}}_s}$ of a morphism $f\colon s\to r$. Furthermore, since any morphism $x=\pair{g,f}\colon r \tickar s$ in ${\mathscr{R}}$ can be written as $x=\pair{g,{{\mathrm{id}}}_x} {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_x,f}$, it follows that every morphism in ${\mathscr{R}}$ can be written as the composite of a right adjoint followed by a left adjoint.
The fundamental lemma says that regular categories can be recovered from their relations po-categories. Similarly, any regular functor can be recovered as the action of its relations po-functor on left adjoints. Before expressing this as a categorical equivalence in \[eqn.equiv\_regpocat\], we first make the following observation.
\[prop.relations\_2functors\] For any regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$, the relations po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}}$ is strong symmetric monoidal.
The functor ${\mathcal{F}}$ and its relations po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}$ act the same on objects, so since ${\mathcal{F}}$ is product preserving, ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}$ is strong monoidal.
Although we do not assume it below, it is a result of Carboni and Walters that every strong symmetric monoidal functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}}$ is the relations po-functor associated to a regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ [@Carboni:1987a]. Indeed, this foreshadows the rephrasing of regular structure in terms of monoidal structure, which runs through this paper.
In any case, this motivates the following definition.
\[def.regular\_pocat\] A po-category is called a [*regular po-category*]{} if it is isomorphic to the relations po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ of some regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$.
A strong symmetric monoidal po-functor between regular po-categories is called a *regular po-functor* if it is isomorphic to the relations po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}$ associated to a regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}$. We write ${{{\mathsf{RgPocat}}}}$ for the category of regular po-categories.
By the fundamental lemma (\[lemma.fundamental\]), we now have an equivalence of categories: $$\label{eqn.equiv_regpocat}
\begin{tikzcd}
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt,"{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{-}}"] \ar[r, phantom, "\cong"] &
{{{\mathsf{RgPocat}}}}. \ar[l, shift left=5pt,"{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}$$
Adjoint monoids and adjoint-lax functors {#chap.adjoint_monoids}
========================================
The poset of subobjects of an object in a regular category is always a meet-semilattice. We characterize these as precisely the adjoint monoids in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$. The seemingly new notion of adjoint monoid makes sense in any monoidal po-category (and more generally): an *adjoint monoid* is an object equipped with commutative monoid and comonoid structures such that the multiplication and unit are right adjoint to the comultiplication and counit. Every regular po-category ${\mathscr{R}}$ is isomorphic to its own po-category of adjoint monoids ${\mathscr{R}}\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{R}})$. Finally, the subobjects functor preserves adjoint monoids.
All these ideas are founded on the notion of adjoint-lax monoidal (ajax) po-functor.
Definition and motivation
-------------------------
In this section we introduce the notions of ajax functor and adjoint monoid.
Let ${\mathscr{C}}$ and ${\mathscr{D}}$ be monoidal po-categories. An [*adjoint-lax*]{} or [*ajax*]{} po-functor $F\colon {\mathscr{C}} \to {\mathscr{D}}$ is a lax symmetric monoidal po-functor for which the laxators are right adjoints.
We denote the laxators by $\rho$ and their left adjoints by $\lambda$: $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
I\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\rho}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
F(I)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\lambda}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
F(c)\otimes F(c')\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\rho_{c,c'}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
F(c\otimes c')\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\lambda_{c,c'}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}.$$
The notion of ajax functor has a dual notion of op-ajax functor: an oplax functor ${\mathscr{C}}\to{\mathscr{D}}$ for which the op-laxators are left adjoints. These two notions *do not coincide*! The laxator naturality squares are asked to strictly commute in an ajax functor, and this property only implies that their mate squares, the corresponding oplaxator naturality squares weakly commute.
Here is a obvious, but useful, consequence of the definition.
\[lemma.ajax\] Every strong monoidal functor between monoidal po-categories is ajax. The composite of ajax po-functors is ajax.
Recall that $1$ is the terminal monoidal po-category.
\[prop.adjoint\_monoids\] Let $({\mathscr{C}},I,\otimes)$ be a monoidal po-category. There is a bijection between:
1. The set of ajax functors $1\to{\mathscr{C}}$,
2. The set of commutative monoid objects $(c,\mu,\eta)$ such that $\mu$ and $\eta$ are right adjoints, and
3. The set of cocommutative comonoid objects $(c,\delta,\epsilon)$ such that $\delta$ and $\epsilon$ are left adjoints.
$(1)\Leftrightarrow(2)$:
: The set ${{{\mathsf{Lax}}}}(1,{\mathscr{C}})$ of lax symmetric monoidal functors $1\to{\mathscr{C}}$ is well-known to be in bijection with the set of commutative monoid objects $(c,\mu,\eta)$ in ${\mathscr{C}}$. Indeed, $\eta$ and unit $\mu$ come from the 0-ary and 2-ary laxators respectively: $\eta=\rho$ and $\mu=\rho_{1,1}$. Hence the added condition that $\eta$ and $\mu$ have left adjoints is precisely the ajax condition.
$(2)\Leftrightarrow(3)$:
: Suppose given an object $c\in{\mathscr{C}}$ and two adjunctions $$\label{eqn.adjmon}
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
I\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\eta}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
c\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\epsilon}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}.
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
c\otimes c\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\mu}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
c\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\delta}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ Then $\mu,\eta$ satisfy the commutative monoid laws iff $\delta,\epsilon$ satisfy the cocommutative comonoid laws.
To summarize, if $(c,\rho,\lambda)\colon 1\to{\mathscr{C}}$ is an ajax functor then the corresponding monoid and comonoid structures on $c$ are given by $$\label{eqn.monoid_comonoid_ajax}
\eta=\rho\qquad
\mu=\rho_{1,1}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\epsilon=\lambda\qquad
\delta=\lambda_{1,1}$$
motivates the following definition.
Let $({\mathscr{C}},I,\otimes)$ be a monoidal po-category. An *adjoint commutative monoid* (or simply *adjoint monoid*) in ${\mathscr{C}}$ is a commutative monoid object $(c,\mu,\eta)$ in ${\mathscr{C}}$ such that $\mu$ and $\eta$ are right adjoints.
Adjoint monoids are a slight weakening of the *internal meet semi-lattice* notion from theoretical computer science; see [@schalk1994algebras Chapter 5] and references therein.
\[prop.ajax\_pres\_adjmon\] Ajax functors send adjoint monoids to adjoint monoids.
The composite of ajax functors is ajax, so the result follows from \[prop.adjoint\_monoids\].
We give examples of adjoint monoids after recalling the proof of a well-known lemma.
\[lemma.comonoids\_unique\] Let ${\mathscr{C}}$ be a monoidal po-category. If the monoidal structure is cartesian (given by finite products in the underlying 1-category) then every object has a unique comonoid structure, and it is commutative.
Since the unit object is terminal, the maps $c\times\epsilon$ and $\epsilon\times c$ are forced to be the projections $c\times c\to c$, so $\delta$ is forced to be the diagonal.
\[prop.adjmon\_msl\] A poset $P\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is an adjoint monoid iff it is a meet-semilattice, in which case $\eta={{\mathtt{true}}}$ and $\mu=\wedge$.
By \[lemma.comonoids\_unique\], $P$ has a unique comonoid structure given by the terminal and diagonal maps $\epsilon\colon P\to 1$ and $\delta\colon P\to P\times P$. Thus $P$ is an adjoint monoid iff these maps have adjoints as in \[eqn.adjmon\], which holds iff $\eta$ is a top element and $\mu$ is a meet.
\[prop.adjmon\_reg\] Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category. Every object $r\in{\mathscr{R}}$ in its relations po-category has a unique adjoint monoid structure.
Since ${\mathcal{R}}$ is cartesian monoidal, there is a unique cocommutative comonoid structure on every object by \[lemma.comonoids\_unique\]. By the fundamental lemma (\[lemma.fundamental\]), we have an isomorphism ${\mathcal{R}}\cong{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({\mathscr{R}})$, and we are done by \[prop.adjoint\_monoids\] $(2)\Leftrightarrow(3)$.
Notions of morphism between ajax functors
-----------------------------------------
Given two ajax functors $F,F'\colon{\mathscr{C}}{\rightrightarrows}{\mathscr{D}}$, we will consider two sorts of (strong) natural transformations $\alpha\colon F\to F'$ between them, differing in terms of the strength of their *laxator naturality*. The first sort only demands that the laxator naturality squares for any $c\in{\mathscr{C}}$ be *mate squares* in ${\mathscr{D}}$: $$\label{eqn.lax_monoid_hom}
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=50, row sep=35]
F(I)\ar[r, "\alpha_I"]\ar[d, shift left=5pt, "\lambda"]&
F'(I)\ar[d, shift left=5pt, "\lambda'"]\ar[dl, phantom, "\Downarrow"]\\
I\ar[r, equal]\ar[u, shift left=5pt, "\rho"]\ar[u, phantom, "\Downarrow"]&
I\ar[u, shift left=5pt, "\rho'"]\ar[u, phantom, "\Downarrow"]
\end{tikzcd}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=50, row sep=35]
F(c\otimes c')\ar[r, "\alpha_{c\otimes c'}"]\ar[d, shift left=5pt, "\lambda_{c,c'}"]&
F'(c\otimes c')\ar[d, shift left=5pt, "\lambda'_{c,c'}"]\ar[dl, phantom, "\Downarrow"]\\
F(c)\otimes F(c')\ar[r, "\alpha_c\otimes\alpha_{c'}"']\ar[u, shift left=5pt, "\rho_{c,c'}"]\ar[u, phantom, "\Downarrow"]&
F'(c)\otimes F'(c')\ar[u, shift left=5pt, "\rho'_{c,c'}"]\ar[u, phantom, "\Downarrow"]
\end{tikzcd}$$ The meaning of each diagram in is that any (and all) of the following four equivalent conditions hold (dropping subscripts and writing $\alpha^{\otimes 2}\coloneqq(\alpha\otimes\alpha)$): $$\label{eqn.lax_mon_hom_2}
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=30]
\rho{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha\leq\rho'\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftrightarrow"]\ar[d, phantom, "\Updownarrow"]&
\rho{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\lambda'\leq I\ar[d, phantom, "\Updownarrow"]\\
\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\lambda'\leq \lambda\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftrightarrow"]&
\alpha\leq\lambda{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho'
\end{tikzcd}
{\quad\text{and}\quad}\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=30]
\rho{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha \leq \alpha^{\otimes 2}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho'\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftrightarrow"]\ar[d, phantom, "\Updownarrow"]&
\rho{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\lambda'\leq \alpha^{\otimes 2}\ar[d, phantom, "\Updownarrow"]\\
\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\lambda'\leq \lambda{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha^{\otimes 2}\ar[r, phantom, "\Leftrightarrow"]&
\alpha\leq\lambda{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha^{\otimes 2}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho'
\end{tikzcd}$$ The second sort demands further that some of these inequalities be equalities.
Let $F,F'\colon{\mathscr{C}}{\rightrightarrows}{\mathscr{D}}$ be ajax functors. A *mate morphism* between them is a natural transformation $\alpha\colon F\to F'$ with mate squares as in \[eqn.lax\_monoid\_hom\]. We say that $\alpha$ is *strong* if the monoid part of the diagram strictly commutes (for all $c,c'\in{\mathscr{C}}$): $$\label{eqn.strong_mate}
\rho{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha_I=\rho'
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\rho_{c,c'}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha_{c\otimes c'}=(\alpha_c\otimes\alpha_{c
'}){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho'_{c,c'}.$$ We denote the corresponding categories by ${{{\mathsf{Ajax}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})$ and ${{{\mathsf{Ajax}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})$ respectively.
Suppose $\alpha,\beta\colon F\to F'$ are mate morphisms (possibly strong). We write $\alpha\leq\beta$ if for all $c\in{\mathscr{C}}$ we have $\alpha_c\leq\beta_c$ in the poset ${\mathscr{C}}(F(c),F'(c))$. We denote the corresponding po-categories as $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}}).$$
Clearly, the po-category structure of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})$ is inherited from ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Pocat}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Pocat}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})$; we record this fact in the following obvious lemma.
The map ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Pocat}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Pocat}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}},{\mathscr{D}})$ is locally fully faithful.
Let ${\mathscr{C}}$ be a monoidal po-category. Define po-categories $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}})\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}(1,{\mathscr{C}})
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({\mathscr{C}})\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Ajax}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Ajax}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}(1,{\mathscr{C}}),$$ and refer to them as the po-category of *adjoint monoids* and the po-category of *adjoint monoids and strong maps* respectively.
Let ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\vert_{{\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}}$ denote the full sub-po-category of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ spanned by the meet-semilattices, and let ${\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}$ denote the po-category of meet-semilattices and meet-preserving maps.
\[prop.adjmon\_poset\] There are isomorphisms of po-categories $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\vert_{{\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\cong{\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}.$$
By \[prop.adjmon\_msl,eqn.monoid\_comonoid\_ajax\] we have the desired isomorphisms on objects, and $\rho=\eta={{\mathtt{true}}}$ and $\rho_{1,1}=\mu=\wedge$. Since every poset map $\alpha\colon P\to P'$ is a comonoid homomorphism, we have mate diagrams as in \[eqn.lax\_monoid\_hom\], giving ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\vert_{{\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}}$.
To see the isomorphism ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\cong{\wedge{\textnormal{-}}{{\mathsf{SL}}}}$, note that by , the equations in precisely say $\alpha({{\mathtt{true}}})={{\mathtt{true}}}$ and $\alpha(\wedge)=\wedge(\alpha,\alpha)$.
\[prop.adjmon\_regular\] Let ${\mathscr{R}}$ be a regular po-category. There are isomorphisms $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{R}})\cong{\mathscr{R}}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({\mathscr{R}})\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{RAdj}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{RAdj}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{R}}).$$
In \[prop.adjmon\_reg\] we gave an isomorphism $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}}\cong\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{R}})$ coming from the fact that every object $r\in{\mathcal{R}}={{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({\mathscr{R}})$ has a unique comonoid structure. Suppose $r{\leftarrow}\alpha\to r'$ is a morphism in ${\mathscr{R}}$. Then there exist unique maps $e,d$ making following diagrams commute: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=small]
r&
\alpha\ar[l, "f"']\ar[r, "f'"]\ar[dd, dotted, "e" description]&
r'\\
r\ar[u, equal]\ar[d]&&
r'\ar[u, equal]\ar[d]\\
1&
1\ar[l, equal]\ar[r, equal]&
1
\end{tikzcd}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=small]
r&
\alpha\ar[l, "f"']\ar[r, "f'"]\ar[dd, dotted, "d" description]&
r'\\
r\ar[u, equal]\ar[d]&&
r'\ar[u, equal]\ar[d]\\
r\times r&
\alpha\times \alpha\ar[l]\ar[r]&
r'\times r'
\end{tikzcd}$$ Thus there is an isomorphism between the posets ${\mathscr{R}}(r,r')$ and ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}(r,r')$.
Unwinding the definition of strong morphisms between the ajax maps $r,r'\colon 1\to{\mathscr{R}}$ the equation $\eta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha=\eta$ implies that the map $\operatorname{im}(f')\to r'$ is an iso, i.e. $f'$ is a regular epi; similarly the equation $\mu{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\alpha=(\alpha\otimes\alpha){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\mu$ implies that the map $\alpha\to \alpha\times_{r'}\alpha$ is iso, i.e. $f'$ is a mono. In other words, $\alpha$ is strong iff $f'$ is iso, and this holds iff $\alpha$ is a right adjoint (see \[rem.rels\_adjoint\_composites\]).
In passing we note the following connection to hypergraph categories, which are well known for their own graphical language, and may help some readers contextualize our main result. This is a corollary of [@fong2017decorated Theorem 3.1].
Given a regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the monoidal category underlying ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ has a hypergraph structure, where the symmetric monoidal structure is given by the product in ${\mathcal{R}}$, and where for any object $x$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ we have $\mu_x$ and $\delta_x$ given by the diagonal subobject $x{\subseteq}x \times x
\times x$, and $\eta_x$ and $\epsilon_x$ given by the maximal subobject $x{\subseteq}x$.
Loosely speaking, one might think of a regular po-category (\[def.regular\_pocat\]) as a poset-enriched hypergraph category in which the hom-posets are meet-semilattices.
The subobjects-functor is ajax
------------------------------
Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category and recall the subobjects functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})$ from \[prop.sub\_ladj\]. It extends to a po-functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\colon{\mathscr{R}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, where ${\mathscr{R}}={{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ is the relations po-category. To be explicit, write a relation $A{\subseteq}r\times r'$ as a span $r{\xleftarrow{f}} A{\xrightarrow{f'}} r'$. Then the map ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(A)\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r)\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(r')$ applied to a subobject $\varphi{\subseteq}r$ is given pulling back and then taking the image: $$\begin{tikzcd}
\varphi\ar[d, >->]&
\cdot\ar[d, >->]\ar[l]\ar[r, ->>]&
\cdot\ar[d, >->]\\
r\ar[ur, phantom, very near end, "\llcorner"]&
A\ar[l]\ar[r]&
r'
\end{tikzcd}$$ That is, ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(A)={{f}_!}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{g^*}$. This po-functor is representable: ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(-)={\mathscr{R}}(I,-)$, where $I$ is the terminal object in ${\mathcal{R}}$. We now show this po-functor is ajax.
\[thm.sub\_is\_ajax\] The po-functor $
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}\colon {\mathscr{R}} \longrightarrow {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is ajax for any regular po-category ${\mathscr{R}}$.
The functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(-)={\mathscr{R}}(I,-)$ has a canonical lax monoidal structure since $I\otimes I\cong I$. We need to show the laxators $\otimes$ and ${{\mathrm{id}}}_I$ have left adjoints in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$. The first is easy: ${{\mathrm{id}}}_I$ is the top element in ${\mathscr{R}}(I,I)$ and thus a right adjoint since there is a unique map ${\mathscr{R}}(I,I)\to 1$.
Now suppose given $r_1,r_2\in{\mathscr{R}}$, and consider the morphisms $\pi_i\colon r_1\otimes r_2\to r_i$ and $\delta\colon r\to r\otimes r$ corresponding to the $i$th projection and the diagonal in ${\mathcal{R}}$. Composition with the $\pi_i$ induces a monotone map $\lambda_{r_1,r_2}\colon{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_1\otimes r_2)\to{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_1)\times{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_2)$, natural in $r_1,r_2$. It remains to show that each $\lambda_{r_1,r_2}$ is indeed a left adjoint, $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_1\otimes r_2)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\lambda_{r_1, r_2}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_1)\times{\mathscr{R}}(I, r_2)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\otimes}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}.$$ For the unit, given $g\colon I\to r_1\otimes r_2$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
g
&=g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\delta_{r_1\otimes r_2}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}((r_1\otimes r_2)\otimes\epsilon_{r_1\otimes r_2})\\
&=g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\delta_{r_1\otimes r_2}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}((r_1\otimes\epsilon_{r_2})\otimes(\epsilon_{r_1}\otimes r_2))\\
&\leq \delta_I{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(g\otimes g){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}((r_1\otimes\epsilon_{r_2}))\otimes(\epsilon_{r_1}\otimes r_2)\\
&=(g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(r_1\otimes\epsilon_{r_2}))\otimes(g{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(\epsilon_{r_1}\otimes r_2)).\end{aligned}$$ For the counit, given $f_1\colon I\to r_1$ and $f_2\colon I\to r_2$, it suffices to show that $(f_1\otimes f_2){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(r_1\otimes \epsilon_{r_2})\leq f_1$, since the other projection is similar. And this holds because $$(f_1\otimes f_2){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(r_1\otimes \epsilon_{r_2})
=f_1\otimes (f_2{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\epsilon_{r_2})
\leq f_1\otimes \epsilon_I=f_1.
\qedhere$$
\[cor.meetsl\] The po-functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}\colon{\mathscr{R}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ sends each object $r\in{\mathscr{R}}$ to a meet-semilattice.
This follows from the fact that ajax functors send adjoint monoids to adjoint monoids; see \[thm.sub\_is\_ajax,prop.ajax\_pres\_adjmon,prop.adjmon\_poset,prop.adjmon\_regular\].
\[rem.meet\_pres\] In fact, we can get a bit more from \[prop.adjmon\_poset,prop.adjmon\_regular\]. If $x\colon r\tickar r'$ is an arbitrary map in ${\mathscr{R}}$ then the monotone map ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(x)\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{R}}(r)\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}(r')$ is *not necessarily meet-preserving*. However, if $x$ is the image of a morphism in ${\mathcal{R}}{^\mathrm{op}}={{{\mathsf{RAdj}}}}({\mathscr{R}})$ then ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(x)$ is meet-preserving. That is, ${\mathcal{R}}{^\mathrm{op}}$ is isomorphic to the underlying 1-category of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}^{{\mathtt{str}}}({\mathscr{R}})$.
\[rem.tangible\] In \[prop.tangible\] we discussed four properties of the subobjects functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})$: a meet-semilattice on each object, Beck-Chevalley for pullbacks, Beck-Chevalley for pushouts of effective epimorphisms, and Frobenius reciprocity. These same four properties in fact hold for any ajax po-functor $F\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$. Moreover, this construction is invertible: given any functor ${\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})$, there is an induced ajax po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, and the two constructions are mutually inverse $${{{\mathsf{Ajax}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}},{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\cong\{S\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\mid {\textnormal{ four properties in \ref{prop.tangible}}}\}.$$ We do not need this result for our work, so we omit the details. However, it is interesting to see these four well-known—though slightly mysterious—properties fall out of the more elementary definition of adjoint-lax functors to ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$.
Free regular categories and regular calculi {#chap.free_reg}
===========================================
We now construct the free regular category ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$—as well as the free regular po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$—on a set ${\mathrm{T}}$. This allows us to define, in \[sec.reg\_calc\], a *regular calculus* to be an ajax po-functor ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$. Eventually, in \[thm.main\], we will see that ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ is essentially a reflective subcategory of the category ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ of regular calculi, in the sense that there is an adjunction ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}{\leftrightarrows}{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ such that for any regular category the counit map is an equivalence of categories. Towards that end, we conclude this section in \[prop.rels\] by defining the right adjoint part, ${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$.
The free regular category on a set {#sec.frc}
----------------------------------
We will propose a graphical calculus based on regular categories ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ free on a set ${\mathrm{T}}$. We define ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ in \[def.free\_reg\] and show that it is free in \[thm.fr\_is\_free\].
Write ${\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}})$ for the poset of finite subsets of ${\mathrm{T}}$; this, or equally its opposite category ${\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}}){^\mathrm{op}}$, is a free $\wedge$-semilattice on ${\mathrm{T}}$. Write also ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$ for the category of finite sets and functions. Note that ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$ is the free category with finite limits on one object. The free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$ arises when these two structures interact.
Note that for any ${\mathrm{T}}$ there is an inclusion of categories $\operatorname{inc}\colon{\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}})\to{{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$.
\[def.free\_reg\] Define ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\coloneqq({\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}}){^\mathrm{op}}\downarrow{{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}})$ to be the comma category $$\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=30pt, row sep=5pt]
&{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\ar[dr, "{{\mathrm{Vars}}}"]\ar[dl, "{{\mathrm{Supp}}}"']\\
{\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}}){^\mathrm{op}}\ar[dr, "\operatorname{inc}"']\ar[rr, phantom, "\xRightarrow{\ {{\mathrm{Tp}}}\ }"]&&
{{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}\ar[dl, "{{\mathrm{id}}}"]\\
&{{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}\end{tikzcd}$$ for any set ${\mathrm{T}}$. We refer to objects $\Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ as *contexts*.
We can unpack a context $\Gamma$ into a quasi-traditional form, e.g. as $$\Gamma\qquad=\qquad x_1:\tau_1,\ldots,x_n:\tau_n\mid\tau_1',\ldots \tau_m'$$ which has a finite set of *variables*, ${{\mathrm{Vars}}}(\Gamma)=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$, whose *support* set is ${{\mathrm{Supp}}}(\Gamma)=\{\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_n,\tau_1'\ldots,\tau_m'\}$, and which has the *typing* function ${{\mathrm{Tp}}}(x_i)=\tau_i$. The notion of support does not typically have a place in traditional logical contexts, but we include it because ${{\mathrm{Supp}}}(\Gamma)$ has a definite place in objects of the free regular category.
Working in the skeleton of ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$, we can assume that each cardinality has a unique set of variables, e.g. ${\underline{n}}=\{1,\ldots,n\}$. Here is an equivalent but more concrete description of the free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$: $$\label{eqn.fr_Lambda_explicit}
\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\coloneqq&
\big\{(n, S, \tau)\mid n\in{\mathbb{N}}, S{\subseteq}{\mathrm{T}}{\textnormal{ finite}}, \tau\colon{\underline{n}}\to S\big\}\\
{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\big(\Gamma,\Gamma'\big)\coloneqq&
\left\{f\colon {\underline{n}}' \to {\underline{n}} \, \middle|
\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=0]
{\underline{n}}\ar[r, "\tau"]&
S\ar[dr, phantom, sloped, "{\subseteq}"]\\
&&[-13pt]
{\mathrm{T}}\\
{\underline{n}}'\ar[r, "\tau'"']\ar[uu, "f"]&
S'\ar[uu, phantom, sloped, "{\subseteq}"]\ar[ur, phantom, sloped, "{\subseteq}"]
\end{tikzcd}
\right\}
\end{aligned}$$ Given a map $f\colon \Gamma\to\Gamma'$, we denote the corresponding function as ${\underline{f}}\colon{\underline{n}}'\to{\underline{n}}$. Say that a context $\Gamma=(n, S, \tau)$:
- is a *unary context* if it is of the form $(1,\{s\},!)$, i.e. if it has arity $n=1$ and full support $\abs{S}=1$; we denote it simply as $\unary{s}$.
- is a *unary support context* if it is of the form $(0,\{s\},!)$; i.e. if it has $n=0$ and $\abs{S}=1$; we abuse notation to denote this ${{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)$.
Suppose ${\mathrm{T}}=\{s\}$ is unary. When $n=0$, the map $\tau$ is unique, and we either have $S=\varnothing$ or $S=\{s\}$. Thus we recover the description from \[eqn.free\_reg\], though in the present terms it looks like this: $$\begin{tikzcd}
(0,\varnothing)&
(0,\{s\})\ar[l, >->]&
(1,\{s\})\ar[l, ->>]\ar[r]&
(2,\{s\})\ar[l, shift left=5pt]\ar[l, shift right=5pt]&
\cdots
\end{tikzcd}$$
For any set ${\mathrm{T}}$, the poset of subobjects of $0$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is the free meet-semilattice on ${\mathrm{T}}$, i.e. the finite powerset ${\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}})$. This will follow from \[cor.descriptions\].
In \[thm.fr\_is\_free\] we will show that ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is indeed the free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$. The following is straightforward.
\[lemma.comma\_limits\] Suppose ${\mathcal{C}}$, ${\mathcal{D}}$, and ${\mathcal{E}}$ have $I$-shaped limits, for some small category $I$, and suppose that $f\colon{\mathcal{C}}\to{\mathcal{E}}$ and $g\colon{\mathcal{D}}\to{\mathcal{E}}$ preserve $I$-shaped limits. Then the comma category ${\mathcal{B}}\coloneqq({\mathcal{C}}\downarrow{\mathcal{D}})$ has $I$-shaped limits, and they are preserved and reflected by the projection $(\pi_1,\pi_2)\colon{\mathcal{B}}\to{\mathcal{C}}\times{\mathcal{D}}$.
\[prop.comma\_regular\] Let ${\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{T}}{\leftarrow}{\mathcal{S}}$ be regular functors. Then the comma category ${\mathcal{B}}\coloneqq({\mathcal{R}}\downarrow{\mathcal{S}})$ is regular, and the projection ${\mathcal{B}}\to{\mathcal{R}}\times{\mathcal{S}}$ preserves and reflects finite limits and regular epimorphisms. In particular, ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is regular for any ${\mathrm{T}}$.
It is well-known that ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$ is regular, and the finite powerset ${\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}})$ is regular because it has finite meets and, because it is a poset, regular epis are equalities. Hence the second statement follows from the first. Since the opposite of a comma category is the comma category of the opposites of its defining data, \[lemma.comma\_limits\] shows that ${\mathcal{B}}$ has finite limits and coequalizers of kernel pairs, and that regular epis are stable under pullback.
\[cor.descriptions\] It will be useful to be have the following explicit computations in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$.
terminal:
: $0{\xrightarrow{!}}\varnothing{\subseteq}{\mathrm{T}}$ is terminal. We denote it $0$.
product:
: The product of $\Gamma=(n, S, \tau)$ and $\Gamma'=(n',
S', \tau')$ is $(n+n', S\cup S',\copair{\tau,\tau'})$. We denote it $\Gamma\oplus\Gamma'$.
pullback:
: The pullback of a diagram $(n_1, S_1, \tau_1)\to (n, S, \tau){\leftarrow}(n_2, S_2, \tau_2)$ is obtained as a pushout (and union) in ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$: $$\begin{tikzcd}[sep=small]
{\underline{n}}\ar[rr]\ar[rd]\ar[dd]&&
{\underline{n}}_2\ar[rd]\ar[dd]\\&
S\ar[rr, crossing over]&&
S_2\ar[dd]\\
{\underline{n}}_1\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&&
{\underline{n}}_1\sqcup_{{\underline{n}}}{\underline{n}}_2\ar[dr]\\&
S_1\ar[from=uu, crossing over]\ar[rr]&&
S_1\cup S_2\ar[r, phantom, "{\subseteq}"]&[-10pt]{\mathrm{T}}\end{tikzcd}$$
monos:
: A map $f\colon(n_1, S_1, \tau_1)\to (n_2, S_2, \tau_2)$ is monic iff the function ${\underline{f}}\colon{\underline{n}}_2\to{\underline{n}}_1$ is surjective.
regular epis:
: A map $f\colon (n_1, S_1, \tau_1)\to (n_2, S_2,
\tau_2)$ is regular epic iff both: the corresponding function ${\underline{f}}\colon {\underline{n}}_2\to {\underline{n}}_1$ is injective and $S_2=S_1$.
As mentioned in \[cor.descriptions\], we denote the product of $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ by $\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_2$. This is reminiscent of the notation for products in an abelian category. However, it is not quite analogous: in an abelian category the product $V\oplus W$ is a biproduct—i.e. also a coproduct—and this is not the case in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$. We use the $\oplus$ notation to remind us that $$(n,S,\tau)\oplus(n',S',\tau')\cong(n+n',S\cup S', \copair{\tau,\tau'}).$$
Note that one should think of the support $S={{\mathrm{Supp}}}(\Gamma)$ of a context $\Gamma$ as a kind of constraint, because the larger $S$ is, the smaller $\Gamma$ is. Indeed, for any $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and context $\tau\colon{\underline{n}}\to S$, if one composes with an inclusion $S{\subseteq}S'{\subseteq}{\mathrm{T}}$ on the level of support, the result is a monic map in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ *going the other way*, $$({\underline{n}}{\xrightarrow{\tau}} S{\subseteq}S'){\rightarrowtail}({\underline{n}}{\xrightarrow{\tau}} S).$$
Recall from \[def.support\] that the support of an object in a regular category is the image of its unique map to the terminal object.
\[cor.support\_as\_of\_unary\] Every unary support context is the support of a unary context.
Given any unary support context ${{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)$, the explicit descriptions in \[cor.descriptions\] make it easy to check that $\unary{s} {\twoheadrightarrow}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s){\rightarrowtail}0$ is the image factorization of the unique map $\unary{s} \to
0$.
\[cor.factor\_unary\_support\] Every object $\Gamma=(n, S, \tau)\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ can be written as the product of $n$-many unary contexts and $\abs{S}$-many unary support contexts, and morphisms in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ correspond to projections and diagonals.
It follows directly from \[cor.descriptions\] that $\Gamma=\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}}\unary{\tau(i)}\times\prod_{s\in
S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s).$ In particular, it will be useful to note the idempotence of support contexts: $$\label{eqn.idem_support}
{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)\times{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)={{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s).$$ If $f\colon\Gamma\to\Gamma'$ is a morphism as in \[eqn.fr\_Lambda\_explicit\], then the corresponding map $$\begin{tikzcd}
\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}}\unary{\tau(i)}\times\prod_{s\in S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)\ar[d,"f"]\\
\prod_{i'\in{\underline{n}}'}\unary{\tau'(i')}\times\prod_{s'\in S'}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s')
\end{tikzcd}$$ acts coordinatewise according to ${\underline{f}}\colon{\underline{n}}'\to{\underline{n}}$ and $S'{\subseteq}S$.
The following theorem establishes the adjunction from \[eqn.fr\_ob\_adj\].
\[thm.fr\_is\_free\] The category ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is the free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$, i.e. there is an adjunction $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=40pt]
{{{\mathsf{Set}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{-}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(-)}
}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}.\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$
We denote the unit component for a set ${\mathrm{T}}$ by $\unary{-}\colon {\mathrm{T}}\to\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$; it is given by unary contexts, $\unary{t}=(1,\{t\},!)$. We denote the counit component ${\classify{-}}\colon{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}\to{\mathcal{R}}$ for a regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$; it is roughly-speaking given by products and supports in ${\mathcal{R}}$ (see \[def.support\]). More precisely, given a context $\Gamma=(n,S,\tau)\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}$, we put $${\classify{\Gamma}}\coloneqq
\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}}\tau(i)
\times
\prod_{s\in S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s),$$ By the universal property of products, a morphism $f\colon\Gamma\to\Gamma'$, i.e. a function ${\underline{f}}\colon {\underline{n}}'\to {\underline{n}}$ as in \[eqn.fr\_Lambda\_explicit\] naturally induces a map ${\classify{f}}\colon{\classify{\Gamma}}\to{\classify{\Gamma'}}$, so ${\classify{-}}$ is a functor. We need to check that it is regular and for this we use \[cor.descriptions\].
For preservation of finite limits, first observe that ${\classify{-}}$ preserves the terminal object because the empty product in ${\mathcal{R}}$ is terminal. For pullbacks we need to check that for every pushout diagram as to the left, the diagram to the right is a pullback: $$\begin{tikzcd}
{\underline{n}}\ar[r]\ar[d]\ar[dr, phantom, very near end, "\ulcorner"]&
{\underline{n}}_2\ar[d]
&[-15pt]&[20pt]
\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}}\unary{\tau'(i)} \ar[dr, phantom, very near end, "\ulcorner"]&
\prod_{i_2\in{\underline{n}}_2}\unary{\tau'(i_2)} \ar[l]\\
{\underline{n}}_1\ar[r]&
{\underline{n}}'\ar[r, "\tau'"]
&{\mathrm{T}}&
\prod_{i_1\in{\underline{n}}_1}\unary{\tau'(i_1)} \ar[u]&
\prod_{i'\in{\underline{n}}'}\unary{\tau'(i')}\ar[l]\ar[u]
\end{tikzcd}$$ where ${\underline{n'}}\cong{\underline{n}}_1\sqcup_{{\underline{n}}}{\underline{n}}_2$ and $\tau'\colon{\underline{n}}'\to{\mathrm{T}}$ is the induced map. This follows from the well-known fact that ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$ is the free finite-colimit completion of a singleton [@MacLane.Moerdijk:1992a], and fact that the slice category ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}_{/{\mathrm{T}}}$ is the free finite-colimit completion of the set ${\mathrm{T}}$.
Finally, suppose $f\colon (n_1, S_1, \tau_1)\to (n_2, S_2, \tau_2)$ is a regular epi in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$; i.e. the corresponding function ${\underline{f}}\colon{\underline{n}}_2 \to {\underline{n}}_1$ is monic and $S_1=S_2$. Letting $n'\coloneqq n_1-n_2$, we use \[cor.factor\_unary\_support,eqn.idem\_support\] to write ${\classify{f}}$ as follows: $$\begin{tikzcd}
\displaystyle \prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}'}\unary{\tau_1(i)}\times
\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}_2}\unary{\tau_2(i)}\times
\prod_{s\in S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s)\ar[d, "{{\classify{f}}}"]
\\
\displaystyle \prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}'}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(\tau_1(i))\times
\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}_2}\unary{\tau_2(i)}\times
\prod_{s\in S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s).{\color{white}Sup}
\end{tikzcd}$$ Since for each $i\in{\underline{n}}'$ the map $\tau_1(i)\to{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(\tau_1(i))$ is a regular epi and regular epis are closed under finite products in a regular category, this shows that ${\classify{f}}$ is again a regular epi. Hence ${\classify{-}}$ is a regular functor. The triangle identities are straightforward: the first is that for any $r\in\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}$, the product of a unary context $\unary{r}$ is just $r$. The second follows from \[cor.factor\_unary\_support\].
Given a function $f\colon{\mathrm{T}}\to{\mathrm{T}}'$, we can use \[thm.fr\_is\_free\] and the idempotence of support contexts to see that the induced regular functor ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{f}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(f)}
}\colon{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}\to{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}'}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}}')}
}$ sends $\Gamma=({\underline{n}}{\xrightarrow{\tau}}S{\subseteq}{\mathrm{T}})$ to the composite $${
\ifthenelse{\equal{f}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(f)}
}(\Gamma)=({\underline{n}}{\xrightarrow{\tau}}S\stackrel{f\vert_S}{\twoheadrightarrow}f(S){\subseteq}{\mathrm{T}}'),$$ where $S{\twoheadrightarrow}f(S){\rightarrowtail}{\mathrm{T}}'$ is the image factorization of $f$ restricted to $S$.
The free finite limit category on a single generator is ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$, and there the unique map ${\underline{n}}\to \varnothing$ is a regular epimorphism for every object ${\underline{n}}$. Consequently, ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$ has another universal property: it is the free regular category *in which every object is inhabited*. Of course the same holds for any set ${\mathrm{T}}$: the free finite limit category is also the free “fully inhabited” regular category. It is equivalent to the result of inverting the map $(\varnothing,S,!)\to(\varnothing,\varnothing,!)$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ for every $S\in{\mathbb{P}_f}({\mathrm{T}})$.
Because $({{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{_{/T}}){^\mathrm{op}}$ is very similar to—but far more familiar than—${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$, it can be useful for intuition to replace ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ with ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}{^\mathrm{op}}$ throughout this story; the only cost is the assumption of inhabitedness, which is a common assumption in classical logic.
For any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the counit map of the adjunction in \[thm.free\_reg\_bicat\] gives a regular functor that we have been denoting $$\label{eqn.counit_reg_cat}
{\classify{-}}\colon{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}{\longrightarrow}{\mathcal{R}}.$$ It sends a context $\Gamma=(n,S,\tau)$ to the product $$\label{eqn.Prod}
{\classify{\Gamma}}\coloneqq\prod_{i\in{\underline{n}}}\unary{\tau(i)}\times\prod_{s\in
S}{{\mathrm{Supp}}}(s).$$
### The free regular po-category on a set
Since ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is a regular category, we may construct its po-category of relations $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}.$$ It should be no surprise that these are the free regular po-categories. Free regular po-categories will form the foundation of our graphical calculus for regular logic; we give an explicit description in \[chap.graphical\_reglog\].
\[thm.free\_reg\_bicat\] The po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\coloneqq {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}$ is the free regular po-category on the set ${\mathrm{T}}$. That is, there is an adjunction $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=40pt]
{{{\mathsf{Set}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(-)}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgPocat}}}}.\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$
This is immediate from \[thm.fr\_is\_free\], which says that ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ is the free regular category on ${\mathrm{T}}$, and the fact that the category of regular po-categories is the essential image of ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ under the po-category of relations construction, \[def.regular\_pocat\].
For any regular po-category ${\mathscr{R}}$, the counit map of the adjunction in \[thm.free\_reg\_bicat\] gives a morphism of regular po-categories that we again denote $$\label{eqn.counit_reg_bicat}
{\classify{-}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}})}{\longrightarrow}{\mathscr{R}}.$$ It is a strong monoidal functor, basically because the functor in \[eqn.counit\_reg\_cat\] in particular preserves finite products.
Regular calculi {#sec.reg_calc}
---------------
In this section we introduce the notion of a regular calculus. This is a new category-theoretic way to look at the kinds of logical moves—and the relationships between them—found in regular logic.
### Definition of regular calculi
The following was given as \[def.reg\_sketch\], but we repeat it here for convenience. Recall from \[thm.free\_reg\_bicat\] that ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}$ is the free regular po-category on ${\mathrm{T}}$.
A *regular calculus* is a pair $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$ where ${\mathrm{T}}$ is a set and ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is an ajax po-functor. For any object $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$, we denote the order in the poset ${P}(\Gamma)$ using the $\vdash_\Gamma$ or $\vdash$ symbol (rather than $\leq$).
A *morphism* $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\to({\mathrm{T}}',{P}')$ of regular calculi is a pair $(F,F^\sharp)$ where $F\colon{\mathrm{T}}\to{\mathrm{T}}'$ is a function and $F^\sharp$ is a monoidal natural transformation $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=0pt]
{\mathrm{T}}\ar[dd, "F"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\ar[dd, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(F)}}"']\ar[dr, bend left=15pt, "{P}", ""' name=T]\\
&&{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\\
{\mathrm{T}}'&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}}')}\ar[ur, bend right=15pt, "{P}'"', "" name=T']
\ar[from = T, to = T'-|T, twocell, "F^\sharp"']
\end{tikzcd}$$ that is strict in every respect: all the required coherence diagrams of posets commute on the nose. We denote the category of regular calculi by ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$.
### Adjoint notation (${{f}_!}$ and ${f^*}$) in regular calculi
It will be convenient to define notation mimicking that in \[eqn.subobject\_adj\] for ${P}$’s action on adjoints in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$. Given an ajax po-functor ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, we can take adjoints and use the fundamental lemma (\[lemma.fundamental\]) to obtain the diagram below: $$\begin{tikzcd}
{\mathcal{R}}\ar[r, "\cong"']\ar[d, equal]\ar[rr, bend left=15pt, "f\mapsto {{f}_!}"]&
{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}})\ar[r, "{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({P})"']\ar[d, "\cong"]&[15pt]
{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}})\ar[d, "\cong"]\\
{\mathcal{R}}\ar[r, "\cong"]\ar[rr, bend right=15pt, "f\mapsto{f^*}"']&
{{{\mathsf{RAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}){^\mathrm{op}}\ar[r, "{{{\mathsf{RAdj}}}}({P}){^\mathrm{op}}"]&
{{{\mathsf{RAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}){^\mathrm{op}}\end{tikzcd}$$ That is, for any $f\colon r\to r'$ in ${\mathcal{R}}$ we have an adjunction between posets: $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{P}(r)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{f}_!}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{P}(r').\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{f^*}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$
In particular, since ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ has finite products (denoted using $0$ and $\oplus$), we will speak of projection maps $\pi_i\colon (\Gamma_1\oplus \Gamma_2)\to \Gamma_i$, for $i=1,2$, diagonal maps $\delta_r\colon r \to r \oplus r$, and the unique map $\epsilon_r\colon r \to 0$. Each determines an adjunction as above, e.g. $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{P}(r_1\times r_2)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{(\pi_i)}_!}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{P}(r_i),\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{(\pi_i)^*}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}
\qquad
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{P}(r)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{(\delta_r)}_!}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{P}(r\times r),\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{(\delta_r)^*}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}
\qquad
{\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{P}(r)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{(\epsilon_r)}_!}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{P}(0).\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{(\epsilon_r)^*}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$
### Regular calculi send objects to meet-semilattices
If ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is a regular calculus, i.e. an ajax po-functor, then by \[cor.meetsl\] the poset ${P}(\Gamma)$ is a meet-semilattice for each object $\Gamma\in{\mathscr{R}}$. Its top element and meet are given by the composites of right adjoints shown here: $$\label{eq.def_true_meet}
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=25pt]
1\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "\rho"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]&
{P}(0)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "!"]\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\epsilon_\Gamma^*}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]&
{P}(\Gamma)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{\epsilon_\Gamma}_!}"]
\end{tikzcd}
\:\quad \mbox{and}\quad\:
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=25pt]
{P}(\Gamma)\times {P}(\Gamma)\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "\rho_{\Gamma,\Gamma}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]&
{P}(\Gamma\oplus\Gamma)\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "\lambda_{\Gamma,\Gamma}"]\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{\delta_\Gamma^*}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]&
{P}(\Gamma).\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{\delta_\Gamma}_!}"]
\end{tikzcd}$$
The predicates functor ${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to {{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category and let ${\mathscr{R}}\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ denote its relations po-category; note that $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}=\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}}$. We have a counit map ${\classify{-}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}})}\to{\mathscr{R}}$ from \[eqn.counit\_reg\_bicat\], and it is a strong monoidal functor. We can compose it with the “subobjects” functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{R}}\coloneqq{\mathscr{R}}(I,-)\colon{\mathscr{R}}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$. The result is a po-functor $$\label{eqn.rels_on_objects}
{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathscr{R}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$$ which assigns to each context $\Gamma$ the poset of [*predicates*]{} in $\Gamma$. By \[lemma.ajax,thm.sub\_is\_ajax\], the po-functor ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}$, is ajax, so $(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}})$ is a regular calculus.
\[prop.rels\] The mapping from \[eqn.rels\_on\_objects\] extends to a faithful functor $${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}.$$
Given an object ${\mathcal{R}}$ of ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$—that is, given a regular category—we define ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})\coloneqq(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}})$. As mentioned above, ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}$ is ajax, so ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})$ is a regular calculus. We need to say how ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ behaves on morphisms. A regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ induces a function $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{F}}\colon\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}\to\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}'$ and hence a morphism ${\overline{{\mathcal{F}}}}\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{F}})}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}')}$. We need to construct a (strict) monoidal natural transformation ${\mathcal{F}}^\sharp\colon{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}}{\longrightarrow}({\overline{{\mathcal{F}}}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}{\classify{-}})$.
Let $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}$ be a context. The left-hand square in the following diagram commutes by the naturality of the counit ${\classify{-}}$, and we have a map ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}(I,-)\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}(I,-){\longrightarrow}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}}(I,-)$ because ${\mathcal{F}}(I)=I$. We define ${\mathcal{F}}^\sharp$ to be the composite 2-cell, which we denote ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{F}}{\classify{-}}$: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=5pt]
\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}\ar[dd, "\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{F}}"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
\ar[dd, "{{\overline{{\mathcal{F}}}}}"']\ar[r, "{\classify{-}}"]&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}\ar[dd, "{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}"']\ar[dr, bend left=15pt, pos=.25, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}(I,-)}", ""' name=T]\\
&&&[35pt]{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\\
\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}'&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}')}\ar[r, "{\classify{-}}"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}}\ar[ur, bend right=15pt, pos=.25, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}'}}(I,-)}"', "" name=T']
\ar[from=T, to=T'-|T, twocell, "{{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}}(I,-)}"]
\end{tikzcd}$$ Thus we define ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ on morphisms by ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{F}})=(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{F}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{F}}{\classify{-}})$; it is easy to check that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ preserves identities and compositions. It remains to check that it is faithful, so let ${\mathcal{F}},{\mathcal{G}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ be regular functors and suppose ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{F}})={{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{G}})$. There is agreement on objects $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{F}}=\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{G}}$, so let $f\colon r_1\to r_2$ be a morphism in ${\mathcal{R}}$ and consider the its graph $\hat{f}\coloneqq \pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_r,f}{\subseteq}r_1\times r_2$. Write $(r_1,r_2) \coloneqq
(2,\{r_1,r_2\},\cong) \in {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. From the fact that ${{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{\mathcal{F}}{\classify{r_1, r_2}}(\hat{f})={{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{G}}}{\classify{r_1,r_2}}(\hat{f})$ it follows that ${\mathcal{F}}(f)={\mathcal{G}}(f)$, completing the proof.
In \[cor.rels\_full\], we will show that in fact ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ is also full.
The goal for the rest of this paper is to construct a left adjoint to ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ and prove the essential reflection. Our proof will rely on some properties of regular calculi, in particular that they can be incarnated as a sort of *graphical calculus* for regular logic reasoning.
Graphical regular logic {#chap.graphical_reglog}
=======================
A key advantage of the regular calculus perspective on regular categories and regular logic is that it suggests a graphical notation for relations in regular categories, as well as how they behave under base-change and co-base-change. This is the promised graphical regular logic.
In this section we develop this graphical formalism, first by giving a graphical description of the free regular po-category on a set, and then by defining the notion of graphical term, showing how these represent elements of posets, and explaining how to reason with them. In subsequent sections, we’ll use this graphical regular logic to prove the main theorem.
Depicting free regular po-categories ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the po-categories ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ form the foundation of our diagrammatic language for regular logic, we begin our exploration of graphical regular logic by giving an explicit description of the objects, morphisms, 2-cells, and composition in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ in terms of wiring diagrams.
By definition, an object of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ is simply a context $\Gamma=({\underline{n}}
{\xrightarrow{\tau}} S \subseteq {\mathrm{T}})$ of ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$. We represent a context graphically by a circle with $n$ ports around the exterior, with $i$th port annotated by the value $\tau(i)$, and with a white dot at the base annotated by the remaining elements of the support $S \setminus \operatorname{im}\tau$.[^2] $$\label{eqn.shell_pic}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack,minimum size = 3ex] (rho) {};
\draw (rho.180) to[pos=1] node[left] (w) {$\tau(1)$} +(180:2pt);
\draw (rho.135) to[pos=1] node[above] (n) {$\tau(2)$} +(135:2pt);
\node at ($(rho.45)+(45:6pt)$) {$\ddots$};
\draw (rho.-30) to[pos=1] node[right] (e) {$\tau(n)$} +(-30:2pt);
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (rho.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of rho.270] (s) {$S\setminus \operatorname{im}\tau$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (s-|w) rectangle (n-|e);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Our convention will be for the ports to be numbered clockwise from the left of the circle, unless otherwise indicated, and to omit the white dot if $S = \operatorname{im}\tau$. We refer to such an annotated circle as a *shell*.
As a syntactic shorthand for the shell in , we may combine all the ports and the white dot into a single wire labeled with the context $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$: $
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=8pt, baseline=(rho.-90)]
\node[pack] (rho) {};
\draw (rho.180) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma$} +(180:2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
$.
Let $\Gamma=(n,S,\tau)$ be the context with arity $n=3$, support $S = \{w,x,y,z\}
\subseteq {\mathrm{T}}$, and typing $\tau\colon {\underline{3}} \to S$ given by $\tau(1) = \tau(3)=y$, $\tau(2)=z$. It can be depicted by the shell $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, minimum size = 3ex] (rho) {};
\draw (rho.180) to[pos=1] node[left] (w) {$y$} +(180:2pt);
\draw (rho.75) to[pos=1] node[above] (n) {$z$} +(75:2pt);
\draw (rho.-20) to[pos=1] node[right] (e) {$y$} +(-20:2pt);
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (rho.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of rho.270] (s) {$w,x$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (s-|w) rectangle (n-|e);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
The hom-posets of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}={{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}$ are the subobject posets $
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}(\Gamma,\Gamma') = {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}(\Gamma \oplus \Gamma').
$ Explicitly, a morphism $\omega\colon \Gamma_1 \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ is a represented by monomorphism $$\Gamma_\omega=(n_\omega \xrightarrow{\tau_\omega} S_\omega \subseteq {\mathrm{T}})
{\rightarrowtail}\Gamma_1 \oplus \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$, and hence specified by a surjection $\omega$ (see \[cor.descriptions\]) such that $$\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=large]
{\underline{n}}_\omega \ar[r,"\tau_\omega"]
& S_\omega \ar[d,phantom, sloped, "\supseteq"] \\
{\underline{n}}_1+ {\underline{n}}_{\mathrm{out}}\ar[r,"{\tau_1+\tau_{\mathrm{out}}}"'] \ar[u,two heads, "\omega"]
& S_1 \cup S_{\mathrm{out}}\end{tikzcd}$$ commutes. We depict $\omega$ using a [*wiring diagram*]{}. More generally, wiring diagrams will give graphical representations of morphisms $\omega\colon
\Gamma_1\oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_k \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$.
\[notation.wiring\_diagrams\] Suppose we have a morphism $\omega\colon \Gamma_1\oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_k
\tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. We depict $\omega$ as follows.
1. Draw the shell for $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$.
2. Draw the object $\Gamma_i$, for $i=1,\dots,k$, as non-overlapping shells inside the $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ shell.
3. For each $i \in {\underline{n}}_\omega$, draw a black dot anywhere in the region interior to the $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ shell but exterior to all the $\Gamma_i$ shells, and annotate it by the value $\tau_\omega(i)$.
4. Draw a white dot in the same region, annotated by all elements of $S_\omega$ not already present in the diagram.
5. For each element $(i,j) \in \sum_{i=1,\dots,k, {\mathrm{out}}} {\underline{n}}_i$, draw a wire connecting the $j$th port on the object $\Gamma_i$ to the black dot $\omega(i,j)$.
Just as for objects, we may neglect to draw a white dot when $\operatorname{im}\tau=S$.
For a more compact notation, we may also neglect to explicitly draw the object $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$, leaving it implicit as comprising the wires left dangling on the boundary of the diagram.
\[ex.wiring\_diagram\] Here is the set-theoretic data of a morphism $\omega\colon \Gamma_1\oplus \Gamma_2
\oplus \Gamma_3 \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$, together with its wiring diagram depiction: $$\begin{aligned}
\parbox{4.15in}{\raggedright
$\Gamma_1 = (3,\{x,y\},\tau_1)$ where $\tau_1(1)=x,\tau_1(2)=\tau_1(2)=y$;\\
$\Gamma_2 = (3,\{w,x,y\},\tau_3)$ where $\tau_3(1)=\tau_3(2)=\tau_3(3)=x$;\\
$\Gamma_3 = (4,\{x,y\},\tau_2)$ where $\tau_2(1)=\tau_2(2)=y, \tau_2(3)=\tau_2(4)=x$;\\
$\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}= (6,\{w,x,y,z\},\tau_{\mathrm{out}})$ where
$\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(1)=y$,\\\qquad$\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(2)=\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(3)=\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(6)=z$,
$\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(4)=\tau_{\mathrm{out}}(5)=x$;\\
$\Gamma_\omega = (7,\{v,w,x,y,z\},\tau_r)$ where $\tau_\omega(1)=\tau_\omega(2)=y$,\\
\qquad$\tau_\omega(3)=\tau_\omega(7)=z$, $\tau_\omega(4)=\tau_\omega(5)=\tau_\omega(6)=x$;}
&\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[penetration=0, inner WD, pack size=20pt, link size=2pt, font=\tiny, scale=2, baseline=(out)]
\node[pack] at (-1.5,-1) (f) {$3$};
\node[pack] at (0,1.9) (g) {$1$};
\node[pack] at (1.5,-1) (h) {$2$};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=34pt] at (0,.2) (out) {};
\node[link,label=90:$x$] at ($(f)!.5!(h)$) (link1) {};
\node[link,label=0:$z$] at (-2.4,-.25) (link2) {};
\node[link,label distance=-6pt,label=200:$y$] at ($(f.75)!.5!(g.-135)$) (link3) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (h.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of h.270] {$w,y$};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (out.270) {};
\node[above=-.2 of out.270] {$w$};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(out.160)!.5!(g)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.2 of dot.90] {$v$};
\begin{scope}[label distance=-6pt]
\draw (out.280) to (link1);
\draw (out.190) to (link2);
\draw (out.155) to (link3);
\draw (out.-35) to node[pos=.5,link,label=10:$x$]{} (h.-30);
\draw (out.15) to[out=-165,in=-110] node[pos=.5,link,label
distance=3pt,label=200:$z$]{} (out.70);
\draw (f.15) to[out=0,in=165] (link1);
\draw (f.-15) to[out=0,in=-165] (link1);
\draw (h.180) to (link1);
\draw (g.-60) to node[pos=.5,link,label=10:$x$]{} (h.120);
\draw (f.45) to node[pos=.5,link,label=-10:$y$]{} (g.-105);
\draw (f.75) to (link3);
\draw (g.-135) to (link3);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\\
\parbox{4.15in}{\raggedright
$f(1,1)=4$, $f(1,2)=2$, $f(1,3)=1$, $f(2,1)=6$, $f(2,2)=4$,\\
\qquad $f(2,3)=5$, $f(3,1)=1$, $f(3,2)=2$, $f(3,3)=f(3,4)=6$,\\
\qquad $f({\mathrm{out}},1)=1$, $f({\mathrm{out}},2)=3$, $f({\mathrm{out}},3)=3$, $f({\mathrm{out}},4)=5$\\
\qquad $f({\mathrm{out}},5)=6$, $f({\mathrm{out}},6)=7$.}\end{aligned}$$
\[ex.no\_inner\] Note that we may have $k=0$, in which case there are no inner shells. For example, the following has $\Gamma_\omega=(2,\{x,y,z,w\},1\mapsto x, 2\mapsto y)$. $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot270) {};
\node[right=-.2 of dot270] {$x$};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot270), inner sep=12pt] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(outer.0) - (0:5pt)$) (dot0) {};
\node[above=-.2 of dot0] {$y$};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (outer.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of outer.270] (w) {$w$};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(outer.160) - (160:8pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.2 of dot.90] {$z$};
\draw (outer.0) -- (dot0);
\draw (outer.70) -- (dot270);
\draw (outer.180) -- (dot270);
\draw (outer.300) -- (dot270);
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (w.north) rectangle (outer.north);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
\[rem.multiple\] When multiple wires meet at a point, our convention will be to draw a dot iff the number of wires is different from two. $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node["1 wire"] (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.west);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P1, "2 wires"] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[link, white] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (outer.west) -- (outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P2, "3 wires"] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.west);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.east);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.south);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P3, "4 wires"] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, surround sep=4pt, font=\tiny]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.west);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.east);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.south);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.north);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=5 of P4, "$\cdots$\quad etc."] (etc){};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox ($(P1.north west)+(0,10pt)$) rectangle ($(etc)+(0,-5pt)$);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ When wires intersect and we do not draw a black dot, the intended interpretation is that the wires are *not connected*:$
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, baseline=(P1.-10)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, link size=3pt, surround sep=2pt, font=\tiny]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.west);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.east);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.south);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.north);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=1 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, link size=3pt, surround sep=2pt, font=\tiny]
\node[link, white] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (outer.east) -- (outer.west);
\draw (outer.south) -- (outer.north);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1)!.5!(P2)$) {$\neq$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$. Of course this is bound to happen when the graph is non-planar.
The following examples give a flavor of how composition, monoidal product, and 2-cells are represented using this graphical notation.
\[ex.comp\_as\_subst\] Composition of morphisms is described by [*nesting*]{} of wiring diagrams. Let $\omega'\colon \Gamma'\tickar \Gamma_1$ and $\omega\colon \Gamma_1 \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ be morphisms in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. Then the composite relation $\omega'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega\colon \Gamma'
\tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ is given by
1. drawing the wiring diagram for $\omega'$ inside the inner circle of the diagram for $\omega$,
2. erasing the object $\Gamma_1$,
3. amalgamating any connected black dots into a single black dot, and
4. removing all components not connected to the objects $\Gamma'$ or $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$, and adding a single white dot annotated by the set containing all elements of ${\mathrm{T}}$ present in these components, but not present elsewhere in the diagram.
Note that step 3 corresponds to taking pullbacks in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ (pushouts in ${{{\mathsf{FinSet}}}}$), while step 4 corresponds to epi-mono factorization.
As a shorthand for composition, we simply draw one wiring diagram directly substituted into another, as per step 1. For example, we have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node["$\omega'$"] (P1a) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (a) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=10pt, fit=(a)] (outer) {};
\node[link] (link1) at ($(a.west)!.6!(outer.west)$) {};
\node[link] (link2) at ($(a.45)!.5!(outer.45)$) {};
\node[link] (link3) at ($(a.-20)!.5!(outer.-20)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(a.100) + (110:7pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.3 of link1] {$x$};
\node[above=-.3 of link2] {$y$};
\node[above=-.2 of link3] {$y$};
\node[above=-.3 of dot] {$w$};
\draw (outer.west) -- (link1);
\draw (a.40) -- (link2);
\draw (link2) -- (outer.45);
\draw (a.-20) -- (link3);
\draw (link3) -- (outer.0);
\draw (link3) -- (outer.-45);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=1 of P1a, "$\omega$"] (P1b) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (c) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=10pt, fit=(c)] (outer2) {};
\node[link] (link4) at ($(c.west)!.4!(outer2.west)$) {};
\node[link] (link5) at ($(c.20)!.5!(outer2.20)$) {};
\node[link] (link6) at ($(c.-45)!.5!(outer2.-45)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (c.270) (dotc) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(c.90) + (90:7pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.2 of link4] {$x$};
\node[above=-.2 of link5] {$y$};
\node[below=-.2 of link6] {$y$};
\node[below=-.3 of dotc] {$t$};
\node[above=-.3 of dot] {$z$};
\draw (c.west) -- (link4);
\draw (c.45) -- (link5);
\draw (c.0) -- (link5);
\draw (link5) -- (outer2.20);
\draw (c.-45) -- (link6);
\draw (link6) -- (outer2.-45);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1b] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (a) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=7pt, fit=(a)] (c) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=5pt, fit=(c)] (outer2) {};
\node[link] (link1) at ($(a.west)!.6!(c.west)$) {};
\node[link] (link2) at ($(a.45)!.5!(c.45)$) {};
\node[link] (link3) at ($(a.-20)!.5!(c.-20)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(a.100) + (110:5pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.3 of link1] {$x$};
\node[above=-.3 of link2] {$y$};
\node[above=-.2 of link3] {$y$};
\node[above=-.3 of dot] {$w$};
\draw (c.west) -- (link1);
\draw (a.40) -- (link2);
\draw (link2) -- (c.45);
\draw (a.-20) -- (link3);
\draw (link3) -- (c.0);
\draw (link3) -- (c.-45);
\node[link] (link4) at ($(c.west)!.4!(outer2.west)$) {};
\node[link] (link5) at ($(c.20)!.5!(outer2.20)$) {};
\node[link] (link6) at ($(c.-45)!.5!(outer2.-45)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (c.270) (dotc) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(c.90) + (90:7pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[above=-.2 of link4] {$x$};
\node[above=-.2 of link5] {$y$};
\node[below=-.2 of link6] {$y$};
\node[below=-.3 of dotc] {$t$};
\node[above=-.3 of dot] {$z$};
\draw (c.west) -- (link4);
\draw (c.45) -- (link5);
\draw (c.0) -- (link5);
\draw (link5) -- (outer2.20);
\draw (c.-45) -- (link6);
\draw (link6) -- (outer2.-45);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2, "$\omega'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega$"] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (c) {};
\node[outer pack, inner sep=10pt, fit=(c)] (outer2) {};
\node[link] (link) at ($(c.0)!.5!(outer2.0)$) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(c.90) + (90:12pt)$) (dot) {};
\node[below=-.2 of link] {$y$};
\node[below=-.3 of dot] {$t,w,x,z$};
\draw (c.25) -- (link);
\draw (c.-25) -- (link);
\draw (link) -- (outer2.15);
\draw (link) -- (outer2.-15);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node (P1) at ($(P1a.east)!.5!(P1b.west)$) {${\mathbin{\fatsemi}}$};
\node at ($(P1b.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$
For the more general $k$-ary or operadic case, we may obtain the composite $$(\Gamma_1 \oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_{i-1} \oplus \omega' \oplus
\Gamma_{i+1} \oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_k) {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega$$ of any two morphisms $\omega'\colon \Gamma'_1\oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma'_k \tickar
\Gamma_i$ and $\omega\colon \Gamma_1\oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_k \tickar
\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ by substituting the wiring diagram for $\omega'$ into the $i$th inner circle of the diagram for $\omega$, and following a procedure similar to that in \[ex.comp\_as\_subst\].
The monoidal product of two morphisms in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ is simply their juxtaposition, merging the labels on the floating white dots as appropriate. For example, leaving off labels, we might have: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1a) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (a) {};
\node[pack, below right=.1 and 2 of a] (b) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (b.270) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(a) (b)] (outer) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(outer.250) - (250:6pt)$) (dot) {};
\draw (a.180) -- (a.180-|outer.west);
\draw (a.20) to[out=0, in=120] (b.140);
\draw (a.-30) to[out=-40, in=180] (b.180);
\draw (b.east) -- (b.east-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=1 of P1a] (P1b) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, below=2 of $(a)!.5!(b)$] (c) {};
\node[link, right=.8 of c] (link1) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(link1) (c)] (outer) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(outer.70) - (70:4pt)$) (dot) {};
\draw (c.20) -- (link1);
\draw (c.-20) -- (link1);
\draw (link1) -- (link1-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node (P1) at ($(P1a.south)!.5!(P1b.north)$) {$\oplus$};
\node[right=5 of $(P1a.north)!.5!(P1b.south)$] (e) {$=$};
\node[right=1 of e] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (a) {};
\node[pack, below right=.1 and 2 of a] (b) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at (b.270) {};
\node[pack, below=2 of $(a)!.5!(b)$] (c) {};
\node[link, right=.8 of c] (link1) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(a) (b) (c)] (outer) {};
\node[link,fill=white,thin] at ($(outer.200) - (200:20pt)$) (dot) {};
\draw (a.180) -- (a.180-|outer.west);
\draw (a.20) to[out=0, in=120] (b.140);
\draw (a.-30) to[out=-40, in=180] (b.180);
\draw (b.east) -- (b.east-|outer.east);
\draw (c.20) -- (link1);
\draw (c.-20) -- (link1);
\draw (link1) -- (link1-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1b.190-|P1a.west) rectangle (P2.east|-P1a.150);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
\[lem.breaking\] Let $\omega,\omega'\colon \Gamma_1\oplus \dots \oplus \Gamma_k \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ be morphisms in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}={{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}}}$. By definition, there exists a 2-cell $\omega\leq\omega'$ if there is a monomorphism $m\colon \Gamma_\omega {\rightarrowtail}\Gamma_{\omega'}$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ such that $m {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega' = \omega$ holds in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. By \[cor.descriptions\], this data consists of a surjection of finite sets $m\colon {\underline{n}}_\omega' \to {\underline{n}}_\omega$ and an inclusion $S_{\omega'} \subseteq S_{\omega}$. In diagrams, the former means 2-cells may break wires, and the latter means they may remove annotations from the inner white dot (or remove it completely). For example, we have 2-cells: $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep=3pt, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.0);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.120);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.240);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link, white] (fake dot) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep=3pt, fit=(fake dot)] (outer) {};
\node[link] (dot) at ($(outer.0)+(0:-5pt)$) {};
\draw (dot) -- (outer.0);
\draw (outer.120) to[out=300, in=60] (outer.240);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\leq$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
\quad \mbox{and}\quad
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link, fill=white] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep=3pt, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link, white] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep=3pt, fit=(dot)] (outer) {};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\leq$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$.
Graphical terms
---------------
Given a regular calculus ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, we give a graphical representations of its predicates, i.e. the elements in ${P}(\Gamma)$ for various contexts $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. Here’s how it works.
A [*${P}$-graphical term*]{} $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k;\omega)$ in an ajax po-functor ${P}\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is a morphism $\omega\colon \Gamma_1\oplus
\dots \oplus \Gamma_k \tickar \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ together with, for each $i = 1,\dots,k$, an element $\theta_i \in {P}(\Gamma_i)$.
We say that the graphical term $t = (\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)$ [*represents*]{} the poset element $$\church{ t } \coloneqq ({P}(\omega){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho)(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k)
\in {P}(\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}})$$ where $\rho$ is the $k$-ary laxator. If $t$ and $t'$ are graphical terms, we write $t \vdash t'$ when $\church{ t
} \vdash \church{ t'}$, and $t =t'$ when $\church{t}=\church{t'}$.
We draw a graphical term $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)$ by annotating the $i$th inner shell with its corresponding poset element $\theta_i$. In the case that $k=1$ and $\omega$ is the identity morphism, we may simply draw the object $\Gamma_1$ annotated by $\theta_1$: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, baseline=(wdot)]
\node[pack,minimum size = 3ex] (rho) {$\theta_1$};
\draw (rho.180) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\tau(1)$} +(180:2pt);
\draw (rho.135) to[pos=1] node[above] {$\tau(2)$} +(135:2pt);
\node at ($(rho.45)+(45:6pt)$) {$\ddots$};
\draw (rho.-30) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\tau(n)$} +(-30:2pt);
\node[link,fill=white,thin] (wdot) at (rho.270) {};
\node[below=-.2 of rho.270] {$S\setminus \operatorname{im}\tau$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$
Recall that we have a diagonal map $\delta\colon \Gamma \to \Gamma\oplus \Gamma$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}{\subseteq}{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. Given $\theta \in {P}(\Gamma)$, the element ${{(\delta)}_!}(\varphi)
\in {P}(\Gamma\oplus \Gamma)$ is represented by the graphical term $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, baseline=(dot)]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(phi) (dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma$} (dot-|outer.west);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma$} (dot-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
When ${\mathrm{T}}=\varnothing$ is empty, ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{\varnothing}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\varnothing)}
}$ is the terminal category. By \[prop.adjoint\_monoids\], an ajax po-functor ${P}\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ then simply chooses a $\wedge$-semilattice ${P}(0)$. The po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is that $\wedge$-semilattice considered as a one object po-category: it has a unique object whose poset of endomorphisms is $P(0)$. The diagrammatic language has no wires, since there is only the monoidal unit in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{\varnothing}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\varnothing)}
}$. The semantics of an arbitrary graphical term $(\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_k;{{\mathrm{id}}})$ is simply the meet $\theta_1\wedge\cdots\wedge\theta_k$.
Graphical terms are an alternate syntax for regular logic. While we will not dwell on the translation, a graphical term $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)$ represents the regular formula $${\mathop{\lower.9ex\hbox{ \scalebox{1.9}{\ensuremath{\exists}}}}\limits}_{\substack{i \in {\underline{n}}_j \\ j \in \{1,\dots,k,\omega\}}} x_{ij} .\bigwedge_{j\in\{
1,\dots k\}} \theta_k(x_{ij}) \quad\wedge \bigwedge_{\substack{i \in {\underline{n}}_j \\
j\in\{1,\dots,k,{\mathrm{out}}\}}} \big(x_{ij} = x_{\omega(i)j}\big).$$ This formula creates a variable of each element of ${\underline{n}}_j$, where $j\in\{1,\dots,k,{\mathrm{out}},\omega\}$, equates any two variables with the same image under $\omega$, takes the conjunction with all the formulas $\theta_j$, and the existentially quantifies over all variables except those in $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$. In particular, if we were to take $\omega\colon\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_2\oplus\Gamma_3\tickar\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ as in \[ex.wiring\_diagram\], the resulting graphical term would simplify to the formula $$\psi(y,z,z',x,x',z'') = \exists \tilde{x},\tilde{y}.\theta_1(\tilde{x},\tilde{y},y) \wedge
\theta_2(\tilde{x},x,x') \wedge \theta_3(y,\tilde{y},x',x') \wedge (z=z') \wedge
(z''=z'').$$
Note that ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ is a subcategory of ${\mathbb{\StrLeft{Cat}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Cat}{1}}}}}$. This allows us to take the monoidal Grothendieck construction $\int {P}$ of ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, [@moeller2018monoidal]. A ${P}$-graphical term is an object in the comma category $\int{P}\mathord{\downarrow} {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. This perspective lends structure to the various operations on diagrams belows; we, however, pursue it no further here.
Reasoning with graphical terms
------------------------------
The following basic rules for reasoning with diagrams express the (2-)functoriality and monoidality of ${P}$.
\[prop.diagrams\_basic\] Let $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k;\omega)$ be a graphical term, where $\theta_i \in
{P}(\Gamma_i)$.
1. (Monotonicity) Suppose $\theta_i \vdash \theta_i'$ for some $i$. Then $$\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_i,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)} \vdash \church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_i',\dots,\theta_k; \omega)}.$$
2. (Breaking) Suppose $\omega \leq \omega'$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$. Then $$\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)} \vdash
\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega')}.$$
3. (Nesting) Suppose $\theta_i = \church{(\theta'_1,\dots,\theta'_\ell; \omega')}$ for some $i$. Then $$\begin{gathered}
\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)}
=
\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_{i-1},\theta'_1, \dots,
\theta'_\ell,\theta_{i+1},\dots,\theta_k;\\(\Gamma_1\oplus\dots\oplus
\Gamma_{i-1}\oplus \omega' \oplus \Gamma_{i+1} \oplus \dots \oplus
\Gamma_k){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega)}.\end{gathered}$$
<!-- -->
1. This is the monotonicity of the map ${P}(\omega){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\rho$.
2. This is the 2-functoriality of ${P}$.
3. This follows from the monoidality and 1-functoriality of ${P}$. In particular, it is the commutativity of the following diagram. Using the braiding we can assume without loss of generality that $i=k$. $$\begin{tikzcd}
\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}{P}(\Gamma_j) \times \prod_{j=1}^\ell {P}(\Gamma'_j)
\ar[d,"{{\mathrm{id}}}\times \rho"'] \ar[dr,"\rho"]
\\
\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}{P}(\Gamma_j) \times {P}\left(\bigoplus_{j=1}^\ell\Gamma'_j\right) \ar[r, "\rho"] \ar[d,"\prod_{P}(\Gamma_j)\times {P}(\omega)"']
&
{P}\left(\bigoplus_{j=1}^{k-1} \Gamma_j \oplus \bigoplus_{j=1}^\ell \Gamma'_j \right) \ar[d, "{P}(\bigoplus_{j=1}^{k-1}\Gamma_j+\omega')"'] \ar[dr, "{P}((\bigoplus_{j=1}^{k-1}\Gamma_j+\omega'){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\omega)"]
\\
\prod_{j=1}^k{P}(\Gamma_j)\ar[r, "\rho"']
&
{P}\left(\bigoplus_{j=1}^k\Gamma_j\right) \ar[r, "{P}(\omega)"']
&[5ex]
{P}(\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}})
\end{tikzcd}$$ The upper triangle commutes by coherence laws for $\rho$, the square commutes by naturality of $\rho$, and the right hand triangle commutes by functoriality of ${P}$.
\[prop.diagrams\_basic\] is perhaps more quickly grasped through a graphical example of these facts in action. Suppose we have the entailment $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=7pt, baseline=(P1.south)]
\def\angle{-65};
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\draw (theta.180) -- +(180:2pt);
\draw (theta.0) -- +(0:2pt);
\draw (theta.\angle) -- +(\angle:2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi1) {$\xi_1$};
\node[pack, right=1 of xi1] (xi2) {$\xi_2$};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)$) (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(xi1) (xi2)] (outer) {};
\draw (outer) -- (xi1.west);
\draw (xi1.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (xi2);
\draw (xi2) -- (outer);
\draw (dot) -- (outer.\angle);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Then using monotonicity, nesting, and then breaking we can deduce the entailment $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=5pt, baseline=(P1.195)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[pack, right=1.5 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[pack] at ($(theta1)!.5!(theta2)+(0,-2)$) (theta3) {$\theta_3$};
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=3pt, inner ysep=1pt, fit=(theta1) (theta2) (theta3.-30)] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(theta2.30)!.5!(outer.30)$) (dot1) {};
\node[link, left=.1 of theta3.west] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta2) -- (dot1);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend right] (outer.20);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend left] (outer.45);
\draw (dot2) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (theta1) -- (outer);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (theta3) -- (outer);
\draw (theta1) -- (theta3);
\draw (theta1) -- (theta2);
\draw (theta2) -- (theta3);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi1) {$\xi_1$};
\node[pack, right=1 of xi1] (xi2) {$\xi_2$};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)$) (dot) {};
\draw (xi1.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (xi2);
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=0, inner ysep=0, fit=(xi1) (xi2)] (outerxi) {};
\node[pack, right=1.5 of xi2] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[pack, below=.6 of xi2] (theta3) {$\theta_3$};
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=3pt, inner ysep=2pt, fit=(xi1.west) (theta2) (theta3.-10)] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(theta2.30)!.5!(outer.30)$) (dot1) {};
\node[link, left=.1 of theta3.west] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta2) -- (xi2.east);
\draw (dot) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend right] (outer.20);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend left] (outer.35);
\draw (dot2) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (xi1) -- (outer);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (theta3.south) -- (theta3|-outer.south);
\draw (theta2) -- (theta3);
\draw (theta2) -- (dot1);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi1) {$\xi_1$};
\node[pack, right=1 of xi1] (xi2) {$\xi_2$};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)$) (dot) {};
\draw (xi1.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (xi2);
\node[pack, right=1 of xi2] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[pack, below=.6 of xi2] (theta3) {$\theta_3$};
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=3pt, inner ysep=1pt, fit=(theta1) (theta2) (theta3.-20)] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(theta2.30)!.5!(outer.30)$) (dot1) {};
\node[link, left=.1 of theta3.west] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta2) -- (xi2.east);
\draw (dot) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend right] (outer.20);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend left] (outer.35);
\draw (dot2) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (xi1) -- (outer);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (theta3) -- (outer);
\draw (theta2) -- (theta3);
\draw (theta2) -- (dot1);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi1) {$\xi_1$};
\node[pack, right=1 of xi1] (xi2) {$\xi_2$};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)+(-.3,0)$) (dota) {};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)+(.3,0)$) (dotb) {};
\node[link] at ($(xi1.east)!.5!(xi2.west)+(.5,-1)$) (dotc) {};
\draw (xi1.east) -- (dota);
\draw (dotb) -- (xi2);
\node[pack, right=1 of xi2] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[pack, below=.6 of xi2] (theta3) {$\theta_3$};
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=3pt, inner ysep=1pt, fit=(theta1) (theta2) (theta3.-20)] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(theta2.30)!.5!(outer.30)$) (dot1) {};
\node[link, left=.1 of theta3.west] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta2) -- (xi2.east);
\draw (dotc) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend right] (outer.20);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (dot1) to[bend left] (outer.35);
\draw (dot2) -- (theta3);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (xi1) -- (outer);
\draw[shorten >= -2pt] (theta3) -- (outer);
\draw (theta2) -- (theta3);
\draw (theta2) -- (dot1);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node (imp1) at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node[above=-.5 of imp1] {(i)};
\node (imp2) at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\node[above=-.5 of imp2] {(iii)};
\node (imp3) at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node[above=-.5 of imp3] {(ii)};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ We’ll see many further examples of such reasoning in the subsequent sections of this paper, as we prove that we can construct a regular category from a regular calculus.
\[lem.combining\] The nesting rule in \[prop.diagrams\_basic\] has two particularly important cases. The first occurs when we consider wiring diagrams themselves as poset elements. More precisely, if $f\colon \Gamma_1 \to \Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ is a morphism in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$, and $\hat{f}\coloneqq \pair{{{\mathrm{id}}}_{\Gamma_1},f}$ is its graph, then taking $i=k=1$, $\ell=0$, $\theta = \church{(;\hat{f})}$, $\omega =
\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ (the identity) and $\omega'=\hat{f}$ in (iii) gives $ \church{(\theta;\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}})} =
\church{(;\hat{f})}$. Note that this equates a graphical term with inner object $\Gamma_{\mathrm{out}}$ and annotation $\theta$ with a term that has no inner object at all; see e.g. \[ex.no\_inner\].
The second important case is that of ‘exterior AND’. If we take $i=k=1$, $\ell=2$, and $\omega = \omega'= \Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2$, then $
\church{(\theta'_1,\theta'_2;\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2)}
=
\church{(\rho(\theta'_1,\theta'_2);\Gamma_1 {\oplus}\Gamma_2)}$. In pictures, this means we can take any two circles, say $\theta_1\in
{P}(\Gamma_1)$ and $\theta_2\in {P}(\Gamma_2)$, and merge them, labelling the merged circle with $\rho_{\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2}(\theta_1,\theta_2)$: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[pack, below=.4 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[outer pack, inner ysep=0pt, fit=(theta1) (theta2)] (outer) {};
\draw (theta1.0) -- (theta1.0-|outer.east);
\draw (theta1.90) -- (outer.north);
\draw (theta1.180) -- (theta1.180-|outer.west);
\draw (theta2.270) -- (outer.south);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (rho) {$\rho(\theta_1,\theta_2)$};
\draw (rho.0) -- +(0:2pt);
\draw (rho.90) -- +(90:2pt);
\draw (rho.180) -- +(180:2pt);
\draw (rho.270) -- +(270:2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.130) rectangle (P2.-40);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
The meet-semilattice structure permits an intuitive graphical interpretation. In the following proposition, the graphical terms on right are illustrative examples of the equalities stated on the left.
\[prop.diagrams\_meet\] \[lem.true\_removes\_circles\] \[lem.meets\_merge\] For all contexts $\Gamma$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ and $\theta,\theta'\in {P}(\Gamma)$, we have
1. (True is removable) $\church{({{\mathtt{true}}}_\Gamma;\Gamma)} = \church{ (;\epsilon_\Gamma)
}$ $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small,baseline=(true)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (true) {${{\mathtt{true}}}$};
\draw (true.0) -- +(0:2pt);
\draw (true.120) -- +(120:2pt);
\draw (true.240) -- +(240:2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, shorten >=-2pt]
\coordinate (helper);
\node[link] (dot0) at ($(helper)+(0:5pt)$) {};
\node[link] (dot120) at ($(helper)+(120:5pt)$) {};
\node[link] (dot240) at ($(helper)+(240:5pt)$) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep=8pt, fit=(helper)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot0) -- (outer.0);
\draw (dot120) -- (outer.120);
\draw (dot240) -- (outer.240);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$
2. (Meets are merges) $
\church{ (\theta_1\wedge\theta_2;\Gamma)} = \church{
(\theta_1,\theta_2;\delta_\Gamma) }.
$ $\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD,baseline=(theta)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[pack, below=.3 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\coordinate (helper) at ($(theta1)!.5!(theta2)$);
\node[link, left=2 of helper] (dot L) {};
\node[link, right=2 of helper] (dot R) {};
\draw (theta1.west) to[out=180, in=60] (dot L);
\draw (theta2.west) to[out=180, in=-60] (dot L);
\draw (theta1.east) to[out=0, in=120] (dot R);
\draw (theta2.east) to[out=0, in=-120] (dot R);
\draw (dot L) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (dot R) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta_1\wedge\theta_2$};
\draw (theta.180) -- +(180:2pt);
\draw (theta.0) -- +(0:2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$
These equations are simply the definitions of ${{\mathtt{true}}}$ and meet; see \[eq.def\_true\_meet\].
\[lem.dotting\_off\] Note that \[prop.diagrams\_meet\](i) and the monotonicity of diagrams (\[prop.diagrams\_basic\](i)) further imply that for all $\theta \in {P}(\Gamma)$ we have $\church{ (\theta;\Gamma)} \vdash \church{
(;\epsilon_\Gamma) }$: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, baseline=(phi)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, shorten >=-2pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[outer pack, fit=(phi)] (outer) {};
\draw (phi) -- (outer.west);
\draw (phi) -- (outer.east);
\draw (phi) -- (outer.south);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, shorten >=-2pt]
\node[pack, fill=white, white] (phi) {$\theta$}; \node[outer pack, fit=(phi)] (outer) {};
\node[link] at ($(outer.180) - (180:5pt)$) (dot180) {};
\node[link] at ($(outer.0) - (0:5pt)$) (dot0) {};
\node[link] at ($(outer.270) - (270:5pt)$) (dot270) {};
\draw (dot0) -- (outer.0);
\draw (dot180) -- (outer.180);
\draw (dot270) -- (outer.270);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$
Internal relations in a regular calculus {#chap.relations}
========================================
Having set up our proof language, we now return to describing the relationship between regular categories and regular calculi. In this section, we’ll see that to every regular calculus we can construct a certain po-category, called its internal relations po-category. Although we shall not prove it directly, this internal relations po-category is in fact a regular po-category. We’ll also get to see our graphical logic in action.
The internal relations po-category {#sec.int_rels}
----------------------------------
\[def.internal\_relations\] Given objects $\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2$ and $\varphi_1\in {P}(\Gamma_1)$ and $\varphi_2\in {P}(\Gamma_2)$, we define the poset ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ of [*${P}$-internal relations from $\varphi_1$ to $\varphi_2$*]{} to be the subposet $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)\coloneqq
\big\{\theta\in {P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2)\,\big|\,
{{(\pi_1)}_!}\theta \vdash_{\Gamma_1} \varphi_1
\text{ and }
{{(\pi_2)}_!}\theta \vdash_{\Gamma_2} \varphi_2
\big\} \subseteq {P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2).$$
An internal relation $\theta$ may be represented by the graphical term $\dectheta$ together with the two entailments $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P11) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta) -- ($(theta.west)-(1,0)$);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P11] (P12) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P11.east)!.5!(P12.west)$) {$\vdash_{\Gamma_1}$};
\node[right=6 of P12] (P21) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta) -- ($(theta.east)+(1,0)$);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P21] (P22) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\draw (phi.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P21.east)!.5!(P22.west)$) {$\vdash_{\Gamma_2}$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$
We check that when this definition is applied to the regular calculus ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})$ associated to a regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, it recovers the usual notion of relation between objects in ${\mathcal{R}}$.
\[prop.rela\_rels\_rrel\] Let ${\mathcal{R}}$ be a regular category, let $\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}$ be contexts, and suppose given $r_1\in{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{\Gamma_1}}$ and $r_2\in{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{\Gamma_2}}$. There is a natural isomorphism $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})}}\big((\Gamma_1, r_1),(\Gamma_2, r_2)\big)\cong{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}(r_1,r_2).$$
Let $g_1\coloneqq{\classify{\Gamma_1}}$ and $g_2\coloneqq{\classify{\Gamma_2}}$ so we have $r_1{\subseteq}g_1$ and $r_2{\subseteq}g_2$; see \[eqn.Prod\]. By \[def.internal\_relations,prop.rels\], a ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})$-internal relation between them is an element $t{\subseteq}g_1\times g_2$ such that there exist dotted arrows making the following diagram commute: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=small]
r_1\ar[d, >->]&
t\ar[d, >->]\ar[r, dotted]\ar[l, dotted]&
r_2\ar[d, >->]\\
g_1&
g_1\times g_2\ar[l]\ar[r]&
g_2
\end{tikzcd}$$ The composite $t\to r_1\times r_2\to g_1\times g_2$ is monic, so we have that $t{\subseteq}r_1\times r_2$. The result follows.
We shall now present some technical lemmas with the goal of proving the following theorem, that internal relations form a po-category. The proof is completed on page .
\[thm.internal\_relations\] Let ${P}\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ be a regular calculus. Then there exists a po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ whose objects are pairs $(\Gamma,\varphi)$, where $\Gamma$ is an object of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ and $\varphi \in
{P}(\Gamma)$, and with hom-posets $(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1) \to
(\Gamma_2,\varphi_2)$ given by ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$.
We begin by specifying the composition rule. For objects $\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2,\Gamma_3$ in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$, let $${\mathtt{comp}}_{\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2,\Gamma_3} \coloneqq
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {};
\node[pack, right=2 of theta] (theta') {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(theta) (theta')] (outer) {};
\draw (outer.east) to (theta'.east) node[right=1] {$\scriptstyle \Gamma_3$};
\draw (theta) to node[above=-.3] {$\scriptstyle \Gamma_2$} (theta');
\draw (theta.west) node[left=1] {$\scriptstyle \Gamma_1$} to (outer.west);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$$ It is a morphism $(\Gamma_1 \oplus \Gamma_2 \oplus \Gamma_2 \oplus \Gamma_3) \tickar (\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_3)$ in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$. We then define $$\label{eqn.composition}
(-){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(-) \colon {P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2)\times {P}(\Gamma_2{\oplus}\Gamma_3)\xrightarrow{\rho} {P}(\Gamma_1 {\oplus}\Gamma_2 {\oplus}\Gamma_2 {\oplus}\Gamma_3) \xrightarrow{{P}({\mathtt{comp}})}
{P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_3).$$
Note that this construction is reminiscent of the composition map defined in the construction of a hypergraph category from a cospan algebra in [@fong2019hypergraph].
\[lemma.comp\_rela\_rela\] The composite of internal relations is an internal relation. That is, let $\varphi_1 \in {P}(\Gamma_1)$, $\varphi_2 \in {P}(\Gamma_2)$, and $\varphi_3 \in {P}(\Gamma_3)$. Then given $\theta_{12}\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ and $\theta_{23}\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_2, \varphi_3)$, the element $(\theta_{12}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_{23})\in {P}(\Gamma_1 {\oplus}\Gamma_3)$ is in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_3)$.
We must prove ${{(\pi_1)}_!}(\theta_{12} {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_{23}) \vdash \varphi_1$ and ${{(\pi_2)}_!}(\theta_{12} {\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_{23}) \vdash \varphi_3$. We prove the first; the second follows similarly. This is not hard, we simply use \[lem.dotting\_off\] and then that $\theta_{12}$ obeys \[def.internal\_relations\]: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta_{12}$};
\node[pack, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_{23}$};
\node[link, right=5pt of theta'] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta');
\draw (theta) -- (theta');
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta_{12}$};
\node[link, right=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash_{\Gamma_1}$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash_{\Gamma_1}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
Given an object $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ and $\varphi\in {P}(\Gamma)$, define ${{\mathrm{id}}}_\varphi\coloneqq {{(\delta_\Gamma)}_!}(\varphi)$ in ${P}(\Gamma\oplus\Gamma)$. Here it is graphically. $$\label{eqn.id_phi}
{{\mathrm{id}}}_\varphi\coloneqq\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt, baseline=(dot)]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(phi) (dot)] (outer) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma$} (dot-|outer.west);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma$} (dot-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
\[lemma.id\_is\_rela\] For any $\Gamma\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}$ and $\varphi\in {P}(\Gamma)$, the element ${{\mathrm{id}}}_\varphi\in
{P}(\Gamma{\oplus}\Gamma)$ is an element of ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi,\varphi)$.
By \[prop.diagrams\_basic\](iii), composing the nested graphical term on the left is precisely the graphical term on the right (and similarly for the codomain): $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1.base)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\node[outer pack, fit=(phi) (dot)] (outer) {};
\node[link, right=3pt] at (dot-|outer.east) (dot2) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (dot2);
\node[outer pack, surround sep=-1pt, fit=(outer) (dot2)] (outer2) {};
\draw (dot) -- (dot-|outer2.west);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash_{\Gamma}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
In what follows, we often elide details about—and graphical notation that indicates—nesting and contexts.
\[lemma.cp\_unital\] The map ${\mathbin{\fatsemi}}$ from \[eqn.composition\] is unital with respect to ${{\mathrm{id}}}$, i.e.$\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathrm{id}}}=\theta={{\mathrm{id}}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{\theta}$.
We prove that $(\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathrm{id}}})=\theta$; the other unitality axiom is similar. The inequality $(\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathrm{id}}}) \vdash \theta$ follows from \[lem.dotting\_off,prop.diagrams\_basic\]: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=5pt of dot] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[link, above=4pt of dot] (phi) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P2] (P3) {\simpletheta};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.160) rectangle (P3.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ The reverse inequality $\theta \vdash(\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathrm{id}}})$ uses \[lem.meets\_merge\], \[lem.breaking\], and \[def.internal\_relations\]: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {\simpletheta};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta1) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, below=.3 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\coordinate (helper) at ($(theta1)!.5!(theta2)$);
\node[link, left=2 of helper] (dot L) {};
\node[link, right=2 of helper] (dot R) {};
\draw (theta1.west) to[out=180, in=60] (dot L);
\draw (theta2.west) to[out=180, in=-60] (dot L);
\draw (theta1.east) to[out=0, in=120] (dot R);
\draw (theta2.east) to[out=0, in=-120] (dot R);
\draw (dot L) -- +(-5pt,0);
\draw (dot R) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, above=2pt of theta2] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (theta2) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=5pt of dot] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox ($(P1.160)+(0,5pt)$) rectangle (P4.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
\[lemma.cp\_assoc\] The map ${\mathbin{\fatsemi}}$ from \[eqn.composition\] is associative, i.e. $(\theta_1{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_2){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_3=\theta_1{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(\theta_2{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_3)$.
This is immediate from \[prop.diagrams\_basic\](iii). Both sides can be represented by (nested versions of) the graphical term $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD,baseline=(theta1.-40)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=2, surround sep=0pt]
\node[pack] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[pack, right=.5 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[pack, right=.5 of theta2] (theta3) {$\theta_3$};
\draw (theta1.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta1) -- (theta2);
\draw (theta2) -- (theta3);
\draw (theta3.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
$.
\[page.proof\_of\_thm.internal\_relations\] \[lemma.cp\_unital,lemma.cp\_assoc\] show that we have a 1-category. Each homset ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2) \subseteq {P}(\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2)$ inherits a partial order from the poset ${P}(\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2)$. Moreover, composition is given by the monotone map $${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2) \times {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_2,\varphi_3)
\stackrel{\rho}\longrightarrow
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2,\varphi_2,\varphi_3)
\xrightarrow{{P}({\mathtt{comp}})} {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_3).$$ We thus have a po-category.
Note that although each homset is a $\wedge$-semilattice, composition does *not* preserve meets, and so ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is not $\wedge$-semilattice enriched; see \[rem.meet\_pres\].
To conclude this section, we mention a useful characterization of internal relations.
\[prop.characterize\_relation\] Let $\theta \in {P}(\Gamma_1 \oplus \Gamma_2)$, $\varphi_i \in {P}(\Gamma_i)$. Then $\theta$ is a relation $\varphi_1 \to
\varphi_2$ if and only if $$\label{eq.relation_with_domains}
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P2)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot] (phi) {$\varphi_{1}$};
\node[link, right=1 of theta] (dot2) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot2] (phi2) {$\varphi_2$};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (theta) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot2) -- (phi2);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot2) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P1] (P2) {\simpletheta};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$$
Any internal relation $\varphi_1 \to \varphi_2$ obeys the identity \[eq.relation\_with\_domains\] by unitality, \[lemma.cp\_unital\]. Conversely, if $\theta$ obeys \[eq.relation\_with\_domains\], then by \[lem.dotting\_off\] $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, right=1 of theta] (dot2) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot2] (phi2) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, right=.7 of dot2] (dot3) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (theta) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot2) -- (phi2);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot2) -- (dot3);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ and similarly for $\varphi_2$, proving that $\theta \in
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$.
\[def.transpose\] Write $\sigma_{\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2}\colon \Gamma_1 {\oplus}\Gamma_2 \longrightarrow
\Gamma_2 {\oplus}\Gamma_1$ for the braiding in ${
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$, and define the map $(-){^\dagger}\coloneqq {{{\sigma_{\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2}}}_!}\colon
{P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2)\to {P}(\Gamma_2{\oplus}\Gamma_1)$. We say that the [*transpose*]{} of a graphical term $(\theta;\Gamma_1\oplus \Gamma_2)$ is the graphical term $(\theta{^\dagger};\Gamma_2\oplus \Gamma_1)$.
\[lem.transpose\_rotate\] Note that transposes are given by “rotating the shell”: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, baseline=(theta.base)]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta{^\dagger}$};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=5pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\coordinate (helper1) at ($(theta)+(0,.4cm)$);
\coordinate (helper2) at ($(theta)-(0,.4cm)$);
\node[outer pack, fit=(theta)] (outer) {};
\draw (theta.west) to[out=180, in=180, looseness=2] (helper1)
to[out=0, in=180, pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} (outer.east|-helper1);
\draw (theta.east) to[out=0, in=0, looseness=2] (helper2) to[out=180,
in=0, pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_2$} (outer.west|-helper2);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.160) rectangle (P2.east|-P2.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ In particular, for $\varphi \in {P}(\Gamma)$, we have $\church{
(\varphi{^\dagger};\Gamma)} = \church{ (\varphi;\Gamma) }$. That is, both $\varphi$ and $\varphi{^\dagger}$ can be represented by the diagram $
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt, baseline=(phi.-60)]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}\; .
$
We briefly note the following connection to hypergraph categories.
The monoidal category underlying ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is a hypergraph category.
More precisely, recall that we write $\rho$ for the laxators of ${P}$. We may equip ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ with the symmetric strict monoidal product given on objects by $(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1) \otimes (\Gamma_2,\varphi_2) = (\Gamma_1
\oplus \Gamma_2, \rho(\varphi_1,\varphi_2))$, and on morphisms by the restriction to ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2) \times
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_3,\varphi_4)$ of the map $$\rho\colon {P}(\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_2) \times {P}(\Gamma_3\oplus\Gamma_4) \to
{P}(\Gamma_1\oplus \Gamma_3\oplus \Gamma_2 \oplus \Gamma_4).$$ The braiding $\sigma_{\varphi_1,\varphi_2}$ on objects $(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1)$, $(\Gamma_2,\varphi_2)$ is given as below. Given this monoidal structure, we may the equip ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ with the hypergraph structure given on each object $(\Gamma,\varphi)$ by the internal relations below. $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P0) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot1) {};
\node[link,below=.4 of dot1] (dot2) {};
\node[pack,above=.3 of dot1,inner sep=1pt] (phi1) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[pack,below=.3 of dot2,inner sep=1pt] (phi2) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[outer pack, inner xsep=3pt, inner ysep=0pt, fit=(phi1) (phi2)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot1) -- (phi1.south);
\draw (dot2) -- (phi2.north);
\draw (dot1) -- (dot1-|outer.west);
\draw (dot1) -- (dot2-|outer.east);
\draw (dot2) -- (dot2-|outer.west);
\draw (dot2) -- (dot1-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=.1 of P0] {$\sigma_{\varphi_1,\varphi_2}$};
\node[right=3 of P0] (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot1) {};
\node[pack,above=.3 of dot1,inner sep=1pt] (phi1) {$\varphi$};
\node[outer pack, circle, minimum size=8ex, fit=(dot1)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot1) -- (phi1.south);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.0);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.150);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.210);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=.1 of P1] {$\mu_{\varphi}$};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack,inner sep=1pt] (phi1) {$\varphi$};
\node[outer pack, minimum size=8ex, fit=(phi1)] (outer) {};
\draw (phi1.east) -- (outer.0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=.1 of P2] {$\eta_{\varphi}$};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot1) {};
\node[pack,above=.3 of dot1,inner sep=1pt] (phi1) {$\varphi$};
\node[outer pack, minimum size=8ex, fit=(dot1)] (outer) {};
\draw (dot1) -- (phi1.south);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.180);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.30);
\draw (dot1) -- (outer.-30);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=.1 of P3] {$\delta_{\varphi}$};
\node[right=3 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack,inner sep=1pt] (phi1) {$\varphi$};
\node[outer pack, minimum size=8ex, fit=(phi1)] (outer) {};
\draw (phi1.west) -- (outer.180);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[below=.1 of P4] {$\epsilon_{\varphi}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$$
Recall that we have already shown, in \[thm.internal\_relations\], that ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is a po-category. To prove this theorem then, it remains to check that the proposed monoidal products and structure maps are always well-defined internal relations, and then that the coherence laws for symmetric monoidal categories and hypergraph categories hold. These facts are all straightforward to verify using the logic of graphical terms.
The Carboni-Walters theorem {#sec.CW}
---------------------------
In [@Carboni:1987a], Carboni and Walters defined the notions of *cartesian bicategory* and *functionally complete bicategory of relations*. The first of these falls out of our work so far. In what follows, we freely use notation from \[sec.int\_rels\], such as ${\mathbin{\fatsemi}}$, ${^\dagger}$, $\delta$, $\mu$, $\epsilon$, and $\eta$.
\[def.cart\_bicat\] A *cartesian bicategory* is a po-category ${\mathscr{C}}$ with a unique adjoint monoid structure on each object $c$, such that each map $\alpha\colon c\to c'$ induces a lax comonoid homomorphism, $$\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\epsilon_{c'}\leq\epsilon_{c}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\alpha{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\delta_{c'}\leq\delta_{c}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(\alpha\otimes\alpha).$$
Now for any po-category ${\mathscr{C}}$, there is a po-functor $U\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}})\to{\mathscr{C}}$ sending an ajax functor $1\to {\mathscr{C}}$ to the image of $1$.
A po-category ${\mathscr{C}}$ is a cartesian bicategory iff $U\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{AdjMon}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{AdjMon}{1}}}}}}({\mathscr{C}})\to{\mathscr{C}}$ is an isomorphism of po-categories.
This follows from \[eqn.monoid\_comonoid\_ajax,eqn.lax\_mon\_hom\_2\].
Our goal is to convert any regular calculus ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$ into a regular category ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({P})$. One approach is to show this directly; we do so in \[chap.functions,chap.ess\_refl\]. Another approach would be to use the Carboni-Walters theorem. While seemingly more direct, the latter approach has two drawbacks. First, it would make our paper less self-contained. Second, [@Carboni:1987a] seem not to describe functors between “functionally complete bicategories of relations” precisely enough for our needs. Thus we recall their theorem here and proceed to the direct approach, where we really see the graphical calculus in action. We will not see cartesian bicatgories again in this paper.
\[def.CW\_reg\_bicat\] Let ${\mathscr{C}}$ be a cartesian bicategory. It is equivalent to ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}}$ for some regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$ if and only if
- (Frobenius) $\mu_c{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\delta_c=(c\otimes\delta_c){\mathbin{\fatsemi}}(\mu_c\otimes c)$ for each $c\in{\mathscr{C}}$, and
- (Images) For every $f\colon b\to I$ there exists an object $\operatorname{im}(f)$ and a left adjoint $i\colon \operatorname{im}(f)\to b$ such that: $$i{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}i{^\dagger}={{\mathrm{id}}}_{\operatorname{im}(b)}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}i{^\dagger}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\epsilon_{\operatorname{im}(b)}=f.$$
This is [@Carboni:1987a Theorem 3.5].
Internal functions and the syntactic category construction {#chap.functions}
==========================================================
Internal functions are defined to be the left adjoints in the po-category ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ of internal relations (see \[thm.internal\_relations\]).
\[def.RT\] Given a regular calculus $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$, where ${P}\colon {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, we define the category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ of ${P}$-internal functions to be the category of left adjoints in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$: $$\label{eqn.RT}
{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}\coloneqq{{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}).$$ In more detail, suppose given elements $\varphi_1\in {P}(\Gamma_1)$ and $\varphi_2\in {P}(\Gamma_2)$. We say that an internal relation $\theta\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1, \varphi_2){\subseteq}{P}(\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_2)$ is an [*internal function*]{} if there exists an internal relation $\xi$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, below=2pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\xi$};
\draw (theta) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta') -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta') {$\xi$};
\node[pack, right=1 of theta'] (theta) {$\theta$};
\draw (theta) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (theta') -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, below=2pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
.$$ The category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ has the same objects $(\Gamma,\varphi)$ as ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$, and morphisms given by internal functions.
Graphically, we’ll sometimes denote an internal function $\theta\in {P}(\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2)$ by the shape $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\tiny]
\node[funcr] (th) {$\theta$};
\draw (th.west) to[pos=1] node[left=0] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (th.east) to[pos=1] node[right=0] {$\Gamma_2$} +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
$ .
Our aim in this section is to prove that the internal functions form a regular category.
\[thm.internal\_functions\] For any regular calculus ${P}\colon{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\to{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}$, the category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ of internal functions in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is regular.
The proof, found on page is divided into three parts. In \[sec.internal\_funs\] we’ll explore properties of internal functions, in \[sec.finlims\] we’ll show ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ has finite limits, and in \[sec.images\] we’ll show it has pullback stable image factorizations and conclude with the theorem.
Properties and examples of internal functions {#sec.internal_funs}
---------------------------------------------
Before we embark on the theorem, let’s get to know the category of internal functions a bit. We’ll first characterize functions in two ways: they’re the relations that have their own transposes as right adjoints, and they’re the relations that are total and deterministic. We’ll then note that the order inherited by functions as a subposet of the poset of relations is just the discrete order, and give two important examples of functions: bijections and projections.
To obtain our characterizations of functions, we’ll need definitions of deterministic and total.
\[def.tot\_det\] Let $\theta \in {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$. We say that $\theta$ is
- [*total*]{} if $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] +(-3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-3pt,0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$ , and
- [*deterministic*]{} if $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.3 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-10pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,5pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,-5pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$ .
Note that by the domain of $\theta$ and discarding (\[lem.dotting\_off\]) we always have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[link, left=.8 of theta] (dotw) {};
\node[pack, above=.8 of dotw] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-1,0);
\draw (phi) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] +(-3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.170) rectangle (P3.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ and that by meets (\[prop.diagrams\_meet\](ii)) and breaking (\[prop.diagrams\_basic\](ii)) we always have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(45:8pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(-45:8pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dot) {};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\draw (theta2.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(45:8pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(-45:8pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.150) rectangle (P3.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ This means that in \[def.tot\_det\] the two entailments are in fact equalities.
In what follows, we’ll often omit the transpose symbol ${^\dagger}$ (see \[def.transpose\]) from our diagrams when it can be deduced from the ambient contextual information.
\[thm.characterize\_functions\] Let $\theta \in {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$. Then the following are equivalent.
1. $\theta\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ is an internal function in the sense of \[def.RT\].
2. $\theta$ has right adjoint $\theta{^\dagger}$. That is, $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, below=2pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta') -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$ and $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt, font=\small]
\node (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=1 of theta'] (theta) {$\theta$};
\draw (theta) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (theta') -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, below=2pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$.
3. $\theta$ is total and deterministic in the sense of \[def.tot\_det\].
\(i) ${\Leftrightarrow}$ (ii): Clearly (ii) ${\Rightarrow}$ (i). Conversely, assume $\theta$ has a right adjoint $\xi$. Note that the unit axiom implies $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\tau_1$} +(-3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=.75 of theta] (xi) {$\xi$};
\node[link, right=.5 of xi] (dot) {};
\draw (theta) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (xi);
\draw (xi) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$. Then using meets and breaking we have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, ellipse] (xi) {$\xi$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-3pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) to[pos=1] node[right, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_1$} +(3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\xi$};
\node[link, right=6pt of xi] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, above=3pt of theta] (dot2) {};
\draw (xi.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.north) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot) to +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\xi$};
\node[link, right=12pt of xi] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above left=6pt and 2pt of dot] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, above right=6pt and 2pt of dot] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\draw (xi.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta2.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.north) to[bend left=50pt] (theta2.north);
\draw (dot) to +(20pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\xi$};
\node[pack, right=6pt of xi] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=6pt of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\draw (xi.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) -- (theta);
\draw (theta) -- (theta2);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2.5 of P4] (P5) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, ellipse] (xi) {$\theta{^\dagger}$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-3pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) to[pos=1] node[right, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_1$} +(3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P4.east)!.5!(P5.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.170) rectangle (P5.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Similarly we can show $\theta \vdash \xi{^\dagger}$, and hence $\xi = \theta{^\dagger}$.
\(ii) ${\Leftrightarrow}$ (iii): We shall prove a stronger statement, that $\theta$ has a unit if and only if it is total, and that it has a counit if and only if it is deterministic.
First, (ii)-units iff (iii)-totalness. Using the unit of the adjunction we have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$\varphi_1$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) to[bend left=50pt] (theta2.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta) -- +(-10pt,0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.170) rectangle (P3.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Conversely, using totalness, meets, and breaking we have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=3pt of theta] (dot) {};
\node[link, above=3pt of theta] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot2);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above left=6pt and 2pt of dot] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, above right=6pt and 2pt of dot] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta2.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.north) to[bend left=50pt] (theta2.north);
\draw (dot) to +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=2 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to node[above] {$\Gamma_2$} (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.170) rectangle (P4.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
Next, (ii)-counits iff (iii)-determinism. We can use the counit of the adjunction to give $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta2] (theta3) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta3] (theta4) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta2)!.5!(theta3)$] (dotw) {};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (doteu) {};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta3)!.5!(theta4)$] (doted) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta3.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta4.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- (doteu);
\draw (theta2.east) -- (doteu);
\draw (theta3.east) -- (doted);
\draw (theta4.east) -- (doted);
\draw (doteu) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (doted) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta2] (theta3) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta3] (theta4) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=2 of $(theta2)!.5!(theta3)$] (dotww) {};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (doteu) {};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta3)!.5!(theta4)$] (doted) {};
\draw (dotww) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotww);
\draw (theta3.west) to[bend left=50pt] (theta2.west);
\draw (theta4.west) -- (dotww);
\draw (theta.east) -- (doteu);
\draw (theta2.east) -- (doteu);
\draw (theta3.east) -- (doted);
\draw (theta4.east) -- (doted);
\draw (doteu) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (doted) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack,below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dot) {};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\draw (theta2.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(45:8pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(-45:8pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P4] (P5) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(45:8pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(-45:8pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P4.east)!.5!(P5.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.130) rectangle (P5.east|-P2.-40);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Conversely, assuming determinism we get the counit, which concludes the proof: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=2 of theta'] (theta) {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta'.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) to node[above] {$\Gamma_1$} (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=3pt of theta] (dot) {};
\node[link, above=3pt of theta] (dot2) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot2);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.160) rectangle (P3.east|-P2.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
Next, we describe how the order on relations restricts to the functions.
\[cor.functions\_discrete\] The order on functions is discrete.
Suppose $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (phi.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta'$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (phi.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$ . Then using the unit of $\theta$ and counit of $\theta'$ we have $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta'$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (phi.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (t3) {$\theta'$};
\node[funcl, left=1 of t3] (t2) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr,left=1 of t2] (t1) {$\theta$};
\draw (t1.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (t1.east) to (t2.west);
\draw (t2.east) to (t3.west);
\draw (t3.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (t3) {$\theta'$};
\node[funcl, left=1 of t3] (t2) {$\theta'$};
\node[funcr, left=1 of t2] (t1) {$\theta$};
\draw (t1.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (t1.east) to (t2.west);
\draw (t2.east) to (t3.west);
\draw (t3.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (phi.east) to +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$.
Finally, we note that bijections and projections are examples of functions.
A [*${P}$-internal bijection*]{} is an invertible ${P}$-internal relation. Note that every bijection is a function. We can also characterise bijections as the adjunctions whose unit and counit are the identity.
\[prop.projections\] Suppose given $\varphi_1\in {P}(\Gamma_1)$ and $\varphi_2\in {P}(\Gamma_2)$ and a relation $\theta\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2){\subseteq}{P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2)$. Define $$\pi_1\coloneqq{{(\delta_{\Gamma_1}{\oplus}\Gamma_2)}_!}(\theta)
{\quad\text{and}\quad}\pi_2\coloneqq{{(\Gamma_2 {\oplus}\delta_{\Gamma_2})}_!}(\theta).$$ Then $\pi_i\in {P}(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_i{\oplus}\Gamma_2)$ are internal functions for $i=1,2$, i.e. $\pi_i\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\theta,\varphi_i)$
We prove $\pi_1$ is a function; the argument for $\pi_2$ is similar. Note that $\pi_1$ is depicted by the graphical term $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt, pack size=6pt, baseline=(dot.north)]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=8pt of phi.290] (dot) {};
\coordinate (g1) at ($(dot)+(-10pt,0)$);
\draw (phi.290) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} (g1);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(10pt, 0);
\draw (phi.250) to[out=270, in=0, looseness=1, pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_2$} ($(g1)+(0,7pt)$);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ By \[lem.meets\_merge\] and the fact that $\theta \in {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ we have $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of phi.290] (dot) {};
\coordinate (g1) at ($(dot)+(-10pt,0)$);
\draw (phi.290) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} (g1);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(10pt, 0);
\draw (phi.250) to[out=270, in=0, looseness=1, pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_2$} ($(g1)+(0,7pt)$);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of theta.290] (dot) {};
\node[pack, left=10pt of theta] (thetaA) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of thetaA.290] (dotA) {};
\coordinate (g1) at ($(dotA)+(-20pt,0)$);
\node[link, inner sep=0, below=4.5pt of thetaA.250] (dot2A) {};
\node[pack, right=10pt of theta] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link] at (dot-|phi) (dotphi) {};
\draw (theta.250) to[out=270, in=0, looseness=.8] (dot2A);
\draw (theta.290) -- (dot);
\draw (thetaA.250) -- (dot2A);
\draw (dot2A) to[pos=1] (g1|-dot2A);
\draw (thetaA.290) -- (dotA);
\draw (dotA) to[pos=1] (g1);
\draw (dotA) -- (dot);
\draw (phi) -- (dotphi);
\draw (dot) -- (dotphi);
\draw (dotphi) -- +(20pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P1.160) rectangle (P2.east|-P2.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ and hence by \[prop.characterize\_relation\], $\pi_1 \in
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\theta,\varphi_1)$.
Proving that $\pi_1$ is an adjunction in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\theta,\varphi_1)$ again uses \[lem.meets\_merge\] and that $\theta \in {{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$, as well as \[lem.breaking\]: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=11pt of phi.290] (dot) {};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi.250] (dot2) {};
\draw (phi.250) -- (dot2);
\draw (phi.290) -- (dot);
\draw (dot2) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot2) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(12pt, 0);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of theta.250] (dot) {};
\node[link, below=4.5pt of theta.290] (dot2) {};
\node[pack, left=8pt of theta] (thetaA) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of thetaA.290] (dotA) {};
\node[link, below=4.5pt of thetaA.250] (dot2A) {};
\draw (theta.290) -- (dot2);
\draw (theta.250) -- (dot);
\draw (thetaA.250) -- (dot2A);
\draw (thetaA.290) -- (dotA);
\draw (dot2A) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dotA) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dotA) -- (dot);
\draw (dot2A) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot2) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(12pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of theta.290] (dot) {};
\coordinate (g1) at ($(dot)+(-10pt, 0)$);
\node[pack, right=8pt of theta] (thetaA) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of thetaA.250] (dotA) {};
\coordinate (g2) at ($(dotA)+(10pt, 0)$);
\coordinate (h) at ($(theta.south)+(0,-5pt)$);
\draw (theta.250) to[out=270, in=0, looseness=.8] (g1|-h);
\draw (theta.290) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (g1);
\draw (dot) to (dotA);
\draw (thetaA.290) to[out=270, in=180, looseness=.8] (g2|-h);
\draw (thetaA.250) -- (dotA);
\draw (dotA) -- (g2);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad\text{and}\quad
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=8pt of theta.290] (dot) {};
\node[pack, left=8pt of theta] (thetaA) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=8pt of thetaA.250] (dotA) {};
\coordinate[below=4.5pt of $(theta.250)!.5!(thetaA.290)$] (dot2);
\draw (theta.290) -- (dot);
\draw (thetaA.250) -- (dotA);
\draw (dotA) -- (dot);
\draw (thetaA.290) to[out=270,in=180,looseness=1.3] (dot2);
\draw (theta.250) to[out=270,in=0,looseness=1.3] (dot2);
\draw (dotA) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\node[link, below=9pt of phi.290] (dot) {};
\node[link, below=4.5pt of phi.250] (dot2) {};
\draw (phi.250) -- (dot2);
\draw (phi.290) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, below=5pt of phi.270] (dot) {};
\draw (phi.270) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
With $\varphi_1,\varphi_2,\theta$ as in \[prop.projections\], we refer to the map ${{(\delta_{\Gamma_1}{\oplus}\Gamma_2)}_!}\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\theta,\varphi_1)$ as the *left projection* and similarly to ${{(\Gamma_1{\oplus}\delta_{\Gamma_2})}_!}\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\theta,\varphi_2)$ as the *right projection*.
Finite limits in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ {#sec.finlims}
----------------------------------------
We now show how to construct finite limits in the category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ of internal functions in $P$.
\[lemma.terminal\] The object $({0},{{\mathtt{true}}})\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ is terminal.
For any context $\Gamma$ and element $\varphi\in {P}(\Gamma)$ we shall show $\varphi\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}((\Gamma,\varphi),({0},{{\mathtt{true}}})) \subseteq
{P}(\Gamma{\oplus}{0})$ is the unique element. Note first that $\varphi$ is indeed an internal function: it’s an internal relation because $\varphi\vdash \varphi$ and ${{\pi_2}_!}(\varphi) \vdash {{\mathtt{true}}}$, and is an adjunction with counit given by the fact that ${{\mathtt{true}}}$ is the top element, and unit given by meets and breaking as follows $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[pack, below=1 of phi] (phi2) {$\varphi$};
\node[link] at ($(phi)!.5!(phi2)$) (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (phi2) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[pack, below=1 of phi] (phi2) {$\varphi$};
\coordinate (ow) at ($(phi)!.5!(phi2)+(-10pt, 0)$);
\coordinate (oe) at ($(phi)!.5!(phi2)+(10pt, 0)$);
\draw (phi.south) to[out=270, in=0] (ow);
\draw (phi2.north) to[out=90, in=180] (oe);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\varphi$};
\node[pack, right=1.5 of theta] (theta') {$\varphi$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.140) rectangle (P4.east|-P2.-30);
\end{tikzpicture}$$
It remains to show uniqueness. If $\theta$ is an internal function then $\theta\vdash\varphi$, so it remains to show that $\varphi\vdash\theta$. But it is easy to verify: $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small, pack size=6pt, baseline=(P1.-20)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\draw (phi.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[pack, right=.5 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=3pt of theta'] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta');
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\theta$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$.
\[lemma.pullbacks\] Let $\theta_1\colon(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1)\to(\Gamma,\varphi)$ and $\theta_2\colon(\Gamma_2,\varphi_2)\to(\Gamma,\varphi)$ be morphisms in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$. Let $\theta_{12}\coloneqq(\theta_1{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_2{^\dagger})$. Then the following is a pullback square in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=22pt, column sep=70pt]
\left((\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2),\theta_{12}\right)
\ar[d, "{{{(\delta_{\Gamma_1}\oplus\Gamma_2)}_!}(\theta_{12})}"']
\ar[r, "{{{(\Gamma_1\oplus\delta_{\Gamma_2})}_!}(\theta_{12})}"]&
(\Gamma_2, \varphi_2)
\ar[d, "\theta_2"]\\
(\Gamma_1, \varphi_1)
\ar[r, "\theta_1"']&
(\Gamma,\varphi)
\end{tikzcd}$$
The graphical term for the proposed pullback $\left((\Gamma_1{\oplus}\Gamma_2),\theta_{12}\right)$ is shown left, and its proposed projection maps are shown middle and right: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\theta_{12}$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\draw (theta) to node[above] {$\Gamma$} (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=7 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2$};
\node[link, left=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} +(135:10pt);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} +(225:10pt);
\draw (theta'.east) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(5pt,0);
\draw (theta) -- (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=4 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta'] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta') -- (dot);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(45:10pt);
\draw (dot) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-45:10pt);
\draw (theta) -- (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\coloneqq$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P1.160) rectangle (P4.east|-P4.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Both projections are internal functions by \[prop.projections\]. The necessary diagram commutes, i.e. we have equalities $$\label{eqn.comm_diag_projs}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small,baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[funcd, below left=.5 and 1 of theta1.west] (theta1') {$\theta_1$};
\node[link] at (theta1'|-theta1) (dot) {};
\draw (theta1'.south) -- +(0, -5pt);
\draw (theta1'.north) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt,0);
\draw (dot) -- (theta1.west);
\draw (theta1.east) -- (theta2.west);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, surround sep=4pt]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2$};
\node[link, "$\Gamma$"] at ($(theta)!.5!(theta')$) (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt,0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (theta') -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(0, -10pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, minimum size=20pt]
\node[funcr] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_2$};
\node[funcd, below right=.5 and 1 of theta2.east] (theta2') {$\theta_2$};
\node[link] at (theta2'|-theta2) (dot) {};
\draw (theta2'.south) -- +(0, -5pt);
\draw (theta2'.north) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- (theta2.east);
\draw (theta1.east) -- (theta2.west);
\draw (theta1.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ because functions are deterministic (\[thm.characterize\_functions\]). Now we come to the universal property. Suppose given an object $(\Gamma',\varphi')$ and morphisms $\theta_1'\colon(\Gamma',\varphi')\to(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1)$ and $\theta_2'\colon(\Gamma',\varphi')\to(\Gamma_2,\varphi_2)$ in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$, such that the $\theta_1'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_1=\theta_2'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta_2$. Let $\pair{\theta_1',\theta_2'}$ denote the following graphical term: $$\label{eqn.pairing_pb}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD,baseline=(dot)]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta_1'$};
\node[funcr, right=2 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2'$};
\node[link, "$\Gamma$" below] at ($(theta)!.5!(theta')$) (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (theta') -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(0,10pt);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ We give one half of the proof that $\pair{\theta_1',\theta_2'}\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi',\theta_{12})$, the other half being easier. $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta_1'$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2'$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (theta');
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta1') {$\theta_1'$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta1'] (theta2') {$\theta_2'$};
\node[funcl, left=1 of theta1'] (theta1) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcr, left=1 of theta1] (theta1t) {$\theta_1$};
\draw (theta1t.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta1t) -- (theta1);
\draw (theta1) -- (theta1');
\draw (theta1') -- (theta2');
\draw (theta2'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta1') {$\theta_2'$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta1'] (theta2') {$\theta_2'$};
\node[funcl, left=1 of theta1'] (theta1) {$\theta_2$};
\node[funcr, left=1 of theta1] (theta1t) {$\theta_1$};
\draw (theta1t.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta1t) -- (theta1);
\draw (theta1) -- (theta1');
\draw (theta1') -- (theta2');
\draw (theta2'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta_2$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta) -- (theta');
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P1.160) rectangle (P4.east|-P4.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ Moreover, applying \[thm.characterize\_functions\], a similarly straightforward diagrammatic argument shows $\pair{\theta_1',\theta_2'}\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi',\theta_{12})$. We next need to show that $\pair{\theta_1',\theta_2'}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{(\delta_{\Gamma_1}\oplus\Gamma_2)}_!}(\theta_{12})=\theta_1'$ and similarly for $\theta_2'$. This follows easily from \[cor.functions\_discrete\] and the diagram $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta1) {$\theta_1'$};
\node[funcr, below=1 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta_1$};
\coordinate (helper) at ($(theta1)!.5!(theta2)$);
\node[link, left=2 of helper] (dot L) {};
\node[funcr, right=2 of theta1] (theta'1) {$\theta_2'$};
\node[link] at ($(theta1)!.5!(theta'1)$) (dot R) {};
\node[funcl, right=2 of theta2] (theta'2) {$\theta_2$};
\draw (theta1.west) to[out=180, in=60] (dot L);
\draw (theta2.west) to[out=180, in=-60] (dot L);
\draw (theta1.east) -- (dot R);
\draw (dot R) -- (theta'1.west);
\draw (dot R) -- ++(0, 5pt) to[out=90, in=180] ++(35pt,5pt);
\draw (theta2.east) -- (theta'2.west);
\draw (theta'1.east) to[out=0, in=0] (theta'2.east);
\draw (dot L) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta_1'$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-5pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P1.160) rectangle (P2.east|-P1.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ It only remains to show that this is unique. So suppose given $\theta'\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi',\theta_{12})$ with $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_1'$};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma'$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=1 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack, minimum size=15pt] (theta) {$\theta'$};
\node[link] at ($(theta.-30)+(-30:4pt)$) (dot){};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma'$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.30) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_1$} +(30:2pt);
\draw (theta.-30) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$ and $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta_2'$};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma'$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=1 of P3] (P4) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack, minimum size=15pt] (theta) {$\theta'$};
\node[link] at ($(theta.30)+(30:4pt)$) (dot){};
\draw (theta.west) to[pos=1] node[left] {$\Gamma'$} +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.-30) to[pos=1] node[right] {$\Gamma_2$} +(-30:2pt);
\draw (theta.30) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P3.east)!.5!(P4.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$. Then by basic diagram manipulations, one shows that $\theta'$ must equal the graphical term in \[eqn.pairing\_pb\], as desired.
\[prop.monos\] Suppose that $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, surround sep=2pt, font=\tiny, baseline=(theta.base)]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-2pt, 0);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ is an internal function. It is a monomorphism iff it satisfies $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_1$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(6pt,0);
\draw (dot) -- +(-6pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$.
Recall that a morphism is a monomorphism iff the projection maps of its pullbacks along itself are the identity maps. Using the characterization of the projection maps of the pullback of $\theta$ along itself (\[lemma.pullbacks\]) and the graphical logic, the proposition is immediate.
\[cor.monos\] If $\varphi\vdash_\Gamma\varphi'$, then ${{\mathrm{id}}}_{\varphi}\in {P}(\Gamma{\oplus}\Gamma)$ as in \[eqn.id\_phi\] is an element of ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}((\Gamma,\varphi),(\Gamma,\varphi'))$ and it is a monomorphism.
Since meets merge circles, we have the equality $$\label{eqn.phi_phi_phi}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=6pt, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\coordinate (theta);
\node[link, left=1.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[link, right=1.5 of theta] (dot2) {};
\node[pack, above=3pt of dot2] (phi2) {$\varphi$};
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (phi);
\draw (theta) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot2) -- (phi2);
\draw (dot) -- +(-.5cm, 0);
\draw (dot2) -- +(.5cm, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi$};
\node[link, below=1pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-7pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(7pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ and it follows easily that ${{\mathrm{id}}}_{\varphi}\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi,\varphi')$. But this also proves that ${{\mathrm{id}}}_{\varphi}$ is a monomorphism, by \[prop.monos\].
Given parallel arrows $\theta, \theta' \colon (\Gamma_1,\varphi_1) \to (\Gamma_2, \varphi_2)$, their equalizing object $(\Gamma_1,e)$ is the following graphical term: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack] (xi) {$e$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma_1$} +(-3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=12pt]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, below=.5 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta'$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of $(theta)!.5!(theta2)$] (dotw) {};
\draw (dotw) -- +(-5pt,0);
\draw (theta.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta2.west) -- (dotw);
\draw (theta.east) to[out=0, in=0] (theta2.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$
Image factorizations {#sec.images}
--------------------
We next discuss image factorizations, and show that they are stable under pullback.
Suppose that $
\theta\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ is an internal function. Define its [*image*]{}, denoted $\operatorname{im}(\theta)\in {P}(\Gamma_2)$ to be the graphical term $
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
$ or, in symbols, ${\epsilon_{\Gamma_1}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta$.
We will now show that this has the usual properties of images, for example that $\theta$ is a regular epimorphism in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ iff it satisfies $
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\varphi_2$};
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
\vdash
\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}
$.
\[prop.epis\] Consider an element $\theta\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$. The following are equivalent:
1. $\theta$, considered as a morphism in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$, is a regular epimorphism,
2. $\varphi_2\vdash_{\Gamma_2} \operatorname{im}(\theta)$,
3. $\varphi_2= \operatorname{im}(\theta)$, and
4. $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt,0);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}
$.
$(1{\Rightarrow}2)$:It is straightforward to show that $\theta\in {P}(\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2)$ is an element of ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\operatorname{im}(\theta))$. Now supposing that $\theta$ is a regular epi, i.e. that the kernel pair diagram $$\begin{tikzcd}
\varphi_1\times_{\varphi_2}\varphi_1\ar[r, shift left=3pt]\ar[r, shift right=3pt]&
\varphi_1\ar[r]&
\varphi_2
\end{tikzcd}$$ is a coequalizer, it suffices to show that $\operatorname{im}(\theta)$ also coequalizes the parallel pair: $$\label{eqn.coeqs}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small,baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, minimum size=20pt]
\node[funcr] (theta1) {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[funcd, below left=0 and .5 of theta1] (theta1') {$\theta$};
\node[link] at (theta1'|-theta1) (dot) {};
\draw (theta1'.south) -- +(0, -5pt);
\draw (theta1'.north) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- (theta1.west);
\draw (theta1.east) -- (theta2.west);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, minimum size=20pt]
\node[funcr] (theta1) {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta1] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\node[funcd, below right=0 and .5 of theta2] (theta2') {$\theta$};
\node[link] at (theta2'|-theta2) (dot) {};
\draw (theta2'.south) -- +(0, -5pt);
\draw (theta2'.north) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(10pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- (theta2.east);
\draw (theta1.east) -- (theta2.west);
\draw (theta1.west) -- +(-10pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ This follows directly from determinism.
$(2{\Rightarrow}3)$: For any relation $\theta\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_1,\varphi_2)$ we always have the converse $\operatorname{im}(\theta)\vdash\varphi_2$.
$(3{\Rightarrow}4)$: By determinism of $\theta$, we have $
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (theta) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,5pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,-5pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot L) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(dot L);
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,5pt);
\draw (dot) -- +(5pt,-5pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr,below=.3 of theta] (theta2) {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) to[out=180, in=180] (theta2.west);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\draw (theta2.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {=};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {=};
\end{tikzpicture}
$
$(4{\Rightarrow}1)$: Assuming 4, we need to show that $
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=small]
\varphi_1\times_{\varphi_2}\varphi_1\ar[r, shift left=2pt]\ar[r, shift right=2pt]&
\varphi_1\ar[r]&
\varphi_2
\end{tikzcd}
$ is a coequalizer. It is easy to show that $\varphi_2$ coequalizes the parallel pair; this is basically \[eqn.coeqs\] again. So let $\theta'\colon\varphi_1\to\varphi_2'$ coequalize the parallel pair, and define $\xi\in{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}(\varphi_2,\varphi_2')$ by $\xi\coloneqq\theta{^\dagger}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta'$. We need to show that $\xi$ is a function and that $\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\xi=\theta'$.
We obtain ${{\mathrm{id}}}_{\varphi_2}\vdash \xi{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\xi{^\dagger}$ using (4) and the fact that $\theta'$ is a function: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, baseline=(P1)]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\node[link, below=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(6pt,0);
\draw (dot) -- +(-6pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta'$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta'] (theta'') {$\theta'$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta''] (theta''') {$\theta$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (theta''.west);
\draw (theta''.east) -- (theta'''.west);
\draw (theta'''.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) (vdash) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
.$$ We obtain $\xi{^\dagger}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\xi\vdash{{\mathrm{id}}}_{\varphi_2'}$ as follows: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcl] (theta) {$\theta'$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta'] (theta'') {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta''] (theta''') {$\theta'$};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (theta''.west);
\draw (theta''.east) -- (theta'''.west);
\draw (theta'''.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=3pt of theta'] (dot) {};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta'] (theta'') {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=1.25 of theta''] (dot R) {};
\node[funcr, right=1.25 of dot R] (theta''') {$\theta'$};
\node[funcd, below=.25 of dot R] (theta) {$\theta'$};
\draw (dot) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (theta''.west);
\draw (theta''.east) -- (dot R);
\draw (dot R) -- (theta'''.west);
\draw (dot R) -- (theta.north);
\draw (theta'''.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\draw (theta.south) to[out=270, in=90] +(0, -5pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta'$};
\node[link, left=3pt of phi] (dot) {};
\node[link, right=3pt of phi] (dot R) {};
\draw (phi.west) to (dot);
\draw (phi.east) to (dot R);
\draw (dot R) -- +(45:7pt);
\draw (dot R) -- +(-45:7pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) (vdash) {$\vdash$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.170) rectangle (P3.-10);
\end{tikzpicture}$$ where the first equality comes from the fact that $\theta'$ coequalizes the parallel pair, and the second is discarding and determinism of $\theta'$. Finally, $\theta'\vdash\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta{^\dagger}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta=\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\xi$ follows easily from $\theta$ being a function. The converse $\theta{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\xi\vdash\theta'$ follows from the fact that $\theta'$ coequalizes the parallel pair: $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta'] (theta'') {$\theta$};
\node[funcr, right=1 of theta''] (theta''') {$\theta'$};
\draw (theta'.west) -- +(-4pt,0);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (theta''.west);
\draw (theta''.east) -- (theta'''.west);
\draw (theta'''.east) -- +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta') {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta'] (theta'') {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=1.5 of theta'] (dot L) {};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta''] (dot R) {};
\node[funcd, below=.25 of dot L] (theta) {$\theta'$};
\draw (theta'.west) -- (dot L);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (theta''.west);
\draw (theta''.east) -- (dot R);
\draw (dot L) -- +(-6pt,0);
\draw (dot L) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.south) -- +(0,-4pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (phi) {$\theta'$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-4pt,0);
\draw (phi.east) to +(4pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) (vdash) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\qedhere$$
\[lemma.image\_fact\] Any morphism $\theta\colon(\Gamma',\varphi')\to(\Gamma,\varphi)$ can be factored into a regular epimorphism followed by a monomorphism; the image object is $(\Gamma,{\epsilon_{\Gamma'}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta)$.
The image factorization of $\theta$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, font=\small]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (xi) {$\theta$};
\draw (xi.west) to[pos=1] node[left, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma'$} +(-3pt, 0);
\draw (xi.east) to[pos=1] node[right, font=\tiny] {$\Gamma$} +(3pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (xi) {$\theta$};
\node[outer pack, surround sep = 1pt, fit=(xi)] (cp1) {};
\node[link, right=20pt of xi] (dot) {};
\node[funcd, above=2pt of dot] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, above=2pt of theta] (dot2) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep = 0pt, fit=(theta) (dot) (dot2)] (cp2) {};
\node[outer pack, surround sep = 4pt, fit=(xi) (theta) (dot) (dot2)] (outer) {};
\draw (xi.west) to (xi-|outer.west);
\draw (xi.east) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.north) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot) to (xi-|outer.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\pgfresetboundingbox
\useasboundingbox (P1.west|-P2.160) rectangle (P2.east|-P2.-20);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$$ The graphical representation of the image object $(\Gamma,{\epsilon_{\Gamma'}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta)$ is $
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
$ . It is immediate from \[prop.epis\] that $\theta$ is a regular epimorphism $(\Gamma',\varphi') \to
(\Gamma,{\epsilon_{\Gamma'}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta)$, and from \[cor.monos\] that ${{(\delta_\Gamma)}_!}({\epsilon_{\Gamma'}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta)$ is a monomorphism $(\Gamma,{\epsilon_{\Gamma'}^*}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\theta) \to (\Gamma,\varphi)$.
\[lemma.pb\_stability\] The pullback of a regular epimorphism along any morphism is again a regular epimorphism in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$.
Suppose that $\xi\colon\varphi_1\to\varphi$ is a regular epimorphism and that $\theta\colon\varphi_2\to\varphi$ is any morphism. Then the pullback $\theta\times_{\varphi}\xi\to\varphi_2$ is a regular epimorphism by \[prop.epis\] and the following reasoning: $\begin{aligned}
\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD]
\node (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD, pack size=6pt]
\node[pack] (phi) {$\varphi_2$};
\draw (phi.west) to +(-2pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-2pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P2] (P3) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[funcl, right=1 of theta] (theta') {$\xi$};
\node[link, right=.5 of theta'] (dot) {};
\draw (theta.west) -- +(-2pt,0);
\draw (theta.east) -- (theta'.west);
\draw (theta'.east) -- (dot);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) (vdash) {$\vdash$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) (vdash) {$\vdash$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{aligned}$.
It is now straightforward to observe that ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ is a regular category.
\[page.proof\_thm.internal\_functions\] By \[lemma.terminal,lemma.pullbacks\], ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ has all finite limits, and by \[lemma.image\_fact,lemma.pb\_stability\], it has pullback-stable image factorizations.
Subobject lattices in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$
---------------------------------------------
We will find the following characterization of the subobject lattices in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ useful.
\[prop.T\_sub\_RT\] Let $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$ be a regular calculus, let $\Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ be a context, and let $s\in {P}(\Gamma)$. There is an isomorphism of posets $$\{t \in {P}(\Gamma) \mid t \leq s\} \cong {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}} (\Gamma, s),$$ with each element $t \leq s$ mapped to the subobject ${P}({{\delta}_!})(t) =
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, inner sep=0pt] (phi) {$t$};
\node[link, below=2pt of phi] (dot) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- +(-8pt, 0);
\draw (dot) -- +(8pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\colon (\Gamma,t) \to (\Gamma,s)
$.
The proposed map indeed sends each $t$ to a subobject by the characterization of monomorphisms in \[cor.monos\]. To see that it is surjective, note that given a monomorphism $\theta\colon (\Gamma',s') \to (\Gamma,s)$ in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$, \[lemma.image\_fact\] (characterizing image factorizations) shows that it is isomorphic to the monomorphism $$\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD,baseline=(current bounding box.center)]
\node[link] (dot) {};
\node[funcd, above=2pt of dot] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, above=2pt of theta] (dot2) {};
\draw (dot) -- +(-1,0);
\draw (theta.south) -- (dot);
\draw (theta.north) -- (dot2);
\draw (dot) -- +(1,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\colon
\big(\Gamma,
\resizebox{2em}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}}\big)
\to (\Gamma,s)$$ where $
\resizebox{2em}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[funcr] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, left=5pt of theta] (dot) {};
\draw (dot) -- (theta);
\draw (theta.east) -- +(5pt,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
=
{P}({{\epsilon}_!} \oplus \Gamma)(\theta)$.
To see that it is injective, suppose we have a map $\theta$ of monomorphisms $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=.5ex, column sep =6ex]
(\Gamma,t') \ar[dd, "\theta"'] \ar[dr, "{P}({{\delta}_!})(t')" near start] \\
& (\Gamma,s) \\
(\Gamma,t) \ar[ur, "{P}({{\delta}_!})(t)"' near start]
\end{tikzcd}$$ Note that this implies that $$\begin{tikzpicture}[unoriented WD, pack size=10pt]
\node (P0) {$\operatorname{im}\theta \wedge t$};
\node[right=2 of P0] (P1) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\coordinate (cent);
\node[link, left=2 of theta] (dot) {};
\node[funcr, inner sep=2pt, left=.8 of cent] (theta) {$\theta$};
\node[link, right=.8 of cent] (dot2) {};
\node[pack, above=2pt of dot2, inner sep=1pt] (phi2) {$t$};
\draw (theta.east) -- (dot2);
\draw (theta) -- (phi);
\draw (dot2) -- (phi2);
\draw (theta) -- (dot);
\draw (dot2) -- +(.5cm, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=3 of P1] (P2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}[inner WD]
\node[pack, inner sep=1pt] (phi) {$t'$};
\node[link, below=1pt of phi] (dot) {};
\node[link, left=3pt of dot] (dot0) {};
\draw (phi) -- (dot);
\draw (dot) -- (dot0);
\draw (dot) -- +(7pt, 0);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\node[right=2 of P2] (P3) {$t'$};
\node at ($(P0.east)!.5!(P1.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P1.east)!.5!(P2.west)$) {$=$};
\node at ($(P2.east)!.5!(P3.west)$) {$=$};
\end{tikzpicture}$$ and hence that $t' \le t \in {P}(\Gamma)$. Thus the subobjects $(\Gamma,t)$ and $(\Gamma,t')$ of $(\Gamma,s)$ are isomorphic if and only if $t = t'$. This proves the proposition.
Our main theorem is to prove an adjunction between regular calculi and regular categories, and we will get to this in the next section. To round out the picture, however, we quickly record that the *po-category* ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ of internal relations in a regular calculus is also regular: it is the relations po-category of ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$.
\[thm.syn\_is\_regular\] Let $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$ be a regular calculus. Then ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is isomorphic to the po-category of relations in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$. In particular, ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ is a regular po-category.
Observe that ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ and ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ have the same set of objects by definition, and that by \[prop.T\_sub\_RT\] for any two objects $(\Gamma,s)$, $(\Gamma',s')$ the poset of relations $(\Gamma,s) \tickar (\Gamma',s')$ in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ is given by $\{\theta \in {P}(\Gamma\oplus\Gamma') \mid \theta \le s \boxplus s'\}$. It remains to prove that the composition rule in ${{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}}$ agrees with composition of relations in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$. Reasoning using graphical terms, this is a straightforward consequence of \[lemma.pullbacks\], which describes pullbacks in the category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$.
${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ is essentially a reflective subcategory of ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ {#chap.ess_refl}
=========================================================================================
We have now proved \[thm.internal\_functions\], which constructs a regular category ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ from any regular calculus $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$. We call ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ the *syntactic category* corresponding to ${P}$. In this section we show that this construction is functorial, and that there is an adjunction $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{syn}}}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}.\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{prd}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ Moreover, ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ is essentially a reflective subcategory of ${{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$, in the sense that for any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the counit map ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}))\to{\mathcal{R}}$ is an equivalence of categories. In future work we plan to show that there is 2-dimensional structure throughout, such that the above adjunction extends to a 2-adjunction in which ${{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ is 2-reflective.
The functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We want to define a functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$ that is adjoint to ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ from \[prop.rels\]. On objects, this is now easy: given a regular calculus $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\in{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$, define ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\coloneqq{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ as in \[eqn.RT\]; objects are pairs $(\Gamma,\varphi)$ where $\Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
}$ and $\varphi\in {P}(\Gamma)$, and morphisms are internal functions $\theta$ as in \[thm.characterize\_functions\].
For morphisms, suppose given $(F,F^\sharp)\colon({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\to ({\mathrm{T}}',{P}')$: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=5pt]
{\mathrm{T}}\ar[dd, "F"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\ar[dd, "{\overline{F}}"']\ar[dr, bend left=15pt, "{P}", ""' name={T}]\\
&&[20pt]{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\\
{\mathrm{T}}'&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}}')}\ar[ur, bend right=15pt, "{P}'"', "" name={T'}]
\ar[from=T, to={T'-|T}, twocell, "F^\sharp"']
\end{tikzcd}$$ where again ${\overline{F}}\coloneqq{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(F)}$. We define ${\mathcal{F}}\coloneqq{{\mathbf{syn}}}(F,F^\sharp)\colon{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}\to{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}'}}$ on an object $(\Gamma,\varphi)\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ by $$\label{eqn.F_objects}
{\mathcal{F}}(\Gamma,\varphi)\coloneqq \left({\overline{F}}(\Gamma), F^\sharp_\Gamma(\varphi)\right)\in{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}'}}.$$ and on a morphism $\theta\colon(\Gamma_1,\varphi_1)\to (\Gamma_2,\varphi_2)$ by $$\label{eqn.F_morphisms}
{\mathcal{F}}(\theta)\coloneqq F^\sharp_{\Gamma_1\oplus\Gamma_2}(\theta).$$
\[thm.syn\_def\] The assignment ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({\mathrm{T}}, {P})\coloneqq{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ on objects, and \[eqn.F\_objects,eqn.F\_morphisms\] on morphisms, constitutes a functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}$.
is proved on page ; first we need the following lemma.
\[lem.funr\_preserves\_diagrams\] $F^\sharp$ preserves semantics of graphical terms.
More precisely, given any ${P}$-graphical term $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)$, the morphism $(F,F^\sharp)$ induces a ${P}'$-graphical term $(F^\sharp\theta_1,\dots,F^\sharp\theta_k; \overline{F}(\omega))$; we call this its [*image*]{} under $F^\sharp$. The image obeys $$F^\sharp\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)} =
\church{(F^\sharp\theta_1,\dots,F^\sharp\theta_k; \overline{F}(\omega))}.$$ Furthermore, given the entailment $(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega) \vdash (\theta_1',\dots,\theta_{k'}'; \omega')$, it follows that $$(F^\sharp\theta_1,\dots,F^\sharp\theta_k; \overline{F}(\omega)) \vdash
(F^\sharp\theta_1',\dots,F^\sharp\theta_{k'}'; \overline{F}(\omega')).$$
The naturality and monoidality of $(F,F^\sharp)$ imply: $$\begin{aligned}
F^\sharp\church{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k; \omega)}
&= F^\sharp({P}(\omega))(\rho(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k))) \\
&= {P}'(\overline{F}(\omega))(F^\sharp(\rho(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_k))) \\
&= {P}'(\overline{F}(\omega))(\rho(F^\sharp\theta_1,\dots,F^\sharp\theta_k)) \\
&= \church{(F^\sharp\theta_1,\dots,F^\sharp\theta_k; \overline{F}(\omega))}.
\end{aligned}$$ The second claim then follows from the monotonicity of components in $F^\sharp$.
\[page.proof\_thm.syn\_def\] First we must check that our data type-checks. We have already shown that ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ is a regular category, so it remains to show that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is a regular functor. This is a consequence of \[lem.funr\_preserves\_diagrams\].
In particular, recall from \[def.RT\] that morphisms in ${{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ can be represented by ${P}$-graphical terms obeying certain entailments. It was shown in \[sec.finlims,sec.images\] that composition, identities, finite limits, and regular epis can also be described in this way. \[lem.funr\_preserves\_diagrams\] implies that given a ${P}$-graphical term, its image under $F^\sharp$ preserves entailments and equalities. Thus ${\mathcal{F}}$ sends internal functions to internal functions of the required domain and codomain, preserves composition, identities, finite limits, and regular epis, and hence is a regular functor.
It is then immediate from the definition (\[eqn.F\_objects,eqn.F\_morphisms\]) that ${{\mathbf{syn}}}$ preserves identity morphisms and composition, and so ${{\mathbf{syn}}}$ is indeed a functor.
The essential reflection
------------------------
Recall that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})=(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}})$ and ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({P})={{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{IntRel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{IntRel}{1}}}}}_{{P}}})$; see \[eqn.rels\_on\_objects,thm.internal\_relations\].
\[prop.essential\_reflection\] For any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, there is a natural equivalence of categories $$\epsilon\colon{{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})){\xrightarrow{\simeq}}{\mathcal{R}}.$$
We will define functors $\epsilon\colon{{\mathcal{R}}_{{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})}}{\leftrightarrows}{\mathcal{R}}{:\!}\epsilon'$ and show that they constitute an equivalence. We have $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}({{\mathcal{R}}_{{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})}})=\{(\Gamma,r)\mid \Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{\mathcal{R}})}
}, \;r\in {{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{\Gamma}}\}$, so put $$\epsilon(\Gamma,r)\coloneqq r,
{\qquad\text{and}\qquad}\epsilon'(r)\coloneqq (\unary{r},r),$$ where $\unary{r}$ is the unary context on $r$ and $r{\subseteq}r={\classify{\unary{r}}}$ is the top element. Given also $(\Gamma',r')$, we have an isomorphism of hom-sets $${{\mathcal{R}}_{{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})}}\left((\Gamma,r),(\Gamma',r')\right) \cong {{{\mathsf{LAdj}}}}({{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Rel}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Rel}{1}}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}})(r,r') \cong {\mathcal{R}}(r,r'),$$ by \[def.RT,prop.rela\_rels\_rrel,lemma.fundamental\]. Hence, we define $\epsilon$ and $\epsilon'$ on morphisms to be the corresponding mutually-inverse maps. Obviously, $\epsilon$ and $\epsilon'$ are fully faithful functors, and $\epsilon'{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}\epsilon={{\mathrm{id}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}$, so $\epsilon$ is essentially surjective.
We next prove that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ is full, fulfilling a promise made after \[prop.rels\], where ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ was first defined. Recall that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})=(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}(R),{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{\mathcal{R}}}{\classify{-}})$.
\[cor.rels\_full\] The functor ${{\mathbf{prd}}}\colon{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}\to{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}$ is full.
Let ${\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{R}}'$ be regular categories, and suppose given a map $(F,F^\sharp)\colon{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}})\to{{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}')$; we need to show there exists a functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}}\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ such that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{F}})=(F,F^\sharp)$. The key idea is that $(F,F^\sharp)$ specifies the action of the desired functor ${\mathcal{F}}$ on subobject semilattices, which is enough, since every morphism in ${\mathcal{R}}$ can be recovered from its graph.
Applying ${{\mathbf{syn}}}$ to $(F,F^\sharp)$, we obtain a regular functor ${{\mathbf{syn}}}(F,F^\sharp)\colon {{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}')) \to {{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}))$. Pre- and post-composing this with the equivalences $\epsilon'_R\colon
{\mathcal{R}}\to{{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}))$ and $\epsilon_{{\mathcal{R}}'}\colon
{{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R'}}))\to{\mathcal{R}}'$ from \[prop.essential\_reflection\], we obtain a regular functor ${\mathcal{F}}\colon{\mathcal{R}} \to {\mathcal{R'}}$. It is routine to check that the image of this functor is ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{F}})=(F,F^\sharp)$.
\[thm.main\] The functors ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ and ${{\mathbf{syn}}}$ are adjoint: $${\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&, column sep=30pt]
{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\ar[r, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{syn}}}}"]\ar[r, phantom, "\Rightarrow" yshift=-.6pt]\&
{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}.\ar[l, shift left=5pt, "{{{\mathbf{prd}}}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
}$$ Moreover, ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ is fully faithful, and for any regular category ${\mathcal{R}}$, the counit map ${{\mathbf{syn}}}({{\mathbf{prd}}}({\mathcal{R}}))\to{\mathcal{R}}$ is an equivalence.
We showed that ${{\mathbf{prd}}}$ is fully faithful in \[prop.rels,cor.rels\_full\] and that there is a natural transformation $\epsilon\colon{{\mathbf{prd}}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathbf{syn}}}\to{{\mathrm{id}}}_{{{{\mathsf{RgCat}}}}}$ with the property that $\epsilon_{{\mathcal{R}}}$ is an equivalence for any ${\mathcal{R}}$. It remains to construct $\eta\colon{{\mathrm{id}}}_{{{\mathsf{RgCalc}}}}\to{{\mathbf{syn}}}{\mathbin{\fatsemi}}{{\mathbf{prd}}}$ and check that $\epsilon$ and $\eta$ satisfy the triangle identities.
Given a regular calculus $({\mathrm{T}}, {P})$, we have ${{\mathbf{prd}}}({{\mathbf{syn}}}({\mathrm{T}}, {P}))=(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}},{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}}{\classify{-}})$, where $\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}=
\{(\Gamma,\varphi)\mid\Gamma\in{
\ifthenelse{\equal{{\mathrm{T}}}{blank}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}}{{{\mathsf{FRg}}}({\mathrm{T}})}
},\varphi\in {P}(\Gamma)\}$. There is an obvious function $e\colon{\mathrm{T}}\to\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}$ sending $\tau \mapsto (\unary{\tau}, {{\mathtt{true}}})$, where as usual, $\unary{\tau}$ is the unary context and ${{\mathtt{true}}}\in {P}(\unary{\tau})$ is its top element. We will define $\eta\coloneqq(e,e^\sharp)$, where $e^\sharp(\Gamma)\colon {P}(\Gamma)\to{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}}{\classify{{\overline{e}}(\Gamma)}}={{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}}(\Gamma,{{\mathtt{true}}})$ is the natural isomorphism given in \[prop.T\_sub\_RT\]: $$\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=5pt]
{\mathrm{T}}\ar[dd, "e"']&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}({\mathrm{T}})}\ar[dd, "{\overline{e}}"']\ar[dr, bend left=15pt, "{P}", ""' name={T}]\\
&&[20pt]{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{Poset}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{Poset}{1}}}}}}\\
\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}&
{{\mathbb{\StrLeft{FRg}{1}}{{\mathsf{\StrGobbleLeft{FRg}{1}}}}}(\operatorname{{\mathrm{Ob}}}{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}})}\ar[ur, bend right=15pt, "{{{\mathsf{Sub}}}}_{{{\mathcal{R}}_{{P}}}}{\classify{-}}"', "" name={T'}]
\ar[from=T, to={T'-|T}, twocell, "e^\sharp"']
\end{tikzcd}$$ The fact that $\epsilon_{{\mathcal{R}}}$ is an equivalence and that $e^\sharp$ is a natural isomorphism make the triangle identities particularly easy (if tedious) to verify. This completes the proof.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
---------------
The authors thank Paolo Perrone for comments that have improved this article.
[^1]: Spivak and Fong acknowledge support from AFOSR grants FA9550-14-1-0031 and FA9550-17-1-0058.
[^2]: By the idempotence of support contexts \[eqn.idem\_support\], one may equivalently include the whole support, $S$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We consider a Brownian particle moving on a ring. We study the probability distributions of the total number of turns and the net number of counter-clockwise turns the particle makes till time $t$. Using a method based on the renewal properties of Brownian walker, we find exact analytical expressions of these distributions. This method serves as an alternative to the standard path integral techniques which are not always easily adaptable for certain observables. For large $t$, we show that these distributions have Gaussian scaling forms. We also compute large deviation functions associated to these distributions characterizing atypically large fluctuations. We provide numerical simulations in support of our analytical results.'
author:
- Anupam Kundu
- Alain Comtet
- 'Satya N. Majumdar'
title: Winding statistics of a Brownian particle on a ring
---
Introduction
============
Starting from the pioneering works of Edwards [@Edwards67; @Edwards68], statistical studies of winding properties of topologically constrained random processes have been a subject of keen interest in various contexts such as in the physics of polymers [@Rudnik87; @Rudnik88; @Grosberg03; @wiegel], the fluxlines in superconductors [@Nelson88; @Drossel96] and many others. The winding properties of planar Brownian paths have also been a subject of interest to mathematicians for a long time. In 1958, Spitzer [@Spitzer58] studied the distribution of the total angle $\theta(t)$ wound by a planar Brownian path around a prescribed point in time $t$. He showed that in the large time limit the scaled random variable $\frac{2\theta(t)}{\ln t}$ has a Cauchy distribution *i.e.* with infinite first moment. Later, various generalizations and extensions of this classic result have been put forward [@Rudnik87; @Rudnik88]. Further asymptotic laws of planar Brownian motion unifying and extending this approach to the case of $n$ different points were obtained by Pitman and Yor [@Pittman86]. Recently, winding properties of other planar processes such as time correlated Gaussian process [@Doussal09], Schramm-Loewner evolution[@Schram], loop erased random walk [@Hagendrof08] and conformally invariant curves [@Duplantier02] have also been studied.
![(Color online) (a) A Brownian particle diffusing on a ring of unit radius. []{data-label="fig1"}](part-on-ring.pdf)
For constrained Brownian trajectories on a surface, the methods of computing probabilities associated with the winding properties are mathematically similar to the path integral of a quantum particle coupled to magnetic fields [@Brereton87; @Khandekar88; @Comtet90; @Comtet91]. This similarity has been exploited in various situations, for example, the algebraic number of full turns a polymer makes around a cylinder on which it lays, can be analyzed by studying the physics of a charged quantum particle interacting with a tube of magnetic flux [@Nelson97]. Thermal fluctuation in the trajectory of a vortex defect in the superconducting order parameter [@Nelson89], which are characterized by winding numbers, can be analyzed by studying path integrals of a polymer melt. These kind of path integral techniques have also been used to study other quantities, like e.g. the area between a Brownian path and its subtending chord [@Duplantier89; @Comtet90; @Comtet91]. Other functionals of the Brownian motion that occur in the context of weak localization have been discussed in [@Comtet05].
In this paper we study winding properties of a Brownian particle moving on a ring of unit radius (see Fig. \[fig1\]) analytically. In mesoscopic physics, such diffusion on a ring geometry appears important in quantum transport through a connected ring. The weak localization correction to the classical conductance of the ring can be computed from the knowledge of the net number of complete turns around the ring [@Texier]. Here we are, in particular, interested in the distributions of total number of turns $n(t)$ and the net number of counter-clockwise turns $k(t)$ the particle makes around the circle till time $t$ in the following two different cases: (a) [*Free*]{}: the position $\theta(t)$ of the particle at time $t$ is not constrained and, (b) [*Constrained*]{} : the position $\theta(t)$ of the particle at time $t$ is constrained to be the starting point (A in Fig. \[fig1\]) *i.e.* $\theta(t)=2\pi l$ where $l$ is an integer. The path configurations in case (b) are called Brownian bridges on a circle. If $\theta(t)$ represents the position of the particle on the circle, then its stochastic evolution is given by the following equations $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d \theta}{dt}= \sqrt{2D}~\xi(t),~~
\langle \xi(t) \rangle = 0,~~~~~\langle \xi(t)\xi(t') \rangle = \delta(t-t'), \label{langevin}\end{aligned}$$ where $D$ is the diffusion constant and $\xi(t)$ is a mean zero white Gaussian noise. As time increases, the particle turns around the circle both clockwise and counter-clockwise. Let $n_+(t)$ be the number of full counter clockwise turns and $n_-(t)$ be the number of full clockwise turns the particle makes in time $t$, then the total number of full turns and the net number of full counter-clockwise turns are given by $n(t)=n_+(t) + n_-(t)$ and $k(t)=n_+(t) - n_-(t) $ respectively. Clearly, $n(t)$ and $k(t)$ are random variables and they are called the total winding number and net winding number respectively. We would like to compute the distributions $P(n,t)$ of $n(t)$, $R(k,t)$ of $k(t)$ and also the joint distribution $P(n,k,t)$ for both the [*[free]{}*]{} and the [*[constrained]{}*]{} cases. In previous studies for example in the context of polymers [@wiegel], in the context planar Brownian trajectories [@Comtet90] or in the context of vortex lines in type II superconductors [@Nelson97], path integral techniques have been successfully used to evaluate winding statistics of net winding numbers, where one maps the problem of finding the probabilities to the problem of finding the propagator of a suitable quantum particle. In contrast, here it seems adapting the path integral techniques is not easy. For example, it is hard to implement the path integral techniques for computing the distributions of quantities like the total winding number $n(t)$ and the net winding number $k(t)$ especially in the [*[free]{}*]{} case. The main purpose of this paper is to present an alternative method based on [*[renewal]{}*]{} properties of the process that allows us to compute the winding distribution exactly.
Let us present a brief summary of our results. We study the statistics of the total winding number and the net winding number of single Brownian particle on the ring for the [*free*]{} and the [*constrained*]{} case separately. First, we consider the [*free*]{} case. For this case, we obtain exact expressions for the mean and variance of both the total winding number $n$ and the net winding number $k$ as a function of time $t$. We see that for large $t$, the mean total winding number grows linearly as $\langle n(t) \rangle \sim \frac{D}{2\pi^2}t$ and its variance also grows linearly as $V(t) = \langle n(t)^2 \rangle - \langle n(t) \rangle^2 \simeq \frac{D}{3\pi^2}t$. On the other hand, the mean net winding number $\langle k(t) \rangle=0$. In fact all odd order moments of $k$ are zero. This is because the probabilities of getting net winding number $k$ and $-k$ at any time $t$, are equal when the particle starts from the origin. The variance of $k$ grows as $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle|_{t \to \infty} \simeq \frac{D}{2\pi^2}t$ which can be understood simply by writing the position of the walker $\theta(t)$ as $\theta(t)=2\pi k(t) + \zeta(t)$ where $\zeta(t)$ corresponds to the displacement of the walker in the time remaining after the last complete turn. Since the displacement $\zeta(t)$ is bounded in $(-2\pi~:~2\pi)$, we have $\langle k^2(t)\rangle \simeq \langle
\left (\frac{ x(t) }{2\pi^2} \right)^2 \rangle=\frac{D}{2\pi^2}t$ for large $t$. These large $t$ behavior of the moments suggests, that the random variable $\chi_{tot} = \frac{n-\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}}{\sqrt{t}}$, constructed from the random variable $n$, will have a $t$ independent distribution in the large $t$ limit. Similarly, the random variable $\chi_{net} = \frac{k}{\sqrt{t}}$ will also have a $t$ independent distribution in the large $t$ limit. This means, the distribution $P(n,t)$ of the total winding number $n$ and the distribution $R(k,t)$ of the net winding number $k$, have the following scaling forms $P(n,t) \simeq \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}G\left(\frac{n-\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}}{\sqrt{t}}\right)$ and $R(k,t) \simeq \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}H\left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{t}}\right)$ respectively. We compute the scaling functions exactly and they are given by simple Gaussians, $$G(y)= \sqrt{\frac{3\pi}{2D}}\text{exp}\left[ -\frac{3\pi^2}{2D} y^2\right],~~~~\text{and}~~~~
H(y)= \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{D}}\text{exp}\left[ -\frac{\pi^2}{D} y^2\right].\label{Gauss}$$ We have verified these scaling distributions numerically. Here we mention that, the above scaling distributions are valid for large $t$ and over the region where the fluctuations of $n$ and $k$ around their respective means are typical *i.e.* $\lesssim \mathcal{O}(\sqrt{t})$. When these fluctuations around their respective means are larger than $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{t})$, then the probabilities can not be described by the scaling distributions in Eq. (\[Gauss\]). The probabilities of atypically large fluctuations of $\mathcal{O}(t)$ are described by large deviation functions. We will see in Sec. (\[LDFs\]) that, for large $n$ and $t$ but $\frac{n}{t}$ fixed, and similarly, for large $k$ and $t$ but $\frac{k}{t}$ fixed, the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ have the following large deviation forms $$\begin{aligned}
P(n,t) &&\overset{n \to \infty,~t \to \infty}{\underset{\frac{n}{t}~\text{fixed}}{\xRightarrow{\hspace*{1.5cm}}}}~%\dfrac{1}{t}
~\text{exp}\left[ -t~\mathcal{G}\left(\frac{n}{t}\right)\right], \label{LDF-tot} \\
R(k,t) &&\overset{k \to \infty,~t \to \infty}{\underset{\frac{k}{t}~\text{fixed}}{\xRightarrow{\hspace*{1.5cm}}}}~%\dfrac{1}{t}
~\text{exp}\left[ -t~\mathcal{H}\left(\frac{k}{t}\right)\right].\label{LDF-net}\end{aligned}$$ In this paper, we compute these large deviation functions $\mathcal{G}(x)$ and $\mathcal{H}(x)$. We also find exact analytical expressions of $P(n,t)$, $R(k,t)$ and the joint distribution $P(n,k,t)$ for arbitrary $n$ and $k$ at any time $t$.
Next we study the case where the trajectories of the Brownian particle are constrained to be exactly at $2\pi l$ with $l =0,\pm1,\pm2,\pm3...$ at time $t$. In this case we denote the probability distributions of $n$ and $k$ by $P_c(n,t)$ and $R_c(k,t)$ respectively and the joint distribution by $P_c(n,k,t)$ where the subscript “c” stands for [*constrained*]{} trajectories. We find exact expressions of these distributions at any time $t$. Moreover, we show that in the large $t$ limit, the scaling forms and the large deviation functions associated to the distributions $P_c(n,t)$ and $R_c(k,t)$ are exactly same as in the previous case *i.e* the scaling distributions are described by the same functions $G(y)$ and $H(y)$ whereas the large deviation functions are also described by $\mathcal{G}(x)$ and $\mathcal{H}(x)$.
The paper is organized as follows. In section \[free\] we study the winding statistics for the [*[free]{}*]{} case *i.e.* for unconstrained Brownian motion on the ring. In the beginning of this section we discuss in detail about the connection between making a complete turn around the circle and making first exit from a box of size $4\pi$. Then in the subsection \[MVS-dis\] we compute the time dependence of the moments of $n$ and $k$ and also their scaling distributions. In the next subsection \[LDFs\] we find the large deviation forms associated to the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$. In subsection \[exact\] we derive exact explicit expressions of the $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ for arbitrary $n$ and $k$. After completing the analysis for the [*[free]{}*]{} case, in section \[Brow-brdg\] we study the moments and the distributions $P_c(n,t)$ and $R_c(k,t)$ corresponding to $n$ and $k$ for Brownian bridge on a ring. In the last section \[conclusion\] we present our conclusion. Few details are left in the Appendix.
Un-constrained Brownian motion on the ring {#free}
==========================================
As mentioned in the introduction, the renewal properties of the Brownian walker helps us to find the distributions of the number of complete counter-clockwise turns $n_+(t)$ and the number of complete clockwise turns $n_-(t)$ around the circle in time $t$. To see how, let us look at (see Fig. \[fig1a\]) a typical trajectory of the Brownian particle on the ring, starting at the origin. In Fig. \[fig1a\] we see that the particle makes its first full turn around the circle at time $\tau_1$ when it makes, starting at the origin, a first exit from the box $[-2\pi,~2\pi]$ (magenta box). In the next time interval $[\tau_1, \tau_1+\tau_2]$ the particle, starting at $2\pi$, makes a first exit from the box $[0,~4\pi]$ (blue box) and thus completing its second full turn around the circle at time $\tau_1+\tau_2$. Similar first exit events happen for each of the successive complete turns at later time intervals except in the last time interval where the particle may not have enough time to perform a complete turn. So we see that, each complete turn around the circle is associated to a first exit from a box of size $4\pi$ given that the particle starts from the center of the box and after each complete turn the location of the center of the box gets shifted to the particle’s current position to perform similar first exit for the next complete turn *i.e.* to renew the first exit process for the next complete turn.
![(Color online) The top panel of this plot contains a typical trajectory (black zig-zag line) of the particle over time $t$. This particular trajectory wounds the circle around completely five times in time intervals $\tau_1,\tau_2,...,\tau_5$ successively. Each of these complete turn around the circle is associated to the first exit of the particle from a box of size $4\pi$ given that the particle started from the center of the box. After each complete turn this first exit process gets renewed with the center of the box shifted to the particle’s current position as shown by the different colored boxes. The bottom panel shows the increase of $n_+$ and $n_-$ with time corresponding to this particular trajectory. []{data-label="fig1a"}](path-ring-nw.pdf)
The first exit through the upper boundary of the box corresponds to a full counter-clockwise turn around the circle whereas the first exit through the lower boundary corresponds to a full clockwise turn around the circle. Using this connection with first exit problem from a box of length $4\pi$ and the renewal property of a Brownian walker we study the distributions of having total winding number $n$ and net winding number $k$ in time $t$ for both [*free*]{} and [*constrained*]{} cases.
![(Color online) First exit of the Brownian particle through the boundaries of the box $[-2\pi,~2\pi]$.[]{data-label="fig2"}](frst-pssg.pdf)
If $f(t)$ represents the first exit probability distribution of the particle from the box of size $4\pi$ given that it had started from the center of the box, then the probability that the particle starting from the origin, makes a complete counter-clockwise turn in time $t$ to $t+dt$, is given by $\frac{f(t)}{2}dt$. Similarly, by symmetry (as the particle starts at the center of the box), the probability that it makes a clockwise turn in time $t$ to $t+dt$, is also given by $\frac{f(t)}{2}dt$. To compute $f(t)$, it turns out to be convenient to study $q(x,t)$ which represents the survival probability that the particle, starting from position $\theta(0)=x$, stays inside the box $[-2\pi,~2\pi]$ (see Fig. \[fig2\]) till time $t$. Knowing $q(x,t)$, the first exit probability is then given by $$f(t)= - \frac{d q(t)}{d t}~~\text{where}~~~q(t)\equiv q(0,t). \label{FPndSVl}$$ The survival probability $q(x,t)$ satisfies the following Backward Fokker-Planck equation [@RednerBook; @Satya05; @Bray13] $$\frac{\partial q(x,t) }{\partial t} = D \frac{\partial^2 q(x,t)}{\partial x^2},\label{BFP1}$$ with initial condition $q(x,0)=1$ and boundary conditions (BCs) $q(x=\pm 2\pi,t)=0$. To solve the above equation it is convenient to use the Laplace transform (LT) and inverse Laplace transform (ILT) which for a general function $g(t)$ are defined as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\text{LT~of}~g(t): &&\tilde{g}(s) = \mathcal{L}_s[g(t)] = \int_0^{\infty}dt~ e^{-st}g(t)~, \nonumber \\
\text{ILT~of}~\tilde{g}(s):&& g(t) =\mathcal{L}_t^{-1}[\tilde{g}(s)] =\frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds ~\tilde{g}(s)~e^{st}, \label{LT-def}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathcal{B}$ stands for the Bromwich integral in the complex $s$ plane. Taking the Laplace transform $\tilde{q}(x,s) = \mathcal{L}_s\left[q(x,t) \right]$ on both sides of Eq. (\[BFP1\]), we get $D \frac{\partial^2 \tilde{q}(x,s)}{\partial x^2} - s\tilde{q}(x,s)=-1$ with BCs $\tilde{q}(x=\pm 2\pi,s)=0$, whose solution at $x=0$ is given by $$\tilde{q}(s)\equiv \tilde{q}(0,s) = \frac{1}{s} \left[1-\text{sech} \left(2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right) \right],~~
\text{which~provides}~~q(t)=\mathcal{L}_t^{-1}[\tilde{q}(s)]. \label{qtilde}$$ Now taking derivative of $q(t)$ with respect to $t$ we get $f(t)=-dq(t)/dt$ from Eq. (\[FPndSVl\]) whose LT is given by $$\tilde{f}(s) = \mathcal{L}_s[f(t)]=1-s\tilde{q}(s) = \text{sech} \left(2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right). \label{ftilde}$$
Knowing $q(t)$ and $f(t)$, we proceed to compute $P(n,t)$ as follows. Consider the event of $n$ complete turns in $[0,t]$ and let $\{\tau_1,\tau_2,\ldots, \tau_n\}$ denote their respective durations (see Fig. \[fig1a\]). The difference $\tau_{\rm last}= t- \sum_{i=1}^n {\tau_i}$ denotes the duration of the last unfinished turn. The probability of such an event, where both the number of turns $n$ as well as their durations $\{\tau_i\}'s$ are random variables, is denoted by $\mathcal{P}(n,~\{\tau_1,\tau_2,....,\tau_n,\tau_{last}\};~t)$ and can be expressed as $$\mathcal{P}(n,~\{\tau_1,\tau_2,....,\tau_n,\tau_{last}\};~t) = f(\tau_1)f(\tau_2)...f(\tau_n)~q(\tau_{\rm last})~
\delta \left( t-\tau_{\rm last}-\sum \limits_{i=1}^n \tau_i\right) \label{JPDF1}$$ where $q(\tau)$ is the survival probability in Eq. (\[qtilde\]) and $f(\tau)=-dq(\tau)/d\tau$ is the first exit probability from the box. The first $n$ factors involving $f$ in Eq. (\[JPDF1\]) represent $n$ complete turns (or the first exits from the box of length $4\pi$ as explained in Fig. \[fig1a\]), the last factor $q(\tau_{\rm last})$ represents the unfinished turn (*i.e.*, the probability to stay inside the box during $\tau_{\rm last}$ as shown in Fig. \[fig1a\]). Finally the delta function represents the fact that the durations of all these intervals add up to $t$. In writing this joint distribution in Eq. (\[JPDF1\]), we have used the renewal property of the Brownian motion, *i.e.*, the successive intervals are statistically independent.
Similar renewal equations appeared before in the study of the record statistics of discrete time random walkers [@MajumZiff; @wergen; @Schehr14; @Godreche14]. In the context of record statistics, $q(t)$ represents the probability that the walker stays below its starting position up to $t$ steps and $f(t)=q(t-1)-q(t)$ represents the first-passage probability that the walker crosses its starting position from below for the first time in between steps $t-1$ and $t$. In contrast here we have continuous time $t$ and $q(t)$ and $f(t)$ represent respectively the survival and the first exit probability from a finite box $[0,4\pi]$.
The probability $P(n,t)$ that the particle makes $n$ complete turns either clockwise or anti clockwise in time $t$, can then be obtained from the joint probability density in Eq. (\[JPDF1\]) by integrating over all the durations $$\begin{aligned}
P(n,t) = \int_0^{t}d\tau_1\int_0^{t}d\tau_2...\int_0^{t}d\tau_n \int_0^{t}d\tau_{\rm last}
~~\mathcal{P}(n,~\{\tau_1,\tau_2,....,\tau_n,\tau_{last}\};~t). \label{P_n-1}\end{aligned}$$ As we will see later, instead of working with these multiple time integrals, it is simpler to work in Laplace space. Using the convolution structure in Eq. (\[P\_n-1\]), we perform Laplace transform with respect to $t$ and get $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{P}(n,s)&=&\mathcal{L}_s[P(n,t)]=\int_0^{\infty}e^{-st}p(n,t)~dt, \nonumber \\
&=&\left[\tilde{f}(s) \right]^n\tilde{q}(s)= \frac{1}{s}~\frac{\cosh\left(2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right)-1}
{\left[\cosh\left(2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right)\right]^{n+1}}, \label{LTP_n}\end{aligned}$$ where we have used Eq. (\[qtilde\]) and (\[ftilde\]). From the above expression one can easily check that, $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}P(n,t)=1$ as $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\tilde{P}(n,s)=s^{-1}$. Finally, taking ILT of $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ given explicitly above, we get the probability $P(n,t)$ that the particle has total winding number $n$ in time $t$ as $$P(n,t) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\left[\tilde{f}(s) \right]^n\tilde{q}(s). \label{ILTP_n}$$
Once we know $P(n,t)$, the joint probability $P(n,k,t)$ that the particle has total winding number $n$ and net winding number $k$ in time $t$, can simply be obtained as follows: Given the particle makes a complete turn around the circle at time $t$ to $t+dt$ with probability $f(t)dt$, the probability that it makes a counter-clockwise turn is $f_+(t)dt=\frac{f(t)}{2}dt$ and similarly, the probability that it makes a clockwise turn is also $f_-(t)dt=\frac{f(t)}{2}dt$. This is because the probabilities associated to the first exits trough the upper and lower boundaries are equal when the particle starts from the center of the box. Hence, given that the particle makes a complete turn at time $t$, the probability that this turn will be a counter-clockwise turn is $\frac{1}{2}$ and the probability that this turn will be a clockwise turn is also $\frac{1}{2}$. So the probability that there are $m$ counter clockwise turns out of $n$ total complete turns is given by ${n \choose m} \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^m~\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{n-m}$ where the binomial factor represents the number of ways to choose $m$ counter-clockwise turns from $n$ total complete turns. If the particle has total winding number $n$ and net winding number $k$, there must be $n_+=\frac{n+k}{2}$ complete counter-clockwise turns and the rest $n_-=\frac{n-k}{2}$ clockwise turns in time $t$. Hence, the joint probability of having total winding number $n$ and net winding number $k$ in time $t$, is then given by $ P(n,k,t)=\text{Prob.}[n_+=\frac{n+k}{2}~\text{counter-clockwise~turns}~$ $\text{given~that~there~are~}
n~\text{total~no.~of~turns}]$ $
~\times~\text{Prob.}\left[n~\text{total~no.~of~turns~in~time}~t\right] $ *i.e.* $$\begin{aligned}
P(n,k,t) &=& {n \choose \frac{n+k}{2}}~\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^n~P(n,t). \label{Joint-free}\end{aligned}$$ From this joint probability, the marginal probability $R(k,t)$ of having net winding number $k$ in time $t$, is obtained by summing over $n$ as follows $$% R(k,t) = \sum \limits_{n=k,k+2,k+4,...} P(n,k,t) = \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} P(2m+k,k,t),
R(k,t) = \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} P(2m+|k|,k,t),$$ whose LT can be expressed using Eq. (\[ILTP\_n\]) as $\tilde{R}(k,s) = \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty}{2m+|k| \choose m}~\left(\frac{\tilde{f}(s)}{2}\right)^{2m+|k|}\tilde{q}(s)$. Now using the identity [@wiki] $$\sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty}{2m+|k| \choose m}z^m = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-4z}}\left(\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4z}}{2z} \right)^{|k|};~|z| < \frac{1}{4},$$ and performing some algebraic simplification we get $$\tilde{R}(k,s) = \mathcal{L}_s[R(k,t)] = \frac{1}{s} \tanh\left(\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right)~\text{exp}\left(-2\pi |k|\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right). \label{LTR-k}$$ one can find explicit expressions of $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ after performing the inverse Laplace transforms of $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ and $\tilde{R}(k,s)$. Before doing that, let us try to understand whether $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ have scaling distributions by looking at how the mean and variance of $n$ and $k$ grow with time $t$.
Moments and scaling distributions {#MVS-dis}
----------------------------------
The $m$th moment of the total winding number $n$ can formally be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\langle n(t)^m \rangle &=& \sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} n^m~P(n,t)
= \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} n^m~\tilde{P}(n,s),\end{aligned}$$ where $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ is given explicitly in Eq. (\[LTP\_n\]). One can write a similar expression for the $m$th moment of the net winding number $k$, with only difference is that $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ will now be replaced by $\tilde{R}(k,s)$. Looking at the expression of $\tilde{R}(k,s)$ in Eq. (\[LTR-k\]) closely, we see $\tilde{R}(k,s) = \tilde{R}(-k,s)$, which implies that all odd order moments of $k$ are zero. Using the expressions of $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ and $\tilde{R}(k,s)$ from Eqs. (\[LTP\_n\]) and (\[LTR-k\]), and performing some algebraic manipulations, one can show that $$\begin{aligned}
\langle n(t) \rangle =\langle k(t)^2 \rangle &=& \frac{1}{2}~\frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} dq~\frac{1}{q~\sinh^2(\sqrt{q})}e^{\frac{qDt}{\pi^2}}
\label{mean-contour}\\
\langle n(t)^2 \rangle &=&\frac{1}{4}~\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\mathcal{B}} dq~\frac{\cosh(2\sqrt{q})+1}{q~\sinh^4(\sqrt{q})}~e^{\frac{qDt}{\pi^2}}.
\label{2ndmom-contour}\end{aligned}$$
![(Color online) Comparison of the moments obtained through direct numerical simulation of the Langevin equation (\[langevin\]) with the analytically obtained expressions in Eqs. (\[mean-appndx\]) and (\[second-appndx\]).[]{data-label="fig3"}](av-n-ksq-vs-t.pdf)
These Bromwich integrals can be computed by computing residues at the poles $q_l = -l^2\pi^2$ for $l=0, 1,2,3...$ of $\text{cosech}(\sqrt{q})$. Exact expressions of $\langle n(t) \rangle$, $\langle n(t)^2 \rangle$ and $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle$ are given in Eqs. (\[mean-appndx\]) and (\[second-appndx\]). In Fig. (\[fig3\]) we compare these analytical expressions with the same obtained from direct numerical simulations of the Langevin equation in Eq. (\[langevin\]) and see nice agreement. From these analytical expressions one can easily see the following small and large $t$ behaviors $$\begin{aligned}
\langle n(t) \rangle \simeq
\begin{cases}
& \frac{2\sqrt{Dt}}{\pi\sqrt{\pi}}~\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2}{Dt} \right);~~t\to 0 \\
& \\
& \left(\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}-\frac{1}{6}\right);~~~~~~~~~~~t \to \infty,
\end{cases}
~~~\text{and}~~~
\langle n(t)^2 \rangle \simeq
\begin{cases}
&\frac{2\sqrt{Dt}}{\pi\sqrt{\pi}}~\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2}{Dt} \right); ~~t\to 0 \\
&\\
& \frac{D^2t^2}{4\pi^4} + \frac{Dt}{6\pi^2} -\frac{2}{45} ;~~~~t \to \infty.
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ Such small and large $t$ behavior of the mean and variance, can also be obtained, respectively, from the large and small $q$ behaviors of the integrands in the Eqs. (\[mean-contour\]) and (\[2ndmom-contour\]). Following similar procedure one can easily show from Eq. (\[Joint-free\]) and Eq. (\[ILTP\_n\]) that the correlation between $n$ and $k$ for large $t$, grows as $\sim t^{3/2}$.
![(Color online) In figure (a) we compare the distribution $P(n,t)$ obtained from simulation with the scaling function $G(y)$ by plotting $\sqrt{t}P(n,t)$ vs. $(n-\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2})/\sqrt{t}$ along with $G(y)$ vs. $y$. In figure (b) we compare the distribution $R(k,t)$ obtained from simulation with the scaling function $H(y)$ by plotting $\sqrt{t}R(k,t)$ vs. $k/\sqrt{t}$ along with $H(y)$ vs. $y$[]{data-label="fig4"}](sclng-dist.pdf)
The linear growths of $\sigma^2_n(t)=\langle n(t)^2 \rangle-\langle n(t) \rangle^2$ and $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle$ at large $t$, suggest that if we scale the fluctuations of $n$ and $k$ around their mean by $\sqrt{t}$ then the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ will have the following scaling forms $P(n,t) \simeq \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}G\left(\frac{n-\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}}{\sqrt{t}}\right)$ and $R(k,t) \simeq \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}}H\left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{t}}\right)$ where the scaling functions $G(y)$ and $H(y)$ are given in Eq. (\[Gauss\]). In Fig. (\[fig4\]) we verify these scaling forms by comparing them with $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ obtained from direct simulation of the Langevin equation (\[langevin\]). In Fig. (\[fig4\]a) we plot numerically obtained $\sqrt{t}~P(n,t)$ against $(n-\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2})/\sqrt{t}$ for $t=100$ and $t=200$ and on comparison with $G(y)$ (blue line) we see nice agreement. On the other hand, in Fig. (\[fig4\]b) we plot numerically obtained $\sqrt{t}~R(k,t)$ against $\frac{k}{\sqrt{t}}$ for $t=100$ and $t=200$, to compare with the scaling distribution $H(y)$ (blue line). Here also we see nice agreement. The scaling forms of $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$, specified by the scaling functions $G(y)$ and $H(y)$ respectively, are valid for large $t$ and over the regions, where their fluctuations around their respective means are $\lesssim \mathcal{O}(\sqrt{t})$. When these fluctuations around their respective means are of $\mathcal{O}(t)$, then the probability distributions are described by large deviation tails.
Large deviation forms of the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ {#LDFs}
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the previous subsection we have studied the scaling distributions associated to $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$, which describe the typical fluctuations of $n$ and $k$ around their respective means. In this subsection, we will study the distributions of atypically large fluctuations which are described by the large deviation tails. We will see that for large $n$ and $t$ but $\frac{n}{t}$ fixed, and similarly, for large $k$ and $t$ but $\frac{k}{t}$ fixed, the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ have large deviation forms as given in Eqs. (\[LDF-tot\]) and (\[LDF-net\]). Let us first focus on deriving the large deviation form of the probability distribution $P(n,t)$ of the total winding number $n$. Taking $n \to \infty$ and $t \to \infty$ limit while keeping $n/t$ finite, one can write the right hand side of Eq. (\[ILTP\_n\]) in the following form $$\begin{aligned}
&& P(n,t) \simeq \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~~e^{t[\Psi(s,x) + \mathcal{O}(1/t)]}, \nonumber \\
\text{where}~~~\Psi(s,x)&=&s+\frac{n}{t}\ln \tilde{f}(s)= s + \frac{xD}{2 \pi^2} \ln \left[\text{sech}\left( 2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right) \right]
~~~\text{with}~~~x=\frac{2\pi^2}{D}\left( \frac{n}{t}\right),\label{Psi}\end{aligned}$$ because the survival probability $q(\tau_{last})$ in the remaining last time interval in Eq. (\[JPDF1\]) do not contribute at the leading order. Performing a saddle point calculation for large $t$, one can see that the distribution $P(n,t)$ has the following large deviation form $$P(n,t) \approx e^{-t\mathcal{G} \left(x\right)};~~\text{with}~~~x=\frac{2\pi^2n}{Dt}, \label{LDP_n}$$ as mentioned in the introduction. The large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ can be obtained from the minimum of $-\Psi(s,x)$ for fixed $x$ *i.e.* $$\mathcal{G}(x)= -\Psi(s^*,x) = -s^* - \frac{xD}{4\pi^2} \ln \left(1-\frac{4\pi^2s^*}{Dx^2} \right), \label{Gx+}$$ where $s^*$ is the solution of $\frac{\partial \Psi(s,x)}{\partial s}\big{|}_{s^*}=0$, which in turn implies $$s^*=\frac{D\alpha^{*2}}{4\pi^2},~~~\text{with}~~~\frac{\alpha^*}{\tanh \alpha^*} =x. \label{alpha*}$$ for given $x$. Here we observe that this transcendental equation has solution $\alpha^*$ only for $x\ge1$ which means $s^*$ obtained from this solution can provide $\mathcal{G}(x)$ for $x \ge 1$ only. This is because the Laplace transform $\tilde{P}(n,s)$ is defined for $s \ge 0$. To obtain $\mathcal{G}(x)$ for $x \in[0, 1]$ we need to analytically continue $\Psi(s,x)$ for negative $s$ and that is done by using $\text{sech}\left( 2\pi\sqrt{\frac{-|s|}{D}}\right)=\sec \left( 2\pi\sqrt{\frac{|s|}{D}}\right)$ in Eq. (\[Psi\]). Hence for $s<0$, we have $$\Psi(s,x)|_{s < 0} = s + \frac{xD}{2 \pi^2} \ln\left[\sec\left( 2\pi\sqrt{|s|/D}\right) \right],
~~~\text{where}~~~x=\frac{2\pi^2n}{Dt}. \label{Psi-s-ngtv}$$ Following the same calculation as done for $s \ge 0$, we get $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{G}(x) &=& -\Psi(-|s|^*,x)= |s|^* - \frac{xD}{4\pi^2} \ln \left(1+\frac{4\pi^2|s|^*}{Dx^2} \right), \label{Gx-} %\\\end{aligned}$$ where $|s|^*$ is obtained from $$|s|^*=\frac{D\beta^{*2}}{4\pi^2},~~~\text{with}~~\frac{\beta^*}{\tan \beta ^*} =x, \label{beta*}$$ for given $x$. So first solving Eq. (\[alpha\*\]) for $x \ge 1$ and Eq. (\[beta\*\]) for $x \le 1$ and then using these solutions in Eqs. (\[Gx+\]) and (\[Gx-\]), respectively, we get the large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ for $x \in [0,\infty]$. Solving Eqs. (\[alpha\*\]) and (\[beta\*\]) analytically for arbitrary values of $x$ is not easy. Instead we solve these transcendental equations numerically and use those solutions to compute $\mathcal{G}(x)$ from Eqs. (\[Gx+\]) and (\[Gx-\]). In Fig. (\[fig5\]), we plot the large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ as a function of $x$.
One can find the form of $\mathcal{G}(x)$ explicitly in the following three limits (i) $x \to 0$, (ii) $x \to 1$ and (iii) $x \to \infty$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{G}(x) \simeq
\label{Gx-asmtry}
\begin{cases}
& \frac{D}{16} + \frac{D}{2\pi^2}~x\ln x,~~~~~x \to 0, \\
&\\
& \frac{3D}{8\pi^2}(x-1)^2,~~~~~~~|x-1| \to 0, \\
&\\
& \frac{D}{4\pi^2}x^2, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~x \to \infty.
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
- As $x\to 0$, the solution of Eq. (\[beta\*\]) is $\beta^* \simeq \frac{\pi}{2} - \frac{2x}{\pi}$ upto the leading order in $x$. Using this solution in Eq. (\[Gx-\]), we get $\mathcal{G}(x) \simeq \frac{D}{16} + \frac{D}{2\pi^2}x\ln x$. The value $\mathcal{G}(0)= \frac{D}{16}$ at $x=0$, implies $P(0,t) \approx e^{-Dt/16}$ which means, the probability that the particle has not made any complete turn around the circle in time $t$, decays exponentially for large $t$. In the first exit picture, this is exactly the probability that the particle, starting from the origin, stays inside the box $[-2\pi,~2\pi]$ till time $t$ and this probability is given by the survival probability $q(t)$ introduced in Eq. (\[FPndSVl\]). Taking an ILT of $\tilde{q}(s)$ in Eq. (\[qtilde\]), one can show that $q(t)$ for large $t$ indeed decays as $\sim e^{-Dt/16}$.
- For $x \to \infty$, the solution of Eq. (\[alpha\*\]) is $\alpha^* \simeq x[1-e^{-2x} + o(e^{-2x}) ]$ which implies $s^* \simeq \frac{Dx^2}{4\pi2}(1-e^{-2x})^2$. Putting this value of $s^*$ in Eq. (\[Gx+\]) we get $\mathcal{G}(x) \simeq \frac{Dx^2}{4\pi^2}$ for large $x$.
For $x=1$, both Eqs. (\[alpha\*\]) and (\[beta\*\]) have solutions $\alpha^*=\beta^*=0$. Hence expanding the left hand sides of both the Eqs. (\[alpha\*\]) and (\[beta\*\]) for small $\alpha^*$ and for small $\beta^*$ respectively, we get $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha^* &\simeq& \sqrt{3(x-1)}~~~\text{for}~~x \gtrsim 1, \nonumber \\
\beta^* &\simeq& \sqrt{3(1-x)}~~~\text{for}~~x \lesssim 1.\end{aligned}$$
![(Color online) Plot of the large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ for $D=1$. Note the Gaussian nature of $\mathcal{G}(x)$ around $x \sim 1$ and the asymmetry in the shape between $x < 1$ and $x > 1$ as expressed in Eq. (\[Gx-asmtry\]). Inset: Plot of the large deviation function $\mathcal{H}(x)$ for $D=1$.[]{data-label="fig5"}](LDF-P_n.pdf)
Using these values of $\alpha^*$ and $\beta^*$ in Eqs. (\[Gx+\]) and (\[Gx-\]) respectively, one can show that the large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ in Eq. (\[LDP\_n\]) for $x \approx 1$ is given by $\mathcal{G}(x) \simeq \frac{3D}{8\pi^2}~(x-1)^2$ which implies $$-\lim \limits_{t \to \infty} \frac{\ln P(n,t)}{t} = \frac{3\pi^2}{2D}\left(\frac{n}{t}-\frac{D}{2\pi^2} \right)^2,~~~~\text{for}~~n\approx \frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}.$$ This large deviation form of $P(n,t)$ for $n$ around its mean $\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}$, is consistent with the Gaussian scaling distribution $G(y)$ given in Eq. (\[Gauss\]).
We now put our attention on finding the large deviation form of the distribution $R(k,t)$ of the net winding number $k$. As done for $P(n,t)$, we start with $$R(k,t) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\tilde{R}(k,s)
= \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\frac{1}{s} \tanh\left(\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\right)~\text{exp}\left(-2\pi |k|\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right),$$ where we have used the explicit form of $\tilde{R}(k,s)$ from Eq. (\[LTR-k\]). In the $k \to \infty$ and $t \to \infty $ limit keeping $\frac{k}{t}$ finite, we see that the dominant contribution in the large deviation function comes from $$R(k,t) \approx \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\text{exp}\left(-2 \pi |k| \sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right),$$ where the rest of the terms in the integrand contribute at $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{t})$. Performing the Bromwich integral in the above equation we get the following large deviation form of $R(k,t)$ $$R(k,t) \approx e^{-t\mathcal{H}(k/t)}~~~\text{where}~~~\mathcal{H}(x) = \frac{\pi^2}{D}x^2. \label{LDF-R-k-t}$$ This quadratic form of the large deviation function implies that over full range of $k \in [-\infty,\infty]$ the distribution $R(k,t)$ has a Gaussian scaling form under the scaling $\frac{k}{\sqrt{t}}$, which is given by $H(y)$ in Eq. (\[Gauss\]) (see also the discussion in Sec.\[MVS-dis\]).
Derivation of the exact distributions for arbitrary $n$ and $k$ {#exact}
----------------------------------------------------------------
Till now we have discussed about the asymptotic forms of the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ describing either typical or atypically large fluctuations. It turns out that one can find explicit expressions of the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ for arbitrary $n$, $k$ and $t$. Such explicit expressions for any $n$ and $k$ may be useful to compare with simulations. In the following we present the derivation of such expressions.
To find an exact expression of $P(n,t)$ for any $n$ we need to perform the inverse Laplace transform in Eq. (\[ILTP\_n\]) which with the help of Eq. (\[LTP\_n\]) can be rewritten explicitly as $$\begin{aligned}
P(n,t) &=& Q\left(n,\frac{Dt}{4\pi^2}\right)-Q\left(n+1,\frac{Dt}{4\pi^2}\right),~~~~~\text{where}, \nonumber \\
Q(n,\tau) &=& \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} dq~e^{q\tau}~\frac{1}{q}~\frac{1}
{\left[\cosh \sqrt{q}\right]^{n}} .\label{ILTP_n-1}\end{aligned}$$ Using the following expansion $$\left[\cosh \sqrt{q}\right]^{-n}= \frac{2^n~e^{-n\sqrt{q}}}{(1+e^{-2\sqrt{q}})^n}
= \frac{2^n}{\Gamma[n]}\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{\ell}\frac{\Gamma[n+\ell]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~e^{-(2\ell+n)\sqrt{q}},
\label{expnsn}$$ and the identity [@Laplace-Joel] $$\frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} dq~e^{qt}~\frac{e^{-a\sqrt{q}}}{q}=\text{erfc}\left(\frac{a}{\sqrt{4t}}\right),~~~a>0,$$ it follows that $$Q(n,\tau)= \frac{2^n}{\Gamma[n]}\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{\ell}\frac{\Gamma[n+\ell]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~\text{erfc}\left(\frac{2\ell+n}{\sqrt{4\tau}}\right),$$ where $\Gamma[x]$ is the Gamma function. Hence the probability distribution of having $n$ total winding around the circle in time $t$ is explicitly given by $$P(n,t)=\frac{2^n}{\Gamma[n]}\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{\ell}\frac{\Gamma[n+\ell]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~\text{erfc}\left(\frac{\pi(2\ell+n)}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right)-
\frac{2^{n+1}}{\Gamma[n+1]}\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{\ell}\frac{\Gamma[n+\ell+1]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~\text{erfc}\left(\frac{\pi(2\ell+n+1)}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right).
\label{P-n-t-exact}$$
![(Color online) Comparison of the exact distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ given in Eqs. (\[P-n-t-exact\]) and (\[R-k-t-exact\]), respectively, with the same obtained from numerical simulation of the Langevin Eq. (\[langevin\]) for $t=50$ and $D=1$. Dashed lines are for guidance to the eye.[]{data-label="compare"}](compare-dist-ana-simu-free.pdf)
Let us now turn our attention to the evaluation of $R(k,t)$ for arbitrary $k$. Once again this can be done by performing the inverse Laplace transform $R(k,t) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} ds~e^{st}~\tilde{R}(k,s)$ where the explicit expression of $\tilde{R}(k,s)$ is given in Eq. (\[LTR-k\]). Writing $\tilde{R}(k,s) = \tilde{A}_1(s)~\tilde{A}_2(s)$ where $$\tilde{A}_1(s) = \frac{\text{exp}\left(-\frac{2\pi|k|}{\sqrt{D}}\sqrt{s}\right)}{\sqrt{s}},~~~\text{and}~~~
\tilde{A}_2(s) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{s}}~\frac{\sinh \left(\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{D}}\sqrt{s}\right)}{\cosh \left(\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{D}}\sqrt{s}\right)},$$ we see that $R(k,t)$ can be expressed as a convolution $R(k,t) = \int_0^t d\tau A_1(\tau)A_2(t-\tau)$ of two functions $A_1(t)$ and $A_2(t)$ which are inverse Laplace transforms of $\tilde{A}_1(s)$ and $\tilde{A}_2(s)$ respectively, *i.e.* $A_1(t) = \mathcal{L}_t^{-1}[\tilde{A}_1(s)]$ and $A_2(t) = \mathcal{L}_t^{-1}[\tilde{A}_2(s)]$. One can show that, $A_1(t)$ and $A_2(t)$ are explicitly given by $$A_1(t)=\frac{\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2k^2}{Dt}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi t}},~~~\text{and}~~~
A_2(t)=\frac{2\sqrt{D}}{\pi}\sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} \text{exp}\left( -\frac{(2m+1)^2Dt}{4}\right).$$ Injecting these expressions in the convolution and performing the integral over $\tau$ we get $$R(k,t)= \frac{4}{\pi} \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{k(2m+1)}}{(2m+1)}~\text{exp}\left( -\frac{(2m+1)^2Dt}{4}\right)~
\text{Im}\left[\text{erf}\left( \frac{\pi k}{\sqrt{Dt}}~+~i~\frac{(2m+1)\sqrt{Dt}}{2}\right) \right], \label{R-k-t-exact}$$ where Im stands for imaginary part. Explicit expression of $\text{Im}\left[\text{erf}(x+iy)\right]$ is given by [@Handbook] $$\text{Im}\left[\text{erf}(x+iy)\right] = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}e^{-x^2}\sum \limits_{l=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^ly^{2l+1}}{(2l+1)!}~H_{2l}(x),$$ where $H_m(x)$ is the $m$th order Hermite polynomial. Although this expression of $R(k,t)$ in Eq. (\[R-k-t-exact\]) converges very fast numerically, it is not suitable for extracting the large $t$ Gaussian behavior described by the scaling function $H(y)$ in Eq. (\[Gauss\]). However there is another representation $R(k,t)= \frac{2~e^{-\frac{\pi^2k^2}{Dt}}}{\pi \sqrt{\pi}} \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} \frac{\mathcal{C}_{m,k}(t)}{(2m+1)}$ where $$\mathcal{C}_{m,k}(t) = \sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty} (-1)^{\ell}~
\frac{ 1.3.5...(2\ell-1)}{2^{\ell}\left(\frac{\pi^2 k^2}{Dt}~+~\frac{(2m+1)^2 Dt}{4}\right)^{2\ell +1}}~
\text{Im}\left[\left(\frac{\pi k}{\sqrt{Dt}}~+~i~\frac{(2m+1)\sqrt{Dt}}{2}\right)^{2\ell +1} \right].$$ From this expression one can immediately see that in the large $k$ and $t$ limit keeping $k/t$ fixed, $R(k,t) \approx \frac{e^{-\frac{\pi^2k^2}{Dt}}}{\sqrt{t}}$ which is consistent with the scaling function $H(y)$ in Eq. (\[Gauss\]) and also with the large deviation function $\mathcal{H}(x)$ in Eq. (\[LDF-R-k-t\]). In Fig. \[compare\] we compare the analytical expressions of the distributions $P(n,t)$ and $R(k,t)$ given in Eqs. (\[P-n-t-exact\]) and (\[R-k-t-exact\]), respectively, with the same obtained from numerical simulation for $t=50$ and $D=1$ and see very good agreement.
Another interesting quantity is the distribution of the maximum net winding number $k_{max}$ in time $t$. Denoting this distribution by $P_{max}(k,t)$, one can write $P_{max}(k,t)=Q_{max}(k,t)-Q_{max}(k-1,t)$ with $Q_{max}(-1,0)=0$, where $Q_{max}(m,t)=\text{Prob.}[k_{max} \le m,t]$. One can easily see that, $Q_{max}(m,t)$ is exactly the probability that the particle, starting at the origin, stays below the level $\theta=2\pi (m+1)$ throughout the time interval $[0,t]$. This means $Q_{max}(m,t)$ is the probability that the random process $\theta'(t)=2\pi (m+1)-\theta(t)$, starting from $\theta'(0)=2\pi (m+1)$, stays positive till time $t$ and it is given by the well known result [@Satya05; @RednerBook; @Bray13] $$Q_{max}(m,t)= \text{Erf}\left(\frac{2\pi (m+1)}{\sqrt{4Dt}}\right),$$ using which we get $$P_{max}(k,t)=Q_{max}(k,t)-Q_{max}(k-1,t) = \text{Erf}\left(\frac{\pi (k+1)}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right) - \text{Erf}\left(\frac{\pi k}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right)~~~\text{for}~~k=0,1,2...$$
Brownian Bridge on the ring {#Brow-brdg}
===========================
In this section we consider the situation where the Brownian particle on the ring, starting from $\theta(0)=0$ *i.e.* from the point A in Fig. \[fig1\], is constrained to come back to A after time $t$. This means that the final position of the particle is constrained to be $\theta(t)=2\pi l$ where $l$ is an integer. The probability $p_l(t)$ that the particle reaches $\theta(t)=2\pi l$ at time $t$ is given by $p_l(t)=\frac{\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2l^2}{Dt}\right)}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt}}.$ Given that such a constrained Brownian trajectory has net winding number $k$ in time $t$, implies that the final position of the particle at time $t$ is $\theta(t)=2\pi k$. Hence the probability distribution $R_c(k,t)$ of having net winding number $k$ (*i.e* $k$ net counter-clockwise turns) in time $t$, is proportional to $p_k(t)$. Letting the normalization constant be $Z(t)$ one can write $R_c(k,t)= \frac{p_k(t)}{Z(t)}$ where $$Z(t) = \sum \limits_{l=-\infty}^{\infty} p_l(t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt}} \sum \limits_{l=-\infty}^{\infty}\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2l^2}{Dt}\right)
= \frac{1}{2\pi}\sum \limits_{m=-\infty}^{\infty} \text{exp}\left(-m^2Dt\right). \label{N_k-t}$$ From the expression of $R_c(k,t)= \frac{p_k(t)}{Z(t)}$ it is clear that this distribution is symmetric with respect to $k$ which implies, all odd order moments are zero. The lowest non-zero moment is $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle_c$ which can be computed and expressed in terms of $Z(t)$ in Eq. (\[N\_k-t\]) as $$\langle k(t)^2 \rangle_c = \frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}+\frac{Dt^2}{\pi^2}\frac{d\ln Z(t)}{dt}.$$ It is easy to see that, the second moment of $k$ has the same large $t$ linear growth $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle_c \simeq \frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}$ as in the [*free*]{} case (see Sec.\[MVS-dis\]).
We now compute the probability $P_c(n,t)$ of having $n$ complete turns in time $t$ for Brownian bridges on the circle. As before (see Eq. (\[JPDF1\]) ) let $\tau_1,~\tau_2,~\tau_3,....,\tau_n$ and $\tau_{\rm last}$ are time intervals in $t$ where $\tau_i$ represents the time required by the particle to perform the $i$th complete turn around the circle and $\tau_{\rm last}$ represents the time interval $\tau_{\rm last}=t-\sum_{i=1}^n\tau_i$ remaining after the $n$th complete turn. Following Sec. \[free\] and remembering once again the connection between a complete turn and the first exit from the box of length $4\pi$, one can write $$P_c(n,t) = \frac{\mathcal{N}(n,t)}{Z(t)},~~~\text{with}~~~
\mathcal{N}(n,t)=\int_0^{t}\int_0^{t}...\int_0^{t} f(\tau_1)f(\tau_2)...f(\tau_n)~r_0(\tau_{last})~\delta \left( t-\tau_{\rm last}-\sum \limits_{i=1}^n \tau_i\right),
\label{mcalN-mult-t}$$ where $f(t)$ is the first exit probability as before and $r_0(\tau_{\rm last})$ is the probability with which the particle starting from the origin (point A in Fig. \[fig1\]) returns back to the origin in the last time interval $\tau_{\rm last}$ without making any complete turn. In the first exit picture, $r_0(\tau_{\rm last})$ represents the probability that the particle starting from the center of the box of length $4\pi$ (see Fig. \[fig1a\]) comes back to the center in time $\tau_{\rm last}$ without exiting the box. Taking Laplace transform of $\mathcal{N}(n,t)$ with respect to $t$ we get $$\tilde{\mathcal{N}}(n,s) = \mathcal{L}_s[\mathcal{N}(n,t)] = \left[ \tilde{f}(s)\right]^n\tilde{r}_0(s), \label{LT-mcalN}$$ where $\tilde{f}(s)= \mathcal{L}_s[f(t)]=\text{sech}\left (2\pi\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right )$ from Eq. (\[ftilde\]) and $\tilde{r}_0(s)$ is the Laplace transform of $r_0(t)$ *i.e.* $ \tilde{r}_0(s) =\mathcal{L}_s[r(t)]$. To compute the probability $r_0(t)$, one needs to solve the diffusion equation $$\frac{\partial r(x,t)}{\partial t}=D \frac{\partial^2 r(x,t)}{\partial x^2}, \label{diff-r-xt}$$ with BCs $r(x=\pm2\pi,t)=0$ and the initial condition $r(x,0)=\delta(x)$, where $r(x,t)$ represents the probability that the particle, starting at the origin, reaches $x$ at time $t$ while staying inside the box $[-2\pi,~2\pi]$ (see Fig. \[fig2\]). Taking the Laplace transform with respect to $t$ on both sides of the above diffusion equation we get $$D \frac{\partial^2 \tilde{r}(x,s)}{\partial x^2} = s \tilde{r}(x,s) - \delta(x),~~~\text{with~~BC}~~ \tilde{r}(x=\pm2\pi,s)=0.$$ It is easy to check that the solution of this equation is given by $$\tilde{r}(x,s) = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{s~D}} ~\frac{\sinh\left ((2\pi-|x|)\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right )}{\cosh\left (2\pi \sqrt{\frac{s}{D}} \right )}, \label{LT-r_x}$$ which for $x=0$ provides $\tilde{r}_0(s) \equiv \tilde{r}(0,s)$. Once we know $\tilde{r}_0(s)$ and $\tilde{f}(s)$ explicitly, then taking inverse Laplace transform of $\tilde{\mathcal{N}}(n,s)$ in Eq. (\[LT-mcalN\]) we get $\mathcal{N}(n,t)$ *i.e.* $$\mathcal{N}(n,t)= \mathcal{L}_t^{-1}\left[ \left(\tilde{f}(s)\right)^n\tilde{r}_0(s)\right]=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\mathcal{B}}ds~e^{st}
~\left(\tilde{f}(s)\right)^n\tilde{r}_0(s)=\frac{1}{4\pi}~\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{\mathcal{B}}dq~e^{q\frac{Dt}{4\pi^2}}
~\frac{\sinh \sqrt{q}}{\sqrt{q}~[\cosh \sqrt{q}]^{n+1}}. \label{mcalN}$$ At this point, one can easily check that $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\mathcal{N}(n,t) = Z(t)$ which implies $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}P_c(n,t) = 1$. Moreover, using this expression of $\mathcal{N}(n,t)$ one can also find exact time dependence of the mean $\langle n(t) \rangle_c$ and the variance $\sigma^2_c(t)=\langle n(t)^2 \rangle_c- \langle n(t) \rangle^2_c$ (given in Appendix \[appndx-f\]) from which we see that, for large $t$ both the mean and variance grow exactly the same linear way as in the [*free*]{} case (see Sec.\[MVS-dis\]). This implies that for large $t$, the scaling distribution function corresponding to the distribution $P_c(n,t)$ is also described by the same functions $G(y)$ as given in Eq. (\[Gauss\]) for the [*free*]{} case. Furthermore, it can be easily seen that the large deviation function associated to $P_c(n,t)$ is same as the large deviation function $\mathcal{G}(x)$ associated to $P(n,t)$ (see Sec.\[LDFs\]), because what happens in the last time interval $\tau_{last}$ after the $n$th complete turn do not contribute at the leading order in the $n\to \infty$ and $t \to \infty$ limit while keeping $n/t$ fixed.
To evaluate the inverse Laplace transform in Eq. (\[mcalN\]), we follow the same steps as done in Sec.\[exact\]. Once again using the expansion in Eq. (\[expnsn\]) and the identity [@Laplace-Joel] $$\frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\mathcal{B}} dq~e^{qt}~\frac{e^{-a\sqrt{q}}}{\sqrt{q}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi t}}\text{exp}\left(-\frac{a^2}{4t}\right),~~~a>0,$$ one can show that the function $\mathcal{N}(n,t)$ is explicitly given by $$\mathcal{N}(n,t) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt}}~\frac{2^n}{\Gamma[n+1]}~\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{\ell}~\frac{2\ell+n}{\ell+n}
~\frac{\Gamma[\ell+n+1]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~\text{exp}\left(-\frac{(2\ell+n)^2\pi^2}{Dt} \right),$$ where $\Gamma[x]$ is the Gamma function. Hence we have an exact expression of the distribution $P(n,t)=\frac{\mathcal{N}(n,t)}{Z(t)}$ where $Z(t)$ is given in Eq. (\[N\_k-t\]).
Let us now look at the distribution $P_{max}^c(k,t)$ of the maximum net winding number $k_{max}$ in time $t$. Once again this distribution can be obtained from $$P_{max}^c(k,t)=Q_{max}^c(k,t)-Q_{max}^c(k-1,t), \label{P_max}$$ with $Q_{max}^c(-1,0)=0$ where $Q_{max}^c(m,t)=\text{Prob.}[k_{max} \le m,t]$. One can easily see that, the probability $Q_{max}^c(m,t)$ is equal to the ratio $Q_{max}^c(m,t)=\frac{\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)}{Z(t)}$. Here $\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)$ is the probability of having the particle’s final position $\theta(t)$ at integer multiple of $2\pi$ while conditioned on the fact that the particle, starting from $\theta(0)=0$, stayed below the level $2\pi(m+1)$ throughout. The function $Z(t)$ in the denominator is given in Eq. (\[N\_k-t\]) and it represents the probability that the final position $\theta(t)$ of the particle is integer multiple of $2\pi$ given that the particle had started from $\theta(0)=0$. To evaluate $\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)$, we consider the shifted random process $\theta'(t)=2\pi(m+1)-\theta(t)$. The probability $\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)$ can be obtained from the propagator $g(\theta',t~|~2\pi(m+1),0)$ representing the probability density that the process $\theta'(t)$, starting from $\theta'(0)=2\pi(m+1)$, reaches $\theta'$ at time $t$ while staying positive throughout. This is actually the propagator of a Brownian particle with an absorbing wall at the origin and it is given by [@Satya05; @RednerBook; @Bray13] $g(y,t~|~x,0)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt}} \left[\text{exp}\left( -\frac{(y - x)^2}{4Dt}\right) -
\text{exp}\left( -\frac{(y + x)^2}{4Dt}\right) \right]$. Hence, the probability $\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)$ is given by $\mathcal{N}_{max}^c(m,t)=\sum_{\ell =1}^{\infty}g(2\pi \ell,t~|~2\pi(m+1),0)$. After performing some algebraic simplification of this infinite sum and using Eq. (\[N\_k-t\]), we get from Eq. (\[P\_max\]) : $$P_{max}^c(k,t) = \frac{e^{-\frac{\pi^2k^2}{Dt}} +e^{-\frac{\pi^2(k+1)^2}{Dt} } }{\sum \limits_{l=-\infty}^{\infty}\text{exp}\left(-\frac{\pi^2l^2}{Dt}\right)}~~~
\text{for}~~k\ge 0.$$
Conclusion
==========
Path integral techniques have been used to study statistics of net winding number $k(t)$ in many situations [@Edwards67; @Edwards68; @Comtet90; @Nelson97] where one maps the problem to a suitable quantum problem. But for other quantities like the total winding number $n$, path integral techniques are hard to adapt. In this paper we have presented a method based on renewal properties of Brownian motion to study winding statistics of a single Brownian motion on a ring. This method is alternative to the standard path integral methods. More precisely, using the renewal property of Brownian motion and the connection between a complete turn around the circle and the first exit from a box of size $4\pi$, we derived analytical expressions of the probability distributions of the total number of turns $n$ and the net number of counter-clockwise turns $k$ at any time $t$. Such distributions are relevant in quantum transport in ring geometry [@Texier]. For large $t$, we have shown that these distributions have Gaussian scaling forms describing the typical fluctuations of $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{t})$ around their respective means. We have also computed the large deviation functions associated to these distributions, which describe the atypical fluctuations of $\mathcal{O}(t)$. Correlation between the total winding number $n$ and net winding number $k$ is studied from the joint probability distribution of $n$ and $k$ whose expression have been provided for any $t$. Numerical simulations have been performed to verify our analytical results.
One can extend this problem in different directions. For example, it would be interesting to see what happens to these distributions when the particle is being subjected to some pure or random potential. Investigating the equilibrium state of a ring coupled to a thermal bath reveals interesting connections with random walk on a Sinai potential [@Hurowitz]. In the context of polymer physics, fluctuations of winding number of a directed polymer in random media have been studied in [@Brunet]. Another interesting extension would be to consider interacting multiparticle system [@Wendelin]. Recently, winding statistics of $N$ non-intersecting Brownian bridges on unit circle have been studied for a case where the diffusion constant scales with the number of particles $N$ [@Litchy]. It will be interesting to study the winding statistics of non-intersecting walkers in the [*[free]{}*]{} case when the final positions of the walkers are not constrained. Finally, in the ring geometry, quantities other than the winding numbers, like residence time spent inside some given region, local time spent at some specified point etc. would also be interesting to study. Such quantities have been studied for general Gaussian stochastic processes in the context of persistence [@Bray13].
This research was supported by ANR Grant No. 2011-BS04-013-01 WALKMAT and in part by the Indo-French Centre for the Promotion of Advanced Research under Project No.4604-3. We thank the Galileo Galilei Institute for Theoretical Physics, Firenze for the hospitality and support received.
Exact expressions of $\langle n(t) \rangle$, $\langle n(t)^2 \rangle$ and $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle$ for the free case {#appndx}
====================================================================================================================
Exact expressions of $\langle n(t) \rangle$, $\langle n(t)^2 \rangle$ and $\langle k(t)^2 \rangle$ are given as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\langle n(t) \rangle &=&\langle k(t)^2 \rangle = \left(\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}-\frac{1}{6}\right)+ \frac{D}{\pi^2}
\sum \limits_{m=1}^{\infty}\left(2+\frac{1}{Dm^2} \right)
e^{-Dm^2 t}=2 \sum \limits_{\ell=1}^{\infty}\ell~\text{erfc}\left(\frac{\pi\ell}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right), \label{mean-appndx} \allowdisplaybreaks[4] \\
\langle n(t)^2 \rangle &=& \left(\frac{D^2t^2}{4\pi^4} + \frac{Dt}{6\pi^2} -\frac{2}{45}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\sum \limits_{m=1}^{\infty}
e^{-D m^2 t} \left(\frac{D t}{3 \pi ^2}+\frac{1}{6 \pi ^2 m^2}-\frac{D t}{2 \pi ^4 m^2}-\frac{1}{2 \pi ^4
m^4}-\frac{2 D^3 m^2 t^3}{3 \pi ^4}\right) \label{second-appndx} \allowdisplaybreaks[1]\\
&=& \frac{1}{3}\sum \limits_{\ell=0}^{\infty}~\frac{\Gamma[\ell+4]}{\Gamma[\ell+1]}~\left[\text{erfc}\left(\frac{(\ell+1)\pi}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right)
+ \text{erfc}\left(\frac{(\ell+2)\pi}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right) + \text{erfc}\left(\frac{(\ell+3)\pi}{\sqrt{Dt}}\right)\right].\end{aligned}$$ Second expressions in both the above equations for $\langle n(t) \rangle$ and $\langle n(t)^2 \rangle $ are obtained using Poisson formula.
Exact time dependence of the mean $\langle n(t) \rangle_c$ and $\langle n(t)^2 \rangle_c$ for the constrained case {#appndx-f}
==================================================================================================================
$$\begin{aligned}
&&\langle n(t) \rangle_c =
\frac{\frac{Dt}{2\pi^2}+\frac{2Dt}{\pi^2}\sum \limits_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-2Dn^2t)e^{-Dtn^2}}{1+ 2\sum \limits_{n=1}^{\infty}~e^{-Dtn^2} }
=\sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{\Gamma[m+3]}{\Gamma[m+1]}
\frac{\left(e^{-\frac{(m+1)^2\pi^2}{Dt}} +e^{-\frac{(m+2)^2\pi^2}{Dt}}\right)}{\left(1+ 2\sum \limits_{l=0}^{\infty} e^{-\frac{l^2\pi^2}{Dt}}\right)}\nonumber \\
&&\langle n(t)^2 \rangle_c = \frac{\frac{D^2t^2}{4\pi^4}+\frac{Dt}{3\pi^2}
+\frac{4Dt}{\pi^2}\sum \limits_{n=1}^{\infty}(4D^3t^3~n^4-12D^2t^2~n^2-8\pi^2Dt~n^2+3Dt+4\pi^2)~e^{-Dtn^2}}{1+ 2\sum \limits_{n=1}^{\infty}~e^{-Dtn^2} }\nonumber \\
&&~~~~~~~~~~~= \frac{1}{12} \sum \limits_{m=0}^{\infty} \frac{\Gamma[m+5]}{\Gamma[m+1]}~
\frac{\left(e^{-\frac{(m+1)^2\pi^2}{Dt}} +3e^{-\frac{(m+2)^2\pi^2}{Dt}} +3e^{-\frac{(m+3)^2\pi^2}{Dt}}+e^{-\frac{(m+4)^2\pi^2}{Dt}}\right)}
{\left(1+ 2\sum \limits_{l=0}^{\infty} e^{-\frac{l^2\pi^2}{Dt}}\right)}.\end{aligned}$$
Edwards S F, Proc. Phys. Soc. 91, 513, (1967). Edwards S F, J. Phys. A, 1, 15, (1968). Rudnick J and Hu Y, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 20, 4421, (1987). Rudnick J and Hu Y, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 712, (1988). Grosberg A and Frisch H, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 36, 8955, (2003). Wiegel F W, Introduction to Path-Integral Methods in Physics and Polymer Science, World Scientific, Singapore. Nelson D R, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1973, (1988). Drossel B and Kardar M, Phys. Rev. E 53, 5861, (1996). Spitzer F, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 87, 187, (1958). Pitman J and Yor M, Ann. Prob. 11, 733-79, (1986). Le Doussal P , Etzioni Y and Horovitz B, J. stat. Mech, P07012, (2009). Schramm O, Isr. J. Math. 118, 221, (2000). Hagendorf C and Le Doussal P, J. Stat. Phys. 133, 231, (2008). Duplantier B and Binder I A, Phys. Rev. Lett, 89, 26, (2002). Brereton M G and Butler C, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 20, 3955, (1987). Khandekar D C and Wiegel F W, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 21, 56, (1988). Comtet A, Desbois J and Ouvry S, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 23, 3563-3572, (1990). Antoine M, Comtet A, Desbois J and Ouvry S, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 24, 2581-2586, (1991). Nelson D R and Stern A, Complex Behaviour of Glassy Systems Lecture Notes in Physics Volume 492, pp 276-297, (1997).
Nelson D R and Seung S, Phys. Rev. B 39, 9153 (1989), Nelson D R and Le Doussal P, Phys. Rev. B 42, 10113 (1990). Duplantier B, J, Phys. A: Math. Gen. 22, 3033, (1989). Comtet A, Desbois J and Texier C, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 R341, (2005). Texier C and Montambaux G, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38, 3455-3471, (2005). Majumdar S N, Curr. Sci. 89, 2076, (2005). Redner S, A Guide to First-Passage Processes (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001). Bray A J, Majumdar S N and Schehr G, Advances in Physics, 62, 225 (2013). Majumdar S N and Ziff R M, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 050601 (2008). Majumdar S N, Schehr G and Wergen G, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 45, 355002 (2012). Schehr G and Majumdar S N, Exact record and order statistics of random walks via first-passage ideas, to appear in the special volume “First-Passage Phenomena and Their Applications”, Eds. R. Metzler, G. Oshanin, S. Redner. World Scientic (2014), preprint arXiv:1305.0639 . Godreche C, Majumdar S N and Schehr G, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 255001 (2014). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_mathematical\_series\#cite\_note-ctcs-2 Schieff L J, The Laplace Transform: Theory and applications, Springer, (1999). Wolfram functions site: [*http://functions.wolfram.com/GammaBetaErf/Erf/19/02/*]{} Hurowitz D, Rahav S, and Cohen D, Phys. Rev. E 88, 062141 (2013). Brunet E, Phys. Rev. E, 68, 041101, (2003). Hobson D G and Werner W, Bull. London Math. Soc., 28(6):643–650, (1996). Liechty K and Wang D, arXiv:1312.7390v2 \[math.PR\].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
In this paper, we used some theorems of fixed point for studying the results of existence and uniqueness for Hilfer-Hadamard-Type fractional differential equations, $$_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}x(t)+f(t,x(t))=0, ~~~~~~ on~~the~~ interval~~ J:=(1,e]$$ with nonlinear boundary value problems $$x(1+\epsilon)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}x(\zeta_{i}),\quad\quad\quad~_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(\zeta_{i})$$\
\
**AMS Classification- 34A08, 35R11**
address:
- 'Ahmad Y. A. Salamooni School of Mathematical Sciences, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University, Nanded-431606, India'
- 'D. D. Pawar School of Mathematical Sciences, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University, Nanded-431606, India'
author:
- 'Ahmad Y. A. Salamooni, D. D. Pawar'
title: ' EXISTENCE AND UNIQUENESS OF NONLOCAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR HILFER-HADAMARD-TYPE FRACTIONAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS'
---
\[section\] \[theorem\][Lemma]{} \[theorem\][Definition]{} \[theorem\][Example]{}
\[theorem\][Remark]{} $$\textbf{1.Introduction}.$$\
In this paper, we discussion the existence and uniqueness result of the solutions for the n-point nonlinear boundary value problems for Hilfer-Hadamard-type fractional differential equations of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
&~_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}x(t)+f(t,x(t))=0,\quad\quad t\in
J:=(1,e]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(1.1)
\\&x(1+\epsilon)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}x(\zeta_{i}),\quad\quad\quad~_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(\zeta_{i})\end{aligned}$$ where $~_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}$ is the Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivative of order $1<\alpha\leq2$ and type $\beta\in[0,1],$ $f:J\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function, $0<\epsilon<1,\zeta_{i}\in(1,e),\\
\nu_{i},\sigma_{i}\in\mathbb{R}\quad for\quad all\quad
i=1,2,...,n-2,\zeta_{1}<\zeta_{2}<...<\zeta_{n-2}$ and $~_{H}D^{1,1}=t\frac{d}{dt}.$
The fractional differential equations give proofs of the more appropriate models for describing real world problems. Indeed, these problems cannot be described using classical integer order differential equations. In the past years the theory of fractional differential equations has received much attention from the authors, and has become an important field of investigation due to existence applications in engineering, biology, chemistry, economics and numerous branches of physics sciences\[1,6,9,10\]. Fractional differential equations have a several kinds of fractional differential equations. One of them is the Hadamard fractional derivative innovated by Hadamard in 1892\[4\],which differs from the Riemann-Liouvill and Caputo type fractional derivative\[9\],the preceding ones in the sense that the kernel of the integral contains logarithmic function of arbitrary exponent. The properties of Hadamard fractional integral and derivative can be found in\[1,27\].Recently, the authors studied the Hadamard-type, Caputo-Hadamard-type and Hilfer-Hadamard-type fractional derivative by using the fixed point theorems with the boundary value problems and give the results of existence and uniqueness\[14-21\].
We found a variety of results for the problem (1.1) by using traditional fixed point theorems. The first result, Theorem 3.2, depend on Banach’s Principle of contraction mapping and concerns an existence and uniqueness result for the solutions of the problem (1.1). In Theorem 3.3 we proved a second result of existence and uniqueness, through a fixed point theorem and nonlinear contractions due to Boyd and Wong. A third result of existence is proved in Theorem 3.4, by using Krasnoselskii’s fixed point theorem, and the last result of existence, Theorem 3.5, by using Leray-Schauder type of nonlinear alternative for single-valued maps.
$$\textbf{2.Preliminaries}$$ In this section, we introduce some notations and definitions of Hilfer-Hadamard-type fractional calculus.\
** Definition 2.1.\[1,10\] ** (Riemann-Liouville fractional integral).\
The Riemann-Liouville integral of order $~\alpha~ > 0$ of a function $~\varphi:[1,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}~$ is defined by $$(I^{\alpha}\varphi)(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}
_{1}\int^{t}\frac{\varphi(\tau)d\tau}{(t-\tau)^{1-\alpha}}\quad,\quad(t>1),$$ Here $\Gamma(\alpha)$ is the Euler’s Gamma function.\
** Definition 2.2.\[1,10\] ** (Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative).\
The Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of order $~\alpha > 0~$ of a function\
$~\varphi:[1,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}~$ is defined by\
$(D^{\alpha}\varphi)(t):=(\frac{d}{dt})^{n}
(I^{n-\alpha}\varphi)(t)$ $$\quad\quad=\frac{1}{\Gamma(n-\alpha)}\frac{d^{n}}{dt^{n}}
_{1}\int^{t}\frac{\varphi(\tau)d\tau}{(t-\tau)^{\alpha-n+1}}
\quad,\quad\quad(n=[\alpha]+1;t>1),$$ Here \[$\alpha$\] is the integer part of $\alpha.$\
** Definition 2.3.\[1\] **(Hadamard fractional integral).\
The Hadamard fractional integral of order $~\alpha\in \mathbb{R}^{+}~$for a function $~\varphi:[1,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}~$ is defined as$$_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}_{1}\int^{t}(\log\frac{t}{\tau})^{\alpha-1}
\quad\frac{\varphi(\tau)}{\tau}d\tau,\quad\quad(t>1)$$ where $~\log(.)=\log_{e}(.)~$.\
**Definition 2.4.\[1\] **(Hadamard fractional derivative).\
The Hadamard fractional derivative of order $~\alpha~$ applied to the function\
$~\varphi:[1,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}~$ is defined as$$_{H}D^{\alpha}\varphi(t)=\delta^{n}(_{H}I^{n-\alpha}\varphi(t)),\quad
n-1<\alpha<n,\quad n=[\alpha]+1,$$ where$\quad~\delta^{n}=(t\frac{d}{dt})^{n}\quad~$and$~[\alpha]~$denotes the integer part of the real number$~\alpha.~$\
** Definition 2.5.\[4,12\] **(Caputo-Hadamard fractional derivative).\
The Caputo-Hadamard fractional derivative of order$~\alpha~$applied to the function $~\varphi\in
AC_{\delta}^{n}[a,b]~$is defined as$$_{HC}D^{\alpha}\varphi(t)=(_{H}I^{n-\alpha}\delta^{n}\varphi)(t)$$ where\
$~n=[\alpha]+1,~$and$~\varphi\in
AC_{\delta}^{n}[a,b]=\bigg\{\varphi:[a,b]\rightarrow
\mathbb{C}:\delta^{(n-1)}\varphi\in
AC[a,b],\delta=t\frac{d}{dt}\bigg\}~$\
**Definition 2.6.\[6,20\] **(Hilfer fractional derivative).\
Let$~~n-1<\alpha<n,~~0\leq\beta\leq 1,~~\varphi\in
L^{1}(a,b).~$The Hilfer fractional derivative $D^{\alpha,\beta}$ of order$~\alpha~$and type $~\beta~$of$~\varphi~$is defined as$$~(D^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=\big(I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}(\frac{d}{dt})^{n}~I^{(n-\alpha)(1-\beta)}\varphi\big)(t)~$$ $$=\big(I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}(\frac{d}{dt})^{n}I^{n-\gamma}\varphi\big)(t);~\quad\gamma=\alpha+n\beta-\alpha\beta.$$ $$=\big(I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}D^{\gamma}\varphi\big)(t),$$\
Where $I^{(.)}$ and $~D^{(.)}~$is the Riemann-Liouvill fractional integral and derivative defined by (2.1) and (2.2), respectively.\
In particular, if $\quad0<\alpha<1,$ then $$~(D^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=\big(I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}\frac{d}{dt}~I^{(1-\alpha)(1-\beta)}\varphi\big)(t)~$$ $$\quad\quad=\big(I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}\frac{d}{dt}I^{1-\gamma}\varphi\big)(t);\quad\gamma=\alpha+\beta-\alpha\beta.~$$ $$=\big(I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}D^{\gamma}\varphi\big)(t).$$\
** Properties 2.7.\[20,21\].**\
Let$~~0<\alpha<1,\quad0\leq\beta\leq 1,
\quad\gamma=\alpha+\beta-\alpha\beta,$ and $\varphi\in L^{1}(a,b).~$ If $D^{\gamma}\varphi$ exists and in $L^{1}(a,b),$ then $$I_{a+}^{\alpha}~(D_{a+}^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=I_{a+}^{\gamma}~
(D_{a+}^{\gamma}\varphi)(t)=
\varphi(t)-\frac{(I_{a+}^{1-\gamma}\varphi)(a)}{\Gamma(\gamma)}(t-a)^{\gamma-1}$$\
** Definition 2.8.\[20,21\]**(Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivative).\
Let$~~0<\alpha<1,~~0\leq\beta\leq 1,~~\varphi\in
L^{1}(a,b).~$The Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivative $_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}$ of order$~\alpha~$and type $~\beta~$of$~\varphi~$is defined as$$~(_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=\big(_{H}I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}\delta~_{H}I^{(1-\alpha)(1-\beta)}\varphi\big)(t)~$$ $$=\big(_{H}I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}\delta~_{H}I^{1-\gamma}\varphi\big)(t);\quad\gamma=\alpha+\beta-\alpha\beta.$$ $$=\big(_{H}I^{\beta(1-\alpha)}_{H}D^{\gamma}\varphi\big)(t).$$ Where $_{H}I^{(.)}$ and $~_{H}D^{(.)}~$is the Hadamard fractional integral and derivative defined by (2.3) and (2.4), respectively.\
** Theorem 2.9.\[1,4\].**\
Let$~\Re(\alpha)>0,\quad~n=[\Re(\alpha)]+1~$and$~0<a<b<\infty.~$ if $~\varphi\in L^{1}(a,b)~$ and $~(_{H}I_{a+}^{n-\alpha}\varphi)(t)\in AC_{\delta}^{n}[a,b],~$ then $$(_{H}I_{a+}^{\alpha}~_{H}D_{a+}^{\alpha}\varphi)(t)=
\varphi(t)-\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\frac{(\delta^{(n-j-1)}(_{H}I_{a+}^{n-\alpha}\varphi))(a)}{\Gamma(\alpha-j)}(\log\frac{t}{a})^{\alpha-j-1}$$\
** Theorem 2.10.\[4,12\] **\
Let $\varphi(t)\in AC_{\delta}^{n}[a,b]$ or $\varphi(t)\in
C_{\delta}^{n}[a,b],$ and $~~\alpha\in\mathbb{C},$ then$$(_{H}I_{a+}^{\alpha}~_{HC}D_{a+}^{\alpha}\varphi)(t)=
\varphi(t)-\sum_{K=0}^{n-1}\frac{\delta^{K}\varphi(a)}{\Gamma(K+1)}(\log\frac{t}{a})^{K}$$\
** Definition 2.11.\[28\]** Let $E$ be a Banach space and let $F :E\rightarrow E $ be a mapping. $F$ is said to be a nonlinear contraction if there exists a continuous nondecreasing function $\Psi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}$ such that $\Psi(0) =
0$ and $\Psi(\phi) < \phi$ for all $\phi > 0$ with the property $$\| Fx-Fy\|\leq\Psi(\| x-y\|),\quad\quad \forall x,y\in E.$$\
** Lemma 2.12.\[24\]** Let $E$ be a Banach space and let $F :E\rightarrow E $ be a nonlinear contraction. Then $F$ has a unique fixed point in $E$.\
** Theorem 2.13.\[23\] **(Krasnoselskii’s fixed point theorem). Let $M$ be a closed, bounded, convex, and nonempty subset of a Banach space $X.$ Let $A,B$ be the operators such that\
(a) $Ax+By\in M,$ whenever$x,y\in M;$\
(b) $A$ is compact and continuous;\
(c) $B$ is a contraction mapping. Ten there exists $z\in M$ such that $z=Az+Bz.$\
** Theorem 2.14.\[25\]**(nonlinear alternative for single-valued maps). Let $E$ be a Banach space,$ C$ a closed, convex subset of $E, U$ an open subset of $C,$ and $0\in U.$ Suppose that $F : \overline{U}\rightarrow C
$is a continuous, compact $\big(i.e., F(\overline{U})$ is a relatively compact subset of $C\big)$ map. Ten either
\(i) F has a fixed point in $\overline{U}$ or
\(ii) there is a $u\in\partial U$ (the boundary of $U$ in $C$) and $\bar{\lambda}\in (0,
1),$ with $u =\bar{\lambda} F(u).$\
** Definition 2.15.\[29\]**(Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivative).\
Let$~~n-1<\alpha<n,~~0\leq\beta\leq 1,~~\varphi\in
L^{1}(a,b).~$The Hilfer-Hadamard fractional derivative $_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}$ of order$~\alpha~$and type $~\beta~$of$~\varphi~$is defined as$$~(_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=\big(_{H}I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}(\delta)^{n}~_{H}I^{(n-\alpha)(1-\beta)}\varphi\big)(t)~$$ $$=\big(_{H}I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}(\delta)^{n}~_{H}I^{n-\gamma}\varphi\big)(t);\quad\gamma=\alpha+n\beta-\alpha\beta.$$ $$=\big(I^{\beta(n-\alpha)}_{H}D^{\gamma}\varphi\big)(t),$$ Where $_{H}I^{(.)}$ and $~_{H}D^{(.)}~$is the Hadamard fractional integral and derivative defined by (2.3) and (2.4), respectively.\
** Lemma2.16.\[29\]**\
Let$~\Re(\alpha)>0,\quad0\leq\beta\leq1,\quad\gamma=\alpha+n\beta-\alpha\beta,
\quad n-1<\gamma\leq n,\quad~n=[\Re(\alpha)]+1~$ and $~0<a<b<\infty.~$ if $~\varphi\in L^{1}(a,b)~$ and $~(_{H}I_{a+}^{n-\gamma}\varphi)(t)\in AC_{\delta}^{n}[a,b],
\quad ~~$ then $$_{H}I_{a+}^{\alpha}~(_{H}D_{a+}^{\alpha,\beta}\varphi)(t)=_{H}I_{a+}^{\gamma}~(_{H}D_{a+}^{\gamma}\varphi)(t)=
\varphi(t)-\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\frac{(\delta^{(n-j-1)}(_{H}I_{a+}^{n-\gamma}\varphi))(a)}
{\Gamma(\gamma-j)}(\log\frac{t}{a})^{\gamma-j-1}$$ From this Lemma, we notice that if $\beta=0$ the formulae reduces to the formulae in the theorem 2.9, and if the $\beta=1$ the formulae reduces to the formulae in the theorem 2.10.\
\
$$\textbf{3.Main Results }.$$\
** Lemma3.1**\
For $1<\alpha\leq2~~$,$~~0\leq\beta\leq1~~$ and $~~\varphi\in
C([1,e],\mathbb{R}),$\
$~~~\gamma=\alpha+2\beta-\alpha\beta~~$,$~\gamma\in(1,2]$\
the problem\
$_{H}D^{\alpha,\beta}x(t)+\varphi(t)=0,~~~~~~~~~~~~$ $t\in J~~,$ $1<\alpha\leq2~~$,$~~0\leq\beta\leq1~~$\
$x(1+\epsilon)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}x(\zeta_{i}),\quad\quad\quad~$$_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(\zeta_{i})\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.1)$ has a unique solution it giving in the formulae $$\begin{aligned}
x(t)=&- _{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(t)+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg],\quad\quad
t\in J.\end{aligned}$$ Where, $$\begin{aligned}
&\lambda=(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}\mu_{2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}\mu_{1},\quad\quad
with \quad\quad\lambda\neq 0, \\&
\mu_{1}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-1}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-1},\\&
\mu_{2}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-2}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2},\\&
\delta_{1}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2},\\&
\delta_{2}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-3}.\end{aligned}$$\
** Proof.** In the view of the Lemma $(2.16)$, the solution of the Hilfer-Hadamard differential equation $(3.1)$ can be written as $$\quad\quad\quad\quad x(t)=-~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(t)+c_{0}(\log t)^{\gamma-1}+c_{1}(\log t)^{\gamma-2}~
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~(3.2)$$ and$$\quad\quad\quad _{H}D^{1,1}
x(t)=-~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(t)+(\gamma-1)c_{0}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}+(\gamma-2) c_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-3}~\quad\quad\quad~(3.3)$$ The boundary condition $x(1+\epsilon)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}x(\zeta_{i})$ gives $$\quad\quad c_{1}=\frac{1}{\mu_{2}}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})-c_{0}\mu_{1}\bigg]
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.4)$$ where $$\mu_{1}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-1}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-1},\quad\quad
\mu_{2}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-2}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2}.$$ In view of the boundary condition $_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(\zeta_{i})$ and by $~(3.3)~,~and~ (3.4)$ we have $$\quad\quad
c_{0}=\frac{1}{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}}\bigg[-(\gamma-2)c_{1}\delta_{2}+~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)-
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.5)$$ where$$\delta_{1}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2},\quad\quad
\delta_{2}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-3}.$$ by $(3.5)$ in $(3.4)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
&c_{1}=\frac{1}{\lambda}\Biggr[(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}\bigg[
~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-
\mu_{1}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)-
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Biggr]\end{aligned}$$ where $$\lambda=(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}\mu_{2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}\mu_{1},\quad\quad
with \quad\quad\lambda\neq 0.$$ by substituting the value of $~c_{1}~$ in $~(3.5)~$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
c_{0}&=\frac{1}{\lambda}\Biggr[-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}\bigg[
~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+
\mu_{2}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)-
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Biggr]\end{aligned}$$ Now substituting the values of $~c_{0}~$ and $~c_{1}~$ in $~(3.2)~$ we obtain the solution of the problem(3.1). $$\textbf{Results of Existence}.$$ Suppose that $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~K=C([1,e],\mathbb{R})\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.6)$$ is a Banach space of all continuous functions from $[1,e]$ into $\mathbb{R}~$ talented with the norm $~\| x\|=\sup_{t\in J}|
x(t)|.~$\
From the Lemma3.1,we getting an operator $~\rho:K\rightarrow K$ defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad\quad(\rho x)(t)&=-
_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(t)\\&\quad+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.7)
\\&\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg],\quad\quad
with \quad\lambda\neq 0\end{aligned}$$ It must be noticed that the problem $(1.1)$ has solutions if and only if the operator $\rho$ has fixed points.The result of existence and uniqueness is based on the Banach Principle of contraction mapping.\
** Theorem 3.2** Let $f:J\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ be a continuous function satisfying the supposition that
$(Q_{1})$there exists a constant $C > 0 $ such that $| f(t,x)-f(t,y)|\leq C| x-y|,$ for each $t\in J$ and $x,y\in\mathbb{R}.$\
If $~\Phi$ satisfied the condition $~~C\Phi<1,~$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad\Phi&=\bigg\{\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\bigg\}\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.8)\end{aligned}$$ Then the problem of boundary value $(1.1)$ has a unique solution on $J$.\
** Proof.**We using Banach’s Principle of contraction mapping for transform the problem of boundary value(1,1) into a fixed point problem,$x=\rho x,$ where the operator $\rho$ is defined by (3.7), we will show that $\rho$ has a fixed point which is a unique solution of problem (1,1).
We put $~~sup_{t\in J}|
f(\tau,0)|= p <\infty~$ and choose $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
r\geq\frac{\Phi
P}{1-C\Phi},\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.9)\end{aligned}$$
Now,assume that $B_{r}=\{x\in K:| x|\leq r\},$ then we show that $\rho B_{r}\subset B_{r}.$\
For any $x\in B_{r},$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\|\rho x\|=sup_{t\in
J}\bigg\{\Biggl|-~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(t)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Biggl|\bigg\}
\\&\quad\quad\leq sup_{t\in
J}\bigg\{~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(t)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}+|\mu_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\bigg\}
\\&\quad\quad\leq ~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,0)|+|f(\tau,0)|\big)(e)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|}
\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,0)|+|f(\tau,0)|\big)(1+\epsilon)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,0)|+|f(\tau,0)|\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|}
\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,0)|+|f(\tau,0)|\big)(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,0)|+|f(\tau,0)|\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\leq(Cr+P)\bigg\{\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\bigg\}\\&\quad\quad=(Cr+P)\Phi\leq
r\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.10)\end{aligned}$$ Thus we shown $\rho B_{r}\subset B_{r}.$
Now,For $x,y\in K$ and $\forall t\in J,$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\mid(\rho x)(t)-(\rho
y)(t)\mid\\&\quad=\Biggl|-~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(t)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Biggl|
\\&\quad\quad\leq ~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(t)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}+|\mu_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\leq C \|x-y\|\bigg\{\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\bigg\}\\&\quad\quad=C
\|x-y\|\Phi\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.11)\end{aligned}$$ Therefore it shown that $\|(\rho x)(t)-(\rho y)(t)\|\leq C \Phi\|
x-y\|,$ where $C \Phi<1.$\
Hence $\rho$ is a contraction. Thus by Banach’s Principle of contraction mapping, the problem $(1.1)$ has a uniqueness solution.\
** Theorem 3.3.** Let $f:J\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ be a continuous function satisfying the supposition that
$(Q_{2})~\big|f(t,x)-f(t,y)\big|\leq\varphi(t)\big(|x-y|/(P^{*}+|x-y|)\big),\quad
t\in J,\quad x,y\geq 0,$
$\quad\quad where\quad
\varphi:J\rightarrow\mathbb{R^{+}}$ is continuous and a constant $P^{*}$ is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad\quad
P^{*}&=~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(e)+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|}
\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\quad\quad\quad(3.12)\end{aligned}$$ Then the problem of boundary value $(1.1)$ has a unique solution on $J$.\
** Proof.**We have the operator $\rho:K\rightarrow K$ defined as (3.7) and we apply the definition 2.11. for that we define a continuous nondecreasing function $\Psi:\mathbb{R}^{+}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{+}$ as $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\Psi(\phi)=\frac{P^{*}\phi}{P^{*}+\phi},\quad\quad\forall\phi\geq 0
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.13)$$ Where the function $\Psi$ satisfies $\Psi(0) = 0$ and $\Psi(\phi) <
\phi$ for all $\phi > 0.$
For any $x,y \in K$ and for each $t\in J,$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
&\mid(\rho x)(t)-(\rho
y)(t)\mid\\&\quad=\Biggl|-~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(t)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big(f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Biggl|
\\&\quad\quad\leq ~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(t)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}+|\mu_{1}|(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\big|f(\tau,x(\tau))-f(\tau,y(\tau))\big|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\leq ~_{H}I^{\alpha}\bigg(\varphi(\tau)\frac{|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}{P^{*}+|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}\bigg)(e)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[
~_{H}I^{\alpha}\bigg(\varphi(\tau)\frac{|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}{P^{*}+|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}\bigg)(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}
\bigg(\varphi(\tau)\frac{|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}{P^{*}+|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}\bigg)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|}
\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\bigg(\varphi(\tau)\frac{|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}{P^{*}+|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}\bigg)(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\bigg(\varphi(\tau)\frac{|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}{P^{*}+|x(\tau)-y(\tau)|}\bigg)(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\leq\frac{\Psi(\|x-y\|)}{P^{*}}\biggr\{~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(e)+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(1+\epsilon)+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(e)+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}\varphi(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\biggr\}
\\&\quad\quad=\Psi(\|x-y\|).\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.14)\end{aligned}$$ Which implies that $\|\rho x-\rho y\|\leq\Psi(\|x-y\|).$ Then $\rho$ is a nonlinear contraction.Thus, by Lemma 2.12 the operator $\rho$ has a fixed point, that is the unique solution of the problem $(1.1)$ .
Next, we give a result of existence by using Theorem 2.13(Krasnoselskii’s fixed point theorem).\
** Theorem 3.4.** Let $f:J\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ be a continuous function satisfying the supposition that $(Q_{1}).$ In addition assume that $$(Q_{3})\quad |f(t,x)|\leq g(t),\quad \forall (t,x)\in
J\times\mathbb{R}\quad and \quad g\in C([1,e],\mathbb{R}^{+}).$$ If $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\frac{C}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}<1,\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.15)$$ Then the problem of boundary value $(1.1)$ has at least one solution on $J$.\
** Proof.** We put $\sup_{t\in J}|g(t)|=\|g\|$ and choose a suitable constant $\hat{r}$ as $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\hat{r}\geq\|g\|\Phi,\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.16)$$ where $\Phi$ is defined by (3.8).Moreover, we set the operators $\mathscr{F}$ and $\mathscr{G}$ on\
$B_{\hat{r}}=\{x\in K
:\|x\|\leq\hat{r}\}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
&(\mathscr{F}x)(t)=\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.17)
\\&\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t)^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t)^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg],\quad\quad
\quad t\in J
\\&(\mathscr{G}x)(t)= -
_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(t),\quad t\in J\end{aligned}$$ For any $x,y\in B_{\hat{r}},$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\|\mathscr{F}x+\mathscr{G}x\|&\leq
\|g\|\bigg(\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\bigg)\\&=\|g\|\Phi\leq\hat{r}.
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.18)\end{aligned}$$ This implies $\mathscr{F}x+\mathscr{G}x\in B_{\hat{r}}.$ It follows from supposition $(Q_{1})$ together with (3.15) that $\mathscr{G}$ is a mapping of contraction.Furthermore,it is easy to show that the operator $\mathscr{F}$ is continuous. $$\begin{aligned}
\quad\quad \quad
\|\mathscr{F}x\|&\leq\|g\|\bigg(\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\bigg).
\quad\quad \quad\quad\quad\quad(3.19)\end{aligned}$$ Hence,$\mathscr{F}$ is uniformly bounded on $B_{\hat{r}}.$
Next,we prove that the operator $\mathscr{F}$ is a compactness, for that we put\
$\sup_{(t,x)\in J\times
B_{\hat{r}}}|f(t,x)|=\bar{p}<\infty .$ Consequently, for $t_{1},t_{2}\in J,$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
&|(\mathscr{F}x)(t_{1})-(\mathscr{F}x)(t_{2})|\\
&\quad=\Biggl|\Bigg\{\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Bigg\}\\&
\quad\quad\quad-\Bigg\{\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Bigg\}\Biggl|\\&\quad
\leq\bar{p}\quad\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}||(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-2}-\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-2}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}||(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-1}-(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad+\bar{p}\quad\frac{|\mu_{2}||(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-1}-\log t_{1})^{\gamma-1}|+|\mu_{1}||(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-2}-(\log
t_{1})^{\gamma-2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.20)\end{aligned}$$ which is independent of $x$ and tends to zero as $t_{2}\rightarrow
t_{1}.$ Thus,$\mathscr{F}$ is equicontinuous. Hence $\mathscr{F}$ is relatively compact on $ B_{\hat{r}}.$ Therefore, by the Arzela-Ascoli theorem, $\mathscr{F}$ is compact on $ B_{\hat{r}}.$ Thus, by Theorem 2.13 the problem of boundary value(1.1) has at least one solution on $J.$
Now, the finally result of existence is based on Theorem 2.14(nonlinear alternative for single-valued maps).\
** Theorem 3.5.** Let $f:J\times\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ be a continuous function, and assume that
$(Q_{4})$ there exists a continuous nondecreasing function $ \vartheta: \mathbb{R^{+}}\rightarrow
\mathbb{R^{+}}\backslash\{0\}$ such that $$\quad\quad\quad\quad|f(t,x)|\leq q(t)\vartheta(|x|)\quad for \quad each \quad (t,x)\in J\times\mathbb{R}
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.21)$$ where $q\in
C([1,e],\mathbb{R}^{+})$ be a function.
$(Q_{5})$ there exists a constant $L>0$ such that $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\frac{L}{\|q\|\vartheta(L)\Phi}>1,
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.22)$$ where $\Phi$ is defined by (3.8).\
Then the problem of boundary value $(1.1)$ has at least one solution on $J$.\
** Proof.** We have the operator $\rho$ is defined by (3.7). Firstly, we will show that $\rho$ maps bounded sets (balls) into bounded sets in $K$, for that let $\bar{r}$ a positive number, and $B_{\bar{r}}=\{x\in K :\|x\|\leq\bar{r}\}$ be a bounded ball in $K,$ where $K$ is defined by (3.6). For $t\in J,$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
|\rho
x(t)|&\leq~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(1+\epsilon)\\&
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}|f(\tau,x(\tau))|(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\\&\leq
\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\\&\quad\quad+\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}
\bigg[(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\\&\leq
\|q\|\vartheta(\bar{r})\bigg\{\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\bigg\}\\&:=C_{1}.\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.23)\end{aligned}$$ This implies that $\|\rho x\|\leq C_{1}.$
Now, we will show that $\rho$ maps bounded sets into equicontinuous sets of $K$, for that let $\sup_{(t,x)\in
J\times B_{\bar{r}}}|f(t,x)|=p^{\star}<\infty ,$ $\omega_{1},\omega_{2}\in J,$ with $\omega_{1}<\omega_{2}$ and $x\in B_{\bar{r}}.$ Hence we have $$\begin{aligned}
&|(\rho x)(\omega_{1})-(\rho x)(\omega_{2})|\\
&\quad=\Biggl|\Bigg\{-
_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\omega_{1})+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Bigg\}\\&
\quad\quad\quad-\Bigg\{-
_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\omega_{2})+\frac{(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-1}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(1+\epsilon)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{\mu_{2}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-1}-\mu_{1}(\log
t_{2})^{\gamma-2}}{\lambda}\bigg[~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(e)\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}~_{H}I^{\alpha-1}f(\tau,x(\tau))(\zeta_{i})\bigg]\Bigg\}\Biggl|\\&\quad
\leq p^{\star}\quad\frac{|(\log \omega_{2})^{\alpha}-\log
\omega_{1})^{\alpha}|}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\\&\quad\quad\quad+
p^{\star}\quad\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}||(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-2}-\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-2}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}||(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-1}-(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad+p^{\star}\quad\frac{|\mu_{2}||(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-1}-\log \omega_{1})^{\gamma-1}|+|\mu_{1}||(\log
\omega_{2})^{\gamma-2}-(\log
\omega_{1})^{\gamma-2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.24)\end{aligned}$$ Clearly, as $\omega_{2}\rightarrow\omega_{1}$ the right hand side of the previous inequality tends to zero which is independently of $x\in B_{\bar{r}}.$ Thus, by the Arzela-Ascoli theorem, it follows that $\rho : K\rightarrow K$ is completely continuous.
Finally, let $x$ be a solution. So, for $t\in J,$ following the similar computations as in the first step, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\|x\|&\leq\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\\&\quad\quad+\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}
\bigg[(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+
\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]
\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}
|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\\&=\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\Phi.\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.25)\end{aligned}$$ Thus, we have $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\frac{\|x\|}{\|q\|\vartheta(\|x\|)\Phi}\leq 1.
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.26)$$ In view of $(Q_{5}),$ there exists $L$ such that $\| x\|\neq L.$ Let us set $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
V=\{x \in K:\|x\|<L\}.
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(3.27)$$ Note that the operator $\rho:\overline{V}\rightarrow K$ is continuous and completely continuous. From the choice of $V,$ there is no $x\in\partial V$ such that $x=\bar{\lambda}\rho x$ for some $\bar{\lambda}\in(0, 1).$ Thus, by Theorem 2.14 the operator $\rho$ has a fixed point in $\overline{V}$ which is a solution of the problem of boundary value(1.1). $$\textbf{\ 4.Examples}$$\
** Example 4.1.**\
Consider the following boundary value problem for Hilfer-Hadamard-type fractional differential equation: $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~_{H}D^{3/2,1/2}x(t)+f(t,x(t))=0,~\quad\quad~~t\in
J=(1,e]~\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.1)$$ $$\quad x(1.3)=\frac{1}{2}x(3/2)-\frac{3}{4}x(7/4),~\quad\quad
~_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=\frac{2}{3}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(3/2)+\frac{4}{3}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(7/4).~$$ Here, $$\alpha=3/2,\quad\beta=1/2,\quad\gamma=7/4,\quad\nu_{1}=1/2,\quad\nu_{2}=-3/4
,\quad\sigma_{1}=2/3,\quad\sigma_{2}=4/3 ,$$ $\zeta_{1}=3/2,\quad\zeta_{2}=7/4,\quad\epsilon=0.3,\quad1+\epsilon=1.3
$ and $f(t,x(t))=\frac{(\sqrt{t}+\log
t^{2})}{2e^{t}(3+t)^{2}}\big(\frac{| x(t)|}{2+| x(t)|}\big).$\
Clearly, $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad|f(t,x)-f(t,y)|\leq\frac{3}{64e}(|x-y|)
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.2)$$ Hence$(Q_{1})$ is satisfied with $C=\frac{3}{64e}.$ We can show that $$\begin{aligned}
&\quad\quad\mu_{1}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-1}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-1}\approx0.59779,\\&\quad\quad
\mu_{2}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-2}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2}\approx1.63780,\\&\quad\quad
\delta_{1}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2}\approx-1.37703,\\&\quad\quad
\delta_{2}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-3}\approx-3.81518,
\\&\quad\quad\lambda=(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}\mu_{2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}\mu_{1}\approx-2.26164,\\
&\quad\quad\Phi=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\approx3.835201,\\&
C\Phi=\frac{3}{64e}(3.835201)\approx0.06613554378<1.\end{aligned}$$Therefore, by Theorem3.2, the boundary value problem (4.1) has a unique solution on $J.$\
** Example 4.2.**\
Consider the following boundary value problem for Hilfer-Hadamard-type fractional differential equation: $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~_{H}D^{3/2,2/3}x(t)+f(t,x(t))=0,~\quad\quad~~t\in
J=(1,e]~\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad$$ $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
x(1.5)=2x(4/3)-\frac{1}{2}x(2)+\frac{5}{3}x(9/7),~\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.3)$$ $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~_{H}D^{1,1}x(e)=-~_{H}D^{1,1}x(4/3)+3D^{1,1}x(2)-\frac{11}{3}~_{H}D^{1,1}x(9/7).
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad~$$ Here, $$\alpha=3/2,\quad\beta=2/3,\quad\gamma=11/6,\quad\nu_{1}=2,\quad\nu_{2}=-1/2,\quad\nu_{3}=5/3
,\quad\sigma_{1}=-1,\quad\sigma_{2}=3,$$ $\sigma_{3}=-11/3
,\zeta_{1}=4/3,\quad\zeta_{2}=2,\quad\zeta_{2}=9/7,\quad\epsilon=0.5,\quad1+\epsilon=1.5
$\
and $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad f(t,x(t))=\frac{(1+\log
t)}{(t+1)^{2}}\big(\frac{| x(t)|+1}{3+|
x(t)|}\big).\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.4)$$\
Clearly, $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad|f(t,x)|\leq|\frac{(1+\log t)}{(t+1)^{2}}\big(\frac{|
x(t)|+1}{3+| x(t)|}\big)|
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad$$ $$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\leq|(1+\log t)\big(\frac{|
x(t)|+1}{12}\big)
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.5)$$ we choose $q(t)=1+\log t$ and $\vartheta(|x|)=(| x(t)|+1)/12,$ We can show that $$\begin{aligned}
&\quad\quad\mu_{1}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-1}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-1}\approx-0.395713,\\&\quad\quad
\mu_{2}=(\log(1+\epsilon))^{\gamma-2}-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\nu_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2}\approx-2.865742,\\&\quad\quad
\delta_{1}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-2}\approx3.65750,\\&\quad\quad
\delta_{2}=1-\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}\sigma_{i}(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\gamma-3}\approx19.04369,
\\&\quad\quad\lambda=(\gamma-1)\delta_{1}\mu_{2}-(\gamma-2)\delta_{2}\mu_{1}\approx-9.990516,\\
&\quad\quad\Phi=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)}+
\frac{(|\gamma-1|)|\delta_{1}|+(|\gamma-2|)|\delta_{2}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha+1)}\bigg[(\log
(1+\epsilon))^{\alpha}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\nu_{i}|(\log
(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\frac{|\mu_{2}|+|\mu_{1}|}{|\lambda|\Gamma(\alpha)}
\bigg[1+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2}|\sigma_{i}|(\log(\zeta_{i}))^{\alpha-1}\bigg]\\&\quad\quad\approx3.414437455.\end{aligned}$$ Now, by $(Q_{5})$ we have,$$\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\frac{L}{(2)((L+1)/12)(3.414437455)}
> 1 \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(4.6)$$ $$$$ Hence, $L>1.320578171.$ Therefore, by Theorem3.5, the boundary value problem (4.3) has at least one solution on $J.$
[99]{}
A. A. Kilbas, H. M. Srivastava, J. J. Trujillo; . (2006).
B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, and A. Alsaedi, vol. 2013, Article ID 320415, 9 pages, 2013.
V. Keyantuo, C. Lizama, M. Warma; . (7/8) (2013), 757–780.
Y. Y. Gambo, F. Jarad, D. Baleanu, T. Abdeljawad, (2014),no.1,1-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1687-1847-2014-10
C. Lizama; (2012), 1-9.
R. Hilfer; . , 2000.
C-G. Li, M. Kostic, M. Li, S. Piskarev; (4) (2012), 639–668.
Z. Bai,
I. Podlubny; , 1999
S. G. Samko, A. A. Kilbas; O. I. Marichev; . . \[Translation from the Russian edition, Nauka i Tekhnika, Minsk (1987)\]
M. Benchohra, S. Hamani, and S. K. Ntouyas,
F. Jarad, T. Abdeljawad, D. Baleanu, . [**2012**]{} (2012),no.1,1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1687-1847-2012-142
P. Thiramanus, S. K. Ntouyas, T. Jessada, . [**2014**]{} (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/902054
B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, . [**2014**]{} (2014), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/705809
B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, . [**17**]{} (2014),no.2,348-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/s13540-014-0173-5
B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, T. Jessada, . [**2015**]{} (2015),no.1,1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13662-015-0625-1
B. Ahmad, S. K. Ntouyas, A. Alsaedi, . [**2013**]{} (2013),1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2013-275
B. Ahmad and S. K. Ntouyas, .
J. Tariboon, S. K. Ntouyas, S. Weerawat, . [**2014**]{} (2014),no.1,1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13661-014-0253-9
Hilfer R, . 2008. p. 17-73
Qassim MD, Furati KM, Tatar N-e. . Abstract Appl Anal 2012;2012:17. Article ID 391062
Smart D.R., Cambridge University Press, 1980
M. A. Krasnosel’skii,
D. W. Boyd and J. S. W. Wong,
A. Granas and J. Dugundji,
Sabri T.M. Thabet\*, Machindra B. Dhakne, . Int. J. Nonlinear Anal. Appl. 7 (2016) No. 2, 165-184 ISSN: 2008-6822 (electronic), http://www.ijnaa.semnan.ac.ir
A. A. Kilbas, . [**38**]{} (2001),no.6,1191-1204.
Phollakrit Thiramanus, Sotiris K. Ntouyas, and Jessada Tariboon, .
AHMAD Y. A. SALAMOONI, D. D. PAWAR, arXiv:1801.10400v1\[math.AP\] 31 Jan 2018.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'This work presents joint subcarrier, power and bit allocation schemes for multi-user OFDM based overlay cognitive radio under constraints on primary user throughput loss and total secondary user transmitted power. Closed form for expressions for the optimal power and bit allocations are initially derived. Subsequently, optimal and suboptimal algorithms to realise the joint subcarrier, power and bit allocations are introduced. Numerical simulations are used to evaluate the performance of the joint resource allocation algorithms.'
author:
- Ayush Kumar
bibliography:
- 'biblio.bib'
title: Joint Resource Allocation for OFDMA based Overlay Cognitive Radio Networks under Stochastic Rate Constraint
---
Cognitive Radio, OFDM, Overlay, Resource Allocation, Dual Decomposition.
Introduction
============
Cognitive Radio (CR) [@MITOLA00] is a radio device that intelligently senses the communication environment, analyses the changes and adapts itself accordingly. There are two types of users in a cognitive radio system, primary users (PUs) and secondary users (SUs). PUs are licensed to operate in a given spectrum, while SUs are unlicensed and can share the spectrum with PUs in three different ways which form the paradigms of cognitive radio: overlay, underlay and interweave. In overlay cognitive radio, SUs transmit even when the spectrum is occupied by PUs while in underlay cognitive radio, SUs transmit only when the spectrum is unoccupied. When SUs transmit in spectrum bands interweaved with the bands occupied by PUs, it is called interweave cognitive radio.
Moreover, OFDM has been identified as a suitable modulation technique for cognitive radio systems [@WEISS04] since it allows high flexibility with respect to the transmitted signal’s spectral shape so that it only fills the spectral bands unoccupied by a licensed user. This ensures that the mutual interference between the licensed system and the unlicensed system is minimized. OFDM offers several other advantages such as high spectral efficiency, frequency flat fading in subcarriers, robustness against Inter Symbol Interference (ISI) and efficient implementation using Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithms. However, the subcarriers in an OFDM system may experience varying channel conditions with time. Hence adaptive bit and power allocation algorithms are needed that assign appropriate transmission power and bits to each subcarrier so that the overall ergodic capacity of the system is maximized. Also, in a multi-user communication system, there exists a multi-user diversity which arises due to independent fading channels across the multiple users. Subcarrier allocation is a technique that takes advantage of this channel diversity across users to improve overall system throughput.
We now go through the existing literature for subcarrier, power and bit allocation in OFDM based cognitive radio systems. In [@CIOFFI00], Cioffi et al. form a multi-user convex optimization problem to find the optimal subcarrier allocation in a multiuser OFDM based system and proposed a low-complexity adaptive subcarrier allocation algorithm. A joint overlay and underlay power allocation scheme is investigated by the authors in [@DUVAL10] by maximizing the total capacity of cognitive radio while maintaining a total power budget and keeping the interference introduced to the primary user band below a threshold. In [@DUALPA10], the power allocation problem is formulated as a convex optimization problem and dual decomposition method is used to obtain the optimal power allocation. Kang et al. [@PRIMPROT10] propose a rate loss constraint for primary transmission protection and derive optimal power allocation under that constraint using dual decomposition. In [@TANG10], integer linear programming based adaptive bit loading and subcarrier allocation techniques are proposed which consider interference leakage to and from multiple primary users and secondary users to optimise the throughput of the secondary network while keeping the interference to primary network below a threshold. The authors in [@DAWEI10] present a new bit allocation scheme for cognitive OFDM systems based on the margin adaptive principle in which the overall transmission power is minimized by placing constraints on the fixed data rate and bit error rate. Nadkar et al.[@NADKAR10] propose a bit allocation algorithm to be used in an OFDM based cognitive relay network using a two pass algorithm.
In this paper, we mathematically characterize the joint subcarrier, power and bit allocation problem in a multiuser OFDM based overlay cognitive radio system under constraints on PU throughput loss and total SU transmitted power. Using Lagrange multipliers method and dual decomposition, we attempt to solve the resulting non-convex optimization problem and derive closed form expression for the power and bit allocation. Further, we propose optimal and sub-optimal algorithms to realise the joint subcarrier, power and bit allocations. Finally, the performance of the proposed resource allocation algorithms is evaluated using MATLAB simulations.
System Model
============
Consider an OFDM based overlay cognitive radio system with $N$ subcarriers allocated to $M$ PUs of the primary system. The secondary system consists of $K$ SUs sharing the same $N$ subcarriers with the primary system. For the $i^{th}$ subcarrier, let the instantaneous channel gains of the primary link, the secondary link, the link between PU transmitter and SU receiver and the link between SU transmitter and PU receiver be denoted by $H_{i}^{pp}$, $H_{i}^{ss}$, $H_{i}^{ps}$ and $H_{i}^{sp}$ respectively. It is assumed that the SUs use a fraction of its transmit power to relay PU transmissions so that the maximum loss in PU throughput (in bits/s) due to SU interference is upper bounded. Also, the interference link $H_{i}^{sp}$ is assumed to be weak, so the PUs treat it as noise.
{width="90mm" height="60mm"}
PU throughput
-------------
The maximum throughput of $j^{th}$ PU in absence of the secondary system is given by $$R_{j}^{p}=\sum_{i \in \Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{|H_i^{pp}|^2 T_i}{N_o}\right)$$ where $\Omega_j$ is the set of subcarriers assigned to $j^{th}$ PU and $T_i$ is the power allocated to the $i^{th}$ subcarrier by PU and $N_o$ is the AWGN noise power in a subcarrier. The maximum throughput of $j^{th}$ PU with SU relaying is given by [@VISW09] $$\label{primthput}
R_{j}^{s}=\sum_{k \in \Psi} \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{(|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_{i}})^2}{N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 (1-\alpha_k) P_{i}}\right)$$ where $\Psi = \{k \in (1,2,\dots,K)\, | \, \Omega_j \cap U_k \neq \emptyset\}$, $U_k$ is the set of subcarriers allocated to the $k^{th}$ SU, $P_i$ is the power allocated to $i^{th}$ subcarrier by SU, and $\alpha_k$ is the fraction of transmission power used for relaying by $k^{th}$ SU.
PU Activity Model
-----------------
The arrival-departure process of PUs can be reliably modelled using a two-state Markov chain model [@HORVATH11]. The ON state indicates the presence while the OFF state indicates the absence of $j^{th}$ PU. The corresponding state transition matrix can be written as, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{P}=
\begin{pmatrix}
1-\alpha_j & \alpha_j \\
\beta_j & 1-\beta_j \\
\end{pmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_j=Pr(S_{n+1}=OFF | S_n=ON)$ and $\beta_j=Pr(S_{n+1}=ON | S_n=OFF)$. Over time, the Markov chain converges to the steady state distribution expressed as $\pi=(p_{j,0} \, p_{j,1})$ which is obtained by solving the equation, $$\begin{aligned}
\pi \mathbf{P} = \pi\end{aligned}$$ where $p_{j,0}$ and $p_{j,1}$ represent the steady-state probability for the OFF/ON states of the $j^{th}$ PU respectively. $$\begin{aligned}
p_{j,0}=\frac{\beta_j}{\alpha_j+\beta_j} \\
p_{j,1}=\frac{\alpha_j}{\alpha_j+\beta_j}\end{aligned}$$
Joint subcarrier, power and bit allocation {#glrtbaseddet}
==========================================
The maximum number of bits that can be loaded into the $i^{th}$ subcarrier is given by [@CIOFFI91] $$\label{bitloading}
b_{k,i}=\log_2 \left(1+\frac{{SINR}_{k,i}}{\Gamma}\right)\,\,\forall \,i \in U_k, k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}$$ where ${SINR}_{k,i}$ is the signal to interference-plus-noise ratio and $\Gamma$ is the SNR gap which is calculated by *gap approximation formula* [@CIOFFI91], based on target bit error rate (BER). SNR gap ($\Gamma$) represents how far the system is from theoretical capacity of $\log_2 (1+SNR)$ for AWGN channel.
Assuming rectangular M-QAM modulation and ideal coherent phase detection, the SNR gap is given by [@CIOFFI91], $$\label{snrgap}
\Gamma \geq \frac{1}{3}\left[Q^{-1}(P_e/4)\right]^2$$ where $Q^{-1}$ is the inverse of the Q-function defined as, $$Q(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_x^{\infty}e^{-t^2/2} \,dt$$ If instead we use MPSK modulation [@MPSK06], the SNR gap is given by, $$\Gamma^{*} \geq \left[\frac{Q^{-1}(P_e/2)}{\pi \sqrt(2)}\right]^2$$
We will use with equality sign for SNR gap approximation. For the system model under consideration, can be re-written as, $$\label{bitloadingexp}
b_{k,i}=\log_2 \left(1+\frac{|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2 P_{i}(1-\alpha_k)}{\Gamma(N_o +\bar{J}_{k,i})}\right)$$ where $\bar{J}_{k,i}$ is the expected interference introduced by $j^{th}$ PU into the $i^{th}$ subcarrier given by $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{J}_{k,i}&=&p_{j,1} \times 0+p_{j,1}|H_{k,i}^{ps}|^2 T_i \nonumber \\
&=&p_{j,1}|H_{k,i}^{ps}|^2 T_i, \, \forall \, i \in \Omega_j\end{aligned}$$ We consider interference contribution to $\bar{J}_{k,i}$ from PU transmission in subcarriers other than the $i^{th}$ subcarrier to be negligible.
Since in the overlay paradigm, the SU transmits in a subcarrier regardless of whether PU is already present, we propose a minimum transmission rate for the corresponding PU so that it need not worry about performance degradation. Hence, the stochastic rate constraint for the $j^{th}$ PU is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{R}_{j}^{s} \geq R_j\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{R}_{j}^{s}=p_{j,0} \times 0+p_{j,1}R_{j}^{s}=p_{j,1}R_{j}^{s}$ is the expected $j^{th}$ PU transmission rate and $R_j$ denotes the minimum required rate. Applying a total power constraint $P_t$, the joint bit, power and subcarrier allocation optimization problem maximizing bit rate can be written as, $$\max_{U_k,P_i} \sum_{k=1}^K \sum_{i \in U_k} b_{k,i}$$ subject to $$\bar{R}_{j}^{s} \geq R_j, \forall j \in \{1,2,\dots,M\}$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^N P_{i} \leq P_t$$ $$b_{k,i} \in Z_{+}, \forall i \in U_k, k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}$$ Due to the integer bit constraint, the above optimization problem turns out to be a *combinatorial* one [@RMLOAD08]. To make it mathematically tractable, we relax the integer bit constraint to $$b_{k,i} \geq 0$$ Using , the throughput maximization problem can be restated as $$\max_{U_k,P_i} \sum_{k=1}^K \sum_{i \in U_k}\log_2 (1+ s_{k,i}P_{i})$$ subject to $$\bar{R}_{j}^{s} \geq R_j, \forall j \in \{1,2,\dots,M\}$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^N P_{i} \leq P_t$$ $$\label{jointoptprob}
P_{i}\geq 0, \forall i \in \{1,2,\dots,N\}$$ where $s_{k,i} = {|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2(1-\alpha_k)}/{\Gamma (N_o+J_{k,i})}$. To perform the subcarrier allocation feasibly, we assume equal power allocation ($P_{eq}$) in all subcarriers though the algorithm would be suboptimal. However, we still have to satisfy the total power constraint, so $P_{eq}$ is given by, $$0 \leq P_{eq} \leq \frac{P_t}{N}$$ To satisfy the stochastic rate constraint, we plugin $P_i=P_{eq}$ in and solve it for $\bar{R}_{j}^{s} \geq R_j$. Assuming that the solution is $P_{eq} \leq P_{eq}^j \, \forall j \in \{1,2,\dots,M\}$, we can write $$\begin{aligned}
P_{eq} = \min \left\{\frac{P_t}{N}, P_{eq}^1, P_{eq}^1, \dots, P_{eq}^M\right\}\end{aligned}$$ Let $R_{k,i}=\log_2 (1+ s_{k,i}P_{eq})$ denote the throughput for the $k^{th}$ SU corresponding to the $i^{th}$ subcarrier, $A$ denote the set of all subcarriers and $U_k \equiv U_k^{*}$ denote the solution set of subcarriers allocated to $k^{th}$ SU. The algorithm for subcarrier allocation is given in Algorithm 1.
1. Initialization\
set $R_{k,i}\,=\,0$, $A\,=\,\{1,2,...,N\}$ and $U_k^{*}\,=\,\emptyset$ $\forall \, k$
2. For $i \in A$
(a)
: find $k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}$ satisfying $R_{k,i}\,\geq \,R_{k',i}$ $\forall k' \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}-\{k\}$
(b)
: assign $U_k^{*}\,=\, U_k^{*} \cup\, \{i\}$ and $A\,=\,A-\{i\}$.
3. While $A\,\not=\,\emptyset$, repeat step 2.
Once the subcarriers have been allocated, the optimization problem mentioned in can be restated as, $$\max_{P_i} \sum_{k=1}^K \sum_{i \in U_k^{*}} \log_2 (1+s_{k,i} P_i)$$ subject to $$\bar{R}_{j}^{s} \geq R_j, \forall j \in \{1,2,\dots,M\}$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^N P_i \leq P_t$$ $$\label{P1}
P_i\geq 0, \forall i \in \{1,2,\dots,N\}$$
The above mentioned problem is a non-convex optimization problem since the stochastic rate constraint is non-convex. Hence, if we try solving this problem by forming its Lagrange dual problem, then the duality gap between the solutions of primal and its dual problem is non-zero. However, if the optimization problem in satisfies the “time-sharing” condition given in [@DUAL06], the duality gap is shown to be zero. In the following lemma, we prove that does satisfy the “time-sharing” condition, though with a prerequisite.
The optimization problem mentioned in satisfies the “time-sharing” condition when $|\Omega_j| \rightarrow \infty$.
Please refer to the Appendix.
The Lagrangian for the optimization problem in can be written as, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{lagrangian}
L(\mathbf{P},\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})=\sum_{k=1}^K \sum_{i \in U_k^{*}} \log_2 \left(1+s_{k,i}P_i)\right) - \lambda(\sum_{i=1}^N P_i-P_t) \\ -\sum_{j=1}^M \mu_j (R_j-R_j^s)\end{gathered}$$ where $\lambda$ and $\boldsymbol{\mu}\,=\,[\mu_1,\mu_2,\dots,\mu_M]$ are Lagrangian multipliers and $\mathbf{P}\,=\,[P_1,P_2,\dots,P_N]$ is the power allocation vector. The corresponding Lagrange dual function is, $$d(\lambda,\mu)=\max_{\mathbf{P}} L(\mathbf{P},\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})$$ Thus, the dual optimization problem can be expressed as, $$\min d(\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})$$ s.t. $$\lambda \leq 0,\, \boldsymbol{\mu} \preceq 0.$$ The above problem can be solved using dual decomposition method [@BOYD].
The optimal power allocation for the optimization problem in is given by, $$P_i^*=max \{\beta_o ,0\}$$ where $i \in U_k$ and $\beta_o$ is a positive root of the equation, $$\beta = \frac{1}{\lambda +\mu_j v_i(\beta)}-\frac{\Gamma(N_o+J_{k,i})}{|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2 (1-\alpha_k)}$$
Please refer to the Appendix.
If $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are fixed, $\beta_o$ can be found using bisection search [@BOYD]. The steps of algorithm for finding optimal sub-carrier power allocation are given in Algorithm 2.
1. Initialize $\lambda_1$, $k=1$.
2. Repeat the following steps
(a)
: Initialize $\mu_{j,1}$, $k^{'}=1 \,\forall \, j \,\in \, \{1,2,..M\} \,$
(b)
: Repeat the following steps for all $j \in \{1,2,..M\}$
(i)
: Find $P_i^* \,\forall \, i \,\in \, \Omega_j$ by bisection search
(ii)
: Update $\mu_{j,{k^{'}}}$ by $$\mu_{j,{k^{'}+1}}=\mu_{j,{k^{'}}}+\gamma\left(R_j-R_j^s\right)$$
(iii)
: If $\mu_{j,{k^{'}+1}}\leq 0$, put $\mu_{j,{k^{'}+1}}=0$ and stop; Otherwise stop when $|\mu_{j,{k^{'}+1}}-\mu_{j,{k^{'}}}|\leq \epsilon$.
(c)
: Update $\lambda_{k+1}$ by $$\lambda_{k+1}=\lambda_{k}+\eta(\sum_{i=1}^N P_i-P_t)$$
3. If $\lambda_{k+1}\leq 0$, put $\lambda_{k+1}=0$ and stop; Otherwise stop when $|\lambda_{k+1}-\lambda_{k}|\leq \epsilon$.
Here $\gamma$ and $\eta$ are step sizes and $\epsilon>0$ is a small constant.
Now, the optimal number of bits allocated to the $i^{th}$ subcarrier, $b_{k,i}^*\, \forall i \in U_k, k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}$ can be calculated from the optimal power allocation $P_i^*$ using . Since the bits allocated to a sub-carrier can only be an integer, $b_i^*$ is rounded off to the next highest integer. But this may increase the total power above $P_t$ which defeats the whole purpose. Hence, we adopt a greedy bit removal algorithm till system constraints are satisfied. The power saved by removing one bit from the $i^{th}$ subcarrier can be obtained from as, $$\Delta P_i=\frac{2^{b_{k,i}-1}}{s_{k,i}}$$ We run a greedy bit removal algorithm, shown in Algorithm 3, that removes at each step the bit which recovers maximum power from the subcarriers till the total power reaches below $P_t$.
Appendix
========
Proof of Lemma 1
----------------
Let $P_x$ and $P_y$ be the optimal power allocations for the optimization problem in (13) with maximum rates achieved as $C(P_x)$ and $C(P_y)$, and rate loss constraints as $R_{j,x}^s$ and $R_{j,y}$, respectively. Then in order to show that (13) satisfies the time-sharing condition, we need to prove that for any $0 \leq \theta \leq 1$, there exists a solution $P_z$ for (13), such that $R_{j,z}^s \geq \theta R_{j,x} + (1-\theta)R_{j,y}$ and $C(P_z) \geq \theta C(P_x) + (1-\theta)C(P_y)$. Now, if we construct $P_z$ such that $P_z = P_x$ in $\theta$ fraction of the total set of subcarriers and $P_z = P_y$ in the remaining $(1-\theta)$ fraction, then it is can be easily inferred that $C(P_z) = \theta C(P_x) + (1-\theta)C(P_y)$, so the first condition is satisfied. Moving to the second condition, we can write $$R_{j,x}^{s}=\sum_{k \in \Psi} \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{(|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_{x,i}})^2}{N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 (1-\alpha_k) P_{x,i}}\right)$$
$$R_{j,y}^{s}=\sum_{k \in \Psi} \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{(|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_{y,i}})^2}{N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 (1-\alpha_k) P_{y,i}}\right).$$
Based on construction of the power allocation $P_z$, $R_{j,z}^{s}$ can be expressed as $$\begin{gathered}
R_{j,z}^{s}=\sum_{k \in \Psi} \sum_{i \in \theta \Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{(|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_{x,i}})^2}{N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 (1-\alpha_k) P_{x,i}}\right)+ \\ \sum_{k \in \Psi} \sum_{i \in (1-\theta)\Omega_j} \log_2 \left(1+\frac{(|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_{y,i}})^2}{N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 (1-\alpha_k) P_{y,i}}\right)\end{gathered}$$ By law of large numbers, it can be inferred that as $|\Omega_j| \rightarrow \infty$, $R_{j,z}^s = \theta R_{j,x}^s + (1-\theta)R_{j,y}^s$. Since $R_{j,x}^s \geq R_{j,x}$ and $R_{j,y}^s \geq R_{j,y}$, it is easy to prove that $R_{j,z}^s \geq \theta R_{j,x} + (1-\theta)R_{j,y}$. Hence, the second condition for time sharing also holds.
Proof Theorem 1
---------------
Rewriting , we get $$\begin{gathered}
L(\mathbf{P},\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})=\sum_{j=1}^M \sum_{\substack{i \in \Omega_j \cap U_k \\ k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}}}\log_2 (1+s_{k,i}P_i) \\ - \lambda( \sum_{j=1}^M \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} P_i) - \sum_{j=1}^M \mu_j (R_j-R_j^s)+\lambda P_t\end{gathered}$$ Accordingly, the Lagrangian dual function can be expressed as, $$\label{dualfunc1}
d(\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})=\sum_{i=1}^M d_j^{'}(\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})+\lambda P_t$$ where, $$\begin{gathered}
d_j^{'}(\lambda,\boldsymbol{\mu})=\max_{P_i \in \Upsilon_j} \sum_{\substack{i \in \Omega_j \cap U_k \\ k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}}}\log_2 (1+s_{k,i}P_i) \\ - \lambda \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} P_i-\mu_j (R_j-R_j^s)\end{gathered}$$ and $\Upsilon_j$ is defined as $\Upsilon_j = \{P_i : P_i \geq 0, \forall i \in \Omega_j\}$. It can be inferred that for a given $\lambda$, can be decomposed into $M$ independent optimization problems, each having the description,
$$\max_{\mathbf{P_j}} z(\mathbf{P_j})$$
subject to $$\label{P2}
R_j^s \geq R_j$$ where $$z(\mathbf{P_j})=\sum_{\substack{i \in \Omega_j \cap U_k \\ k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}}}\log_2(1+s_{k,i}P_i) - \lambda \sum_{i \in \Omega_j} P_i$$
The Lagrangian for the optimization problem in can be written as, $$L_j^{'}(\mathbf{P_j},\mu_j)=z(\mathbf{P_j})-\mu_j(R_j-R_j^s)$$ The Lagrange dual function can then be expressed as, $$d^{''}(\mu_j)=\max_{\mathbf{P_j}} L_j^{'}(\mathbf{P_j},\mu_j)$$ Thus the dual optimization problem becomes, $$\min_{\mu_j} d^{''}(\mu_j)$$ s.t. $$\label{P3}
\mu_j \leq 0.$$
Hence the KKT conditions for are, $$\mu_j(R_j-R_j^s)=0$$ $$\frac{\partial L_j^{'}(\mathbf{P_j},\mu_j)}{\partial P_i}=0$$
From the KKT conditions given above, the optimal power allocation satisying can be found as follows. $$\begin{gathered}
\label{lagrangediff}
\frac{\partial L_j^{'}(\mathbf{P_j},\mu_j)}{\partial P_i}=\frac{|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2(1-\alpha_k)}{\Gamma(N_o+J_i)+|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2 P_i(1-\alpha_k)} \\ +\mu_j \frac{\partial R_j^s}{\partial P_i}\end{gathered}$$ where $i \in \Omega_j \cap U_k$ and $k \in \{1,2,\dots,K\}$. Now, $$\label{viPi}
\frac{\partial R_j^s}{\partial P_i}= \frac{N}{D_1D_2}$$ where, $$\begin{gathered}
N = N_o (|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 \alpha_k + |H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k /P_i}) \\ - |H_i^{pp}|^2 |H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2 T_i(1-\alpha_k) \\ + |H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2(1-\alpha_k)P_i|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k /P_i} \\ - 2|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2(1-\alpha_k)|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_i},\end{gathered}$$ $$D_1 = (N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2(1-\alpha_k)P_i),$$ $$\begin{gathered}
D_2 = (N_o+|H_{k,i}^{sp}|^2(1-\alpha_k)P_i \\ + (|H_i^{pp}| \sqrt{T_i}+|H_{k,i}^{sp}| \sqrt{\alpha_k P_i})^2).\end{gathered}$$ Expressing as $-v_i(P_i)$ and equating to zero, we get $$P_i=\frac{1}{\lambda +\mu_j v_i(P_i)}-\frac{\Gamma(N_o+J_{k,i})}{|H_{k,i}^{ss}|^2 (1-\alpha_k)}$$
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Photonic crystals with a sufficiently high refractive index contrast display partial or full band gaps. However, imperfections in the metamaterial cause light scattering and extinction of the interfering propagating waves. Positive as well as negative defect volumes may contribute to this kind of optical perturbation. In this study, we fabricate and characterize three-dimensional woodpile photonic crystals, with a pseudo-bandgap for near-infrared optical wavelengths. By direct laser writing, we intentionally introduce random defects in the periodic structure. We show that we can model random defect scattering by considering the difference between the disordered and the regular structure. Our findings pave the way towards better control and understanding of the role of defects in photonic materials that will be crucial for their usability in potential applications.'
author:
- Stefan
- 'Geoffroy J.'
- Nicolas
- Frank
bibliography:
- 'sharedBiblio.bib'
title: Scattering from controlled defects in woodpile photonic crystals
---
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
Dielectric materials with a periodic variation of the refractive index display photonic stop bands for an optical wave propagating in specific directions [@Joannopoulos2008]. The Bragg length $L_\mathrm{B}$ is a measure for the number of crystal layers penetrated by the incident beam and it is directly related to the scattering strength of the crystal layers. The attenuation of the wave in the direction of a stopband scales roughly exponentially as the thickness $L$ of the crystal is increased beyond $L_\mathrm{B}$ [@Galisteo-Lopez2003; @Marichy2016]. For a perfect crystal, and $L \to \infty$, destructive interference always leads to vanishing transmission in the stop band’s direction irrespective of the refractive index contrast [@Spry1986]. Bandgaps in one and two-dimensional photonic crystals are now widely employed in applications such as supercontinuum fiber lasers [@Russell2003] and for data processing using optical modules based on 2D silicon photonic crystal technology [@Hochberg2010]. In a three-dimensional (3D) full photonic bandgap (PGB) material, for specific wavelengths, the propagation of light is inhibited in all directions. However, only above a certain threshold refractive index contrast full photonic bandgaps exist [@Joannopoulos2008; @Ho1994]. 3D photonic crystals (PCs) are metamaterials fabricated from mesoscopic building blocks. In contrast to the case of atomic or molecular crystals, these building blocks are not identical. Therefore, all photonic crystal materials possess some intrinsic degree of disorder due to surface roughness, size dispersion, stress-induced deformations, in addition to defects, stacking faults, crystal grain boundaries. The influence of disorder is often so strong that the interaction of the propagating wave with the periodic Bragg planes competes with scattering on similar length scales. In early work on opal photonic crystals the manifestation of intrinsic defects has been discussed and a plethora of studies found that it is nearly impossible to fabricate perfect crystals made by self-assembly of colloids [@Vlasov2000]. As a consequence, artificial opals of polystyrene spheres or air holes in TiO$_2$ (titanium dioxide) display diffuse, multiple-scattering in tandem with Bragg diffraction [@Koenderink2003; @Huang2001]. Similar observations have been made for quasi-crystals [@Ledermann2006]. Improved self-assembly protocols and lithography have led to higher quality photonic crystals, but despite the progress made, imperfections still play a significant role [@Lopez2003; @Soukoulis2011]. While disorder in photonic crystals is often considered a nuisance, it also highlights the rich and fascinating interplay between defect states, wave tunneling and percolation, random diffuse scattering, and directed Bragg scattering of light [@Skipetrov2004; @Florescu2010; @Froufe-Perez2017; @Fernandes2013; @Pratesi2013; @Aubry2020]. Moreover, the interaction between the band structures and defect scattering might facilitate the observation of other critical coherent transport phenomena such as Anderson localization of light. In a seminal paper published in 1987, Sajeev John suggested the presence of localized defect states close to the band edge of a photonic crystal, due to multiple scattering and a reduced density of states [@John1987]. Finally, defect states can be introduced in a photonic crystal deliberately to implement a particular function, such as for optical sensing applications, lasing, or optical circuitry [@Joannopoulos2008; @Ishizaki2013]. Controlling and understanding the role of defects and disorder in photonic crystals is thus of paramount importance.
Results {#results .unnumbered}
=======
Here, we report on a study about intrinsic and intentionally added defects in photonic crystals (PCs) [@Yablonovitch1987]. The tight control over the position and size of the defects we have, sets our study apart from earlier work on intrinsic defects [@Koenderink2005] or intentionally added defects in opals [@Garcia2011]. By direct laser writing (DLW) in a polymer resist [@Sun1999; @Deubel2004] (Photonic Professional, Nanoscribe, Germany), we fabricate high-quality woodpile (WP) photonic crystals. For optimal results, we use the IP-Dip photoresist (Nanoscribe, Germany), refractive index $n_\mathrm{IP-Dip}=1.53$ [@Dottermusch2019]. Our PCs display a pseudo-gap in the near-infrared range as shown in Fig. \[fig:woodpile\](a) [@Ledermann2006]. We intentionally add defects to our crystals to probe the effect of disorder on the photonic properties of the PCs. We introduce two types of defects: positive and negative defects, see Fig \[fig:woodpile\], and we place these defects uniformly over the sample volume with a variable defect number density $\rho$.
![Computer generated renderings of (a) woodpile structure, (b) a woodpile structure with positive defects, (c) a woodpile structure with negative defects. Scanning electron micrograph of polymer woodpile structures fabricated by DLW, with (d) positive (rod cross section area +280%, image taken at an angle of 52$^\circ$), and (e) negative defects (-100%, top view). Scale bar is 5 $\mu$m. []{data-label="fig:woodpile"}](WPimage3.png){width="\columnwidth"}
The basic WP-structures are composed of horizontal arrays of parallel rods, where $d$ denotes the in-plane distance between two rods. Alternating layers are rotated by 90$^\circ$ and shifted by $d/2$ every 2 layers. Hence, the structure repeats itself every 4 layers in the stacking direction given be $d_{z}$. We use a ratio $d_{z}/d=\sqrt{2}$ which results in a face-centered-cubic-lattice (FCC, see Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:woodpileFCC\]). The rods of adjacent layers slightly overlap, as indicated in Figure \[fig:woodpile\] (a-c), and we define a *rod-segment* as the distance between two rod intersections. Note that one rod-segment corresponds to the primitive unit cell lattice constant, see Fig. \[fig:woodpileFCC\]. By locally enlarging (reducing) the thickness of a rod-segment, Fig. \[fig:woodpile\](b,c), we create positive (negative) defects. We denote the percent increase of the rod cross sectional area with $\kappa$. We control the thickness of the rods by setting the power of the DLW-laser below or above the default power used to fabricate the woodpile crystal. For the crystal structures, the in-plane-distance between rods, which is equal to the rod-segment length, is set to $d=1.2\ \mu$m. All the samples have a total size of $70 \times 70 \times 8.5\ \mu \mathrm{m}^3$ which corresponds to five lattice constant of the conventional cubic unit cell of the FCC lattice (20 rods layers) in $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$- direction, i.e., perpendicular to rods long axis, Fig. \[fig:woodpile\] (a). Due to the asymmetric shape of the DLW focal volume, set by the point-spread function of the DLW-microscope objective, the cross-section of the rods is elliptical with an aspect ratio of nearly three. For each laser power used, we measure the rod cross sectional area with a scanning electron microscope (SEM); see Materials and Methods. For the crystal, we find for the long axis $a=0.42\ \mu$m, and the short axis $b=0.15\ \mu$m. Figure \[fig:reflTrans\] shows the reflectance and transmittance spectra recorded for a series of samples.
![Experimental reflectance (solid lines) and transmittance (dashed lines) of woodpile structures with different defect number densities. The density ranges from 0 to 0.24 $ \mathrm{\mu m^{-3}} $. (a) spectra for negative defects ($\kappa=-74\%$ cross section surface), (b) for positive ($\kappa=+158\%$). The blue ellipses in inset show the standard dimensions of the WP-rods, while the orange ellipses show the dimensions the negative (a) and positive (b) defects.[]{data-label="fig:reflTrans"}](wavelength_ReflTrans_paper.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
The measurements were performed by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR, Bruker Vertex 70, and Hyperion Spectrometer). As we use a Cassegrain mirror-objective in the FTIR-microscope, the light is transmitted and detected along a hollow cone with an acceptance angle between $\theta_{\mathrm{min}}$=15$^\circ$ and $\theta_{\mathrm{max}}$=30$^\circ$ with $\theta_{\mathrm{mean}}$=22.5$^\circ$ compared to the $\Gamma-\mathrm{X}_z$-direction of the crystal (see Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:fccBrilloin\] for the FCC-Brillouin zone scheme). We measure the spectra averaged over an area of about 40x40 $\mu \mathrm{m}^2$ covering wavelengths between 0.9 and $2.6\ \mu$m while for wavelengths larger than $2.6\ \mu$m, the polymer absorbs light (for details see Materials and Methods). We use a silver-coated mirror as a reference for the reflectance spectra. To calibrate the transmittance, we measure the spectrum of the bare substrate next to the samples. For each set of fabrication parameters, we produce several samples, and each curve in Fig. \[fig:reflTrans\] represents an average over three to five different sample realizations. The darkest lines shows the spectra of the crystalline samples, i.e., without any added defects. The transmittance (reflectance) displays a profound dip (peak) indicating the presence of a pseudo-gap in the chosen incident direction. We find that by increasing the number density $\rho$ of defects, the peak of the reflectance and the dip of the transmittance become less marked meaning that the quality of the bandgap is affected by the presence of defects. Interestingly, we also observe that the peaks are shifted to higher (lower) wavelengths when increasing the density of positive (negative) defects. To study this effect quantitatively, we plot in Fig. \[fig:fillfrac\] the position of the reflectance maxima for different defect sizes and defect densities against the polymer filling fraction $\phi$ of each sample (see Materials and Methods for the method used to estimate the filling fraction).
![Center position (circles) of the reflection peak marking the position of the photonic pseudo-gap in the presence of defects. Each color corresponds to a different defect size. The values of $\kappa$ denote the volume of the defect in units of the unperturbed rod-segment. $-100$% indicates a missing link, $+310$% means the interstitial space between parallel rods is entirely filled, marking the two extreme cases. The error bars correspond to the standard deviation of the different realizations for equal fabrication parameters. The vertical line indicates the filling fraction of the WP crystal. In red: pseudo-gap span (area) and center (crosses) calculated with MPB for the WP crystal with elliptical rods as a function of the rods filling fraction keeping the rods aspect ratio constant. The grey line shows the expected scaling of the gap wavelength assuming a linear dependency with the Maxwell-Garnet effective refractive index $n_\text{eff}$. []{data-label="fig:fillfrac"}](fillingFraction_wavelength_paper2.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Interestingly, we find that all the data collapse on a master curve. The pseudo-gap center wavelength increases roughly linearly with $\phi$, independent of whether the defect volume or number density is varied to achieve a certain $\phi$-value. Our results are consistent with effective medium theories, such as the Maxwell-Garnett mixing formula [@Garnett1904], that predict that the effective refractive index $n_\mathrm{eff}$ roughly scales linearly with $\phi$ in the studied range, see the yellow line in Fig. \[fig:fillfrac\]. This shift of $\lambda_G$ can be explained as follows. The reflectance maximum is due to Bragg back-scattering at a scattering angle $\Theta \simeq 180^\circ$ where the momentum transfer $\vec{q}=2\vec{k}\sin[\Theta/2]\equiv \vec{G}$ matches a reciprocal lattice vector $\vec{G}$ with $\left |k \right |=2\pi n_\text{eff}/\lambda_G$. Thus, we expect that the maximas’ $\lambda_G$ scale with the effective refractive index of the medium $n_\text{eff}$ such that $\lambda_G/ n_\text{eff}$ remains constant. We, therefore, can explain the linear increase of the bandgap-center wavelength with a change in the average polymer filling fraction, and we find this effect to be surprisingly robust against defect scattering. We corroborate this finding’s accuracy by band structure calculations with MPB (MIT Photonic Bands) [@mpb] for WP photonic crystal with different filling fractions. For all the filling fractions, the calculations, shown as red crosses in Fig. \[fig:fillfrac\], were performed for elliptical rods with a constant aspect ratio of $a/b=0.42/0.15=2.8$. To accurately compare the simulations with the measurements using a Cassegrain-objective, we proceed as follows. We calculate the intersections of the widths of the gaps for all the directions, making an angle $\theta_{\mathrm{eff}}$ relative to the $\Gamma-\mathrm{X}_z$ direction where $\theta_{\mathrm{eff}}$ is defined by the incident direction and the refraction at the interface, for details see Materials and Methods. With increasing filling fraction $\phi$, the MPB-value of $\lambda_G$ increases and its evolution follows the Maxwell-Garnett effective refractive index, as shown in Fig. \[fig:fillfrac\] Next, we study the scattering by the intentionally induced defects. We use a modified Beer-Lambert’s law to extract the scattering mean free path $\ell_\mathrm{s}$ from the simultaneous reflection $R$ and transmission $T$ measurements of the PC, $$\begin{aligned}
T(L) + R(L) = \alpha\exp\left(-L/\ell_\mathrm{s}\right),
\label{eq:ls}\end{aligned}$$ where $L$ is the thickness of the sample. This relation is valid before the onset of diffraction and for negligible absorption [@Garcia2009]. Both conditions are met in our case over the range of wavelength studied; see also Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:polymerAbsorption\]. The additional factor $\alpha$ in Eq. (\[eq:ls\]) takes account of systematic errors in the calibration procedure. The bare substrate and the sample covered substrate deviate in two ways. First, the sample acts as an antireflection coating since the effective index $n_\text{eff}\simeq 1.3$ lies in between glass and air, which leads to an increased optical transmission $T$. Second, the sample thickness, $L\simeq8.5\ \mu$m, is only a small multiple of the wavelength, which results in Fabry-Pérot interferences between the paths reflected by the sample top and the WP/substrate interface. As a consequence, we observe slow oscillations in $T(\lambda)$ which complicates proper calibration. To achieve a model independent calibration, for each set of samples, we take averages of $T+R$ between $\lambda=2.45\ \mu$m, and $2.55\ \mu$m, where we expect $T+R\simeq \alpha$ for the crystal structure. We find typical values of $\alpha$ between 0.948 and 0.964. From the data shown in Fig. \[fig:reflTrans\], and using Eq. (\[eq:ls\]), we extract $\ell_\mathrm{s}$ as a function of $\lambda$ as shown in Fig. \[fig:ls\].
![Turbidity (inverse of the scattering mean free path) of woodpile structures with (a) negative and (b) positive defects. The different color of the curves encode the defect number density $\rho$ in $\mathrm{\mu m^{-3}} $ in the sample. The samples are the same as in Fig. \[fig:reflTrans\]. []{data-label="fig:ls"}](wavelength_ls_paper.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Discussion {#discussion .unnumbered}
==========
We first note that the turbidity of the WP crystals, given by the reciprocal of the scattering mean free path, $1/\ell_\mathrm{s}$, is finite, and it rises in the low-wavelength regime. The residual scattering from WP crystals, observed previously in [@Deubel2004], is caused by intrinsic roughness, small displacements, undulations, and deformations in the crystal. The turbidity of a crystal in the presence of artificially added defects is therefore determined by defect scattering and by intrinsic scattering. In Fig. \[fig:defectsRGD\], we illustrate how we can understand the scattering from our materials as a sum of scattering from the WPs and the intentionally added defects. If we assume that these two contributions contribute independently, we can express the measured turbidity $1/\ell_\mathrm{s}$ as follows [@Pine1990] $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\ell_\mathrm{s}} = \frac{1}{\ell_\mathrm{s,0}} + \frac{1}{\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}},\label{uncorls}\end{aligned}$$ where $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,0}$ corresponds to the intrinsic scattering and $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}$ to the artificial defects scattering.
![The measured turbidity of the samples is the sum of two contributions, the intrinsic turbidity of the woodpile crystals (due to DLW imperfections) on one hand, and the induced turbidity due to the artificially added defects on the other hand.[]{data-label="fig:defectsRGD"}](woodpileOperation.png "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}\
![The measured turbidity of the samples is the sum of two contributions, the intrinsic turbidity of the woodpile crystals (due to DLW imperfections) on one hand, and the induced turbidity due to the artificially added defects on the other hand.[]{data-label="fig:defectsRGD"}](woodpileBigDefects.png "fig:"){width="0.7\columnwidth"}
The same expression can be derived in the frame of the classical theory for the resistivity of ordinary metals [@Ashcroft1976]. In the latter case the resistivity is controlled by the scattering mean free path of electrons; $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,0}$ corresponds to the residual resistivity contribution, due to intrisic defects, and $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}$ to the temperature dependent contribution $\propto T$, also known as the Wiedemann-Frantz law, due to electron-phonon scattering. Both for negative (Fig. \[fig:ls\](a)) and positive (Fig. \[fig:ls\](b)) defects, we see that the induced turbidity increases with the defect number density $\rho$. In Fig. \[fig:lsSingleWavelength\], we plot the same data, $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}$, at a selected wavelength ($\lambda_0 = 1.57\ \mu$m) as a function of the defect number density.
![Induced turbidity for different defect volumes measured at $\lambda_0=1.57\ \mu$m for negative (a) and positive defects (b) as a function if the defects number density. Each color corresponds to a different relative change of the rod cross section for a single defect with respect to the default rod. Lines are linear fits done on the first points.[]{data-label="fig:lsSingleWavelength"}](DefDensity_lsnorm_subplot_at1.57um_paper.pdf){width="1\columnwidth"}
We plot the data for negative and positive defects of different size in separate panels Fig. \[fig:lsSingleWavelength\] (a) and (b). The induced turbidity increases linearly with $\rho$ for sufficiently small defect number densities, supporting the validity of our assumptions in Eq. in this limit, $\rho\le0.1\ \mu$m$^{-3}$. The linear scaling of $1/\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}$ suggests that induced defects act as independent scatterers. Indeed, the turbidity of a medium consisting of identical uncorrelated scatterers is given by $1/\ell_\mathrm{s} = \rho \sigma$, where $\sigma$ denotes the total scattering cross-section of a scatterer. For higher concentrations, positional correlations and proximity effects lead to deviations from the linear dependence [@Fraden1990; @RezvaniNaraghi2015; @Aubry2017].
![Total scattering cross-section of defect scatterers. Symbols show $C_\mathrm{sca,hc}$ extracted from the slopes of the curves $\left ( \rho \ell_\mathrm{s,ind}\right)^{-1}$ (solid lines shown in Fig. \[fig:lsSingleWavelength\]). The effective radius of the defect rod-segments is denoted by $r_\text{d}$ with $r_\text{d}=r=0.25 \mu$m for the standard rod size in the crystal (vertical dashed line).[]{data-label="fig:Csca"}](sizeChange_Csca_071.3deg_log.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Our results suggest that the initial slope of $1/\ell_\mathrm{s}(\rho)$ is a measure for the total scattering cross section of defects $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\ell_\mathrm{s,ind}} &= \rho C_\mathrm{sca,hc}.\end{aligned}$$ In Fig. \[fig:Csca\], we report the values for $C_\mathrm{sca,hc}$ extracted in the low-$\rho$ regime as a function of $r_\mathrm{d}=\sqrt{a_\mathrm{d}b_\mathrm{d}}$ where $a_\mathrm{d}$ and $b_\mathrm{d}$ are the long and short axis of the defect rod-segments. For all the samples studied, we report data for five different wavelengths. Inspired by earlier work on disordered opals, Ref. [@Koenderink2005], we model the defect scattering in the frame of the 1^st^ Born, also known as Rayleigh-Gans-Debye (RGD) scattering, approximation. We hypothesize that we can treat the WP crystal as an effective, homogeneous background medium, and scattering arises from the local density differences, as shown in Figure \[fig:defectsRGD\]. To this end, we calculate the known RGD-expression for the total scattering cross-section of a hollow cylinder $C_\mathrm{sca,hc}$ with a length $d=1.2 \mu$m equal to a rod segment [@Bohren1998].
For simplicity, in our calculations, we consider scattering from hollow cylinders with $n_\mathrm{IP-Dip}$ in air ($n_\text{air}=1$), and limiting radii $r_\mathrm{d}=\sqrt{a_\mathrm{d}\cdot b_\mathrm{d}}$, $r=\sqrt{a\cdot b}=0.25\ \mu$m. For positive defects $r_\mathrm{d}>r$ while for negative defects $r_\mathrm{d}<r$. We explicitly take into account the optical geometry imposed by the Cassegrain objective. To this end, we calculate $C_\mathrm{sca,hc}$ for an angle between the incoming beam and the cylinder axis $\zeta=90^\circ-\left<\theta_\mathrm{eff}\right>=71.3^\circ$. $\theta_\mathrm{eff}$ is the angle after refraction by the effective medium ($n_\mathrm{eff}$) when the incident angle is $22.5^\circ$ (Cassegrain objective). We calculate $\left<\theta_\mathrm{eff}\right>$ by averaging $\theta_\mathrm{eff}$ over the different $n_\mathrm{eff}$ obtained by varying the filling fraction over the experimental range ($0.3 < \phi < 0.5$). The effective refractive index $n_\mathrm{eff}$ also enters via the effective wavenumber $k_\mathrm{eff} = 2\pi n_\mathrm{eff}/\lambda_0$. In contrast to earlier studies on disordered opals [@Koenderink2003; @Koenderink2005], our entire modeling predictions, shown as lines in Fig. \[fig:Csca\], are fit-parameter free. Overall, we find an good agreement between the data and the model: the calculated scattering cross-sections follow the trend of the experimental data. The agreement between theory and experiment is nearly quantitative for the higher wavelengths where the intrinsic scattering is negligible, and the transmission of the unperturbed crystal is high, signaling a trend toward an effective homogeneous medium. In conclusion, in this study, we have quantified the effect of intrinsic and induced defects on photonic crystals’ optical properties. We demonstrate that both the bandgap position and its quality are simultaneously affected by defect scattering. The study presented in this work can provide essential guidelines how to quantify and model defect scattering. Our study also provides a modelling framework for diffuse scattering in PCs that lays the ground toward more complex disordered PCs based photonic materials. Such materials, based on higher refractive index building block, could become crucial to reach conditions for Anderson localization of light [@Sperling2016].
Materials and methods {#materials-and-methods .unnumbered}
=====================
Rod size measurement {#sec:rodSize .unnumbered}
--------------------
The lateral size of the rods, or the short axis of the elliptical cross section, can be assessed by taking a top-view electron micrograph. The measurement of the long axis of the elliptical rods inside the structure is more difficult. We tried to obtain a side-view of the rods using ion-beam milling but this posed problems due to the melting of the polymer when exposed to the ion beam. To circumvent this problem, we wrote single rods with different laser powers between two large pillars, as shown Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:rodSize\]. This procedure allowed us to take SEM-images of the rods created by using different laser powers in DLW, from the top and at an inclined angle of 45$^\circ$. We measure the short and long axis several times at different locations. The FWHM of the grey value profile of a line perpendicular to the rod is taken to determine the size. We obtain a mean value by measuring the size on different positions on the same image and get a standard deviation of about 7%, which we attribute to the uneven surface of the rods and the limited accuracy of the procedure.
Absorption spectrum of the IP-Dip polymer {#absorption-spectrum-of-the-ip-dip-polymer .unnumbered}
-----------------------------------------
Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:polymerAbsorption\] shows the absorption spectrum of a glass substrate coated with a $10\mu$m layer of developed IP-Dip photoresist. In the wavelength-band between $\lambda=1$ and $2.6\ \mu$m absorptive losses are small. Between $\lambda=2.45$ and $2.55\ \mu$m we observe a average drop of transmittance by 2.7%. For the thinner ($L\simeq 8.5\mu$m) and air-filled WP-layers we estimate that absorptive losses attenuate the transmitted power by less than 1%.
Assessment of the Polymer Filling Fraction {#sec:fillingFraction .unnumbered}
-------------------------------------------
The overlap between alternating layers of rods is taken into account in order to accurately estimate numerically the filling fraction of each sample. To this end, we discretize the unit cell of the digital representation of the woodpile structure, and label every volume element (or voxel) belonging to at least one rod. We then calculate the ratio between the labeled and unlabeled voxels to get the filling fraction. Using this method, we calculate $\phi_0$ for the unit cell of the perfect woodpile, but also $\phi_{0,\mathrm{d}}$ for the unit cell containing a single defect. The parameters of the rods are taken from the rod size measurements.For a sample having a defect density $\rho$, the filling fraction of the sample is then $\phi=(1-\rho V_0)\phi_0 + \rho V_0 \phi_{0,\mathrm{d}}$ where $V_0$ is the volume of the unit cell.
Band structure calculations {#sec:mpb .unnumbered}
---------------------------
The woodpile is a FCC lattice, see Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:woodpileFCC\]. Its band structure is calculated in the first Brilloin zone, see Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:fccBrilloin\]. Usually, the (pseudo)gap is observed in the $\Gamma-\mathrm{X}_z$ direction (See Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:fccBrilloin\]). In our measurement, because of the Cassegrain objective, we observe transmission of light having an incident angle between 15$^\circ$ and 30$^\circ$. We therefore have to compare our measurements with band structure calculation for the same angles. To achieve this, we performed calculations of the band structure in the $\Gamma-\mathrm{P}_\theta(\varphi)$ directions as a function of the azimuthal angle $\varphi$ for a fixed polar angle of $\theta=\arcsin\left(\theta_\mathrm{mean}/n_\mathrm{eff}\right)$ with $\theta_\mathrm{mean}=(15^\circ+30^\circ)/2$ due to the Cassegrain objective and $n_\mathrm{eff}(\phi)$ calculated with the Maxwell-Garnett mixing formula [@Garnett1904] (See Supplementary Information Fig. \[fig:fccBrilloin\] and its legend for the geometry).
Supplementary Information Figure \[fig:bandStructure\] shows the band structure for different $\Gamma-\mathrm{P}_\theta(\phi)$ directions. $\theta$ is constant and $\phi$ is equally distributed between 0 and 90$^\circ$ (for symmetry reasons we don’t need to calculate for all angles between 0 and 360$^\circ$ because the structure is invariant by a rotation of 90$^\circ$ around the $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ axis). The bandgap corresponds to the intersection of the bandgaps calculated for $\phi\in[0,90^\circ]$.
Rayleigh-Gans-Debye scattering of a hollow cylinder {#sec:rgHollowCylinder .unnumbered}
---------------------------------------------------
The form factor of a finite cylinder of radius $r$ and length $L$ (see Supplementary Fig. \[fig:cylinder\] for the geometry), illuminated by a beam making an angle $\zeta$ with its axis oriented along the $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ axis, as found in @Bohren1998, is
$$\begin{aligned}
f_\mathrm{c} &= \frac{1}{\pi r^2 L} \int_{-L/2}^{L/2}e^{-ikAz}dz\int_0^r\rho\, d\rho \int_0^{2\pi} e^{-ik\rho(B\cos \psi + C\sin \psi)} d\psi.\end{aligned}$$
The integration is done in cylindrical coordinates $(\rho, \psi, z)$, which axis $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ is oriented along the direction of the cylinder. Note that in this calculation, to take advantage of the radial symmetry, the cylinders are oriented *along* the $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ axis, whereas in the rest of the paper they are *perpendicular* to the $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ axis. $k=2\pi n_\mathrm{eff}/\lambda_0$ (where $n_\mathrm{eff}$ is the effective refractive index of the medium, and $\lambda_0$ the wavelength in vacuum of the incoming beam) is the wave number. Finally, $$\begin{aligned}
A &= \cos \zeta + sin\theta \cos\varphi\\
B &= \sin \theta \sin\varphi \\
C &= \cos\theta -sin\zeta\\
M &= \sqrt{B^2+C^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $\theta \in \left[0,\pi\right]$ and $\varphi\in \left[0,2\pi\right]$ are the spherical coordinates angles for scattered wave.
To calculate the form factor of a hollow cylinder, one just has to perform the second integration between $r_1$ and $r_2$ (the inner and outer radii of the cylinder) instead of $0$ and $r$. Performing all the integration, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
f_\mathrm{hc}(\theta,\varphi;\zeta)=\frac{2}{L(r_2^2-r_1^2)}\frac{r_2J_1(kr_2M)-r_1J_1(kr_1M)}{kM}\frac{2\sin(kAL/2)}{kA}\end{aligned}$$ $J_1$ is the Bessel function of the first kind of order 1.
The Rayleigh-Gans-Debye scattering cross section for a cylinder making an angle of $\zeta$ with respect to the incoming beam is then defined through the integral over all solid angles $\Omega$ $$\begin{aligned}
C_\mathrm{sca,hc} (\zeta)&= \int_{4\pi}\frac{k^4}{4\pi^2}(m-1)^2 v^2 \left|f_\mathrm{hc}(\theta,\varphi; \zeta)\right|^2 \left[\cos^2\theta \cos^2\varphi + \sin^2\varphi\right] d\Omega.
\label{eq:CscaHollowCylinder}\end{aligned}$$
The integrations over $\theta$ and $\varphi$ are performed numerically.
In this paper, the incoming light makes an angle $\zeta=\frac{\pi}{2}-\theta_\mathrm{eff}$ with the axis of the cylinders, where $\theta_\mathrm{eff} = \arcsin{\left(\theta_\mathrm{mean}/n_\mathrm{eff}\right)}$. $n_\mathrm{eff}$ should depend on the filling fraction, each curve and point plotted in the main text Fig. \[fig:Csca\] is deduced from measurements done varying the filling fraction. We therefore kept $n_\mathrm{eff}$ constant and equal to the value of the Maxwell-Garnett refractive index of the perfect structure.
We thank Luis Froufe-Pérez for fruitful discussions. We acknowledge financial support by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grants No. 169074 and 188494. This work benefited from support from the Swiss National Science Foundation via the National Center of Competence in Research Bio-Inspired Materials.
Data and code availability {#data-and-code-availability .unnumbered}
==========================
All experimental and numerical data discussed in this manuscript, and the associated codes for analyzing or generating those data can be obtained upon reasonable request.
Competing interest {#competing-interest .unnumbered}
==================
The authors declare no competing interest.
Supplementary Information {#supplementary-information .unnumbered}
=========================
This document contains all the figures referenced in the Materials and Methods section.
![Structure printed by DLW to determine the dimensions of a single rod. (a) Top view; (b) same sample viewed from different angle. We placed the defects at different heights in order to allow a size measurement from a side view. This inforamtion is then used to calculate the long and short axis of the rod cross section as discussed in the text. We have color-code the image as follows: (blue) the laser power is set to the usual writing power of the woodpile crystal structure ($I_0$). On the left hand side of the structure, a single positive defect per line is shown in red ($2\, I_0$) (a) and orange ($1.44\, I_0$) (b). On the right hand side, the entire rod is written with the increased laser power. Scale bars are 20$\mu$m.[]{data-label="fig:rodSize"}](rodSize.png)
![Absorption spectrum of a thin homogeneous film of made of the developed photoresin IP-Dip used in the study. The thickness of the layer is $10\ \mu$m. The red shaded area indicates the onset of absorption of the water vapour in air. The yellow shaded areas highlight the absorption bands of the polymer. []{data-label="fig:polymerAbsorption"}](AbsorptionOfPolymer.pdf)
![Conventional FCC unit cell of the woodpile structure. The black arrows correspond to the cartesians unit vectors, the red arrows to the FCC primitive vectors. The volume marked in dark yellow corresponds shows the primitive unit cell.[]{data-label="fig:woodpileFCC"}](woodpileFCC.png){width="50.00000%"}
![Band structure calculation for the directions making a polar angle $\theta=19.1^\circ$ with the $\hat{\mathbf{z}}$ direction calculated for the perfect structure where the cylinder cross-section have an aspect ratio $a/b$. The blue area is the bandgap.[]{data-label="fig:bandStructure"}](ellipticalWoodpile_rxyOvera0.088_rzOvera0.247_epsilon02.34_019.1.npz.pdf)
{width="\textwidth"}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present interferometric detections of HCN in comets LINEAR (C/2002 T7) and NEAT (C/2001 Q4) with the Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland Association (BIMA) Array. With a $25{\farcs}4\times20{\farcs}3$ synthesized beam around Comet LINEAR and using a variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV) model, we found an HCN column density of $<N_T>=6.4\pm2.1\times10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, and a production rate of Q(HCN)=$6.5\pm2.2\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$, giving a production rate ratio of HCN relative to H$_2$O of $\sim3.3\pm1.1\times10^{-3}$ and relative to CN of $\sim4.6\pm1.5$. With a $21{\farcs}3\times17{\farcs}5$ synthesized beam around Comet NEAT and using a VTOV model, we found an HCN column density of $<N_T>=8.5\pm4.5\times10^{11}$ cm$^{-2}$, and a production rate of Q(HCN)=$8.9\pm4.7\times10^{25}$ s$^{-1}$, giving a production rate ratio of HCN relative to H$_2$O of $\sim7.4\pm3.9\times10^{-4}$ and relative to CN of $\sim0.3\pm0.2$. For both comets, the production rates relative to H$_2$O are similar to those found in previous comet observations. For Comet LINEAR the production rate relative to CN is consistent with HCN being the primary parent species of CN, while for Comet NEAT it is too low for this to be the case.'
author:
- 'D. N. Friedel, Anthony J. Remijan, L. E. Snyder, M. F. A’Hearn, Geoffrey A. Blake, Imke de Pater, H. R. Dickel, J. R. Forster, M. R. Hogerheijde, C. Kraybill, L. W. Looney, Patrick Palmer, & M. C. H. Wright'
title: 'BIMA ARRAY DETECTIONS OF HCN IN COMETS LINEAR (C/2002 T7) AND NEAT (C/2001 Q4)'
---
INTRODUCTION
============
HCN has been extensively studied around several comets including Comet P/Halley [@desp86], Comet Hyakutake (C/1996 B2) [e.g., @mumma96; @lis97; @woma97; @biver99b], Comet Hale-Bopp (C/1995 O1) [e.g., @fitz95; @wright98; @hir99; @irv99; @magee99; @ziu99; @veal00; @snyder01; @wood02] and Comet LINEAR (C/1999 S4) [@b-m01; @hoger04]. @veal00 made some of the first interferometric observations of HCN in Comet Hale-Bopp. From the distribution and temporal behavior of the HCN emission, they were able to make very accurate calculations of the HCN production rate as well as modeling its distribution in the coma using a spherical Haser model [@haser]. The deviations from the Haser model were explained by the existence of jets releasing HCN gas, a conclusion directly supported by high spatial resolution interferometric imaging of Comet Hale-Bopp by @blake99. @snyder01 followed up the observations of @veal00 and found the measured HCN scale length to be very similar to the theoretical predictions of @heub92a and @crov94.
In the Spring of 2004, we were awarded a rare opportunity to observe two comets passing into the inner solar system and within $\sim$0.3 AU of the Earth. Comet LINEAR (C/2002 T7) reached perigee on 2004 May 19, coming within 0.27 AU, while Comet NEAT (C/2001 Q4) reached perigee on 2004 May 7, coming within 0.32 AU. Both comets were identified as being dynamically new; such comets reach a peak of strong activity as they approach perihelion. It was extremely important to observe both comets when they were close to both perihelion and perigee in order to observe them near their peak emission and their maximum signal due to their proximity.
This paper describes the results of an effort to observe HCN in both Comets LINEAR and NEAT, with the Berkeley-Illinois-Maryland Association (BIMA) Array[^1] near Hat Creek, California ($\S$2). We present interferometric detections of HCN in both comets and calculate the total beam averaged HCN column densities and production rates by two methods. The first assumes the realistic scenario of a temperature and outflow velocity that vary with cometocentric distance and the second model assumes a constant temperature and outflow velocity throughout the coma.
OBSERVATIONS
============
We used the BIMA Array at Hat Creek, California (122$^o$28$'$8$''$.4 West, 40$^o$49$'$2$''$.28 North; altitude 1333 m) in D-configuration (baselines from $\sim$6m to $\sim$35m) cross-correlation mode to observe HCN in Comets LINEAR (C/2002 T7) and NEAT (C/2001 Q4) during their 2004 apparitions.
The HCN observations of Comet LINEAR, using JPL reference orbit 69, were taken 2004 May 11 toward the topocentric coordinates $\alpha$=01$^h$15$^m$59.$^s$06; $\delta$=$-$07$^o$39$'$16.5$''$ \[J2000.0\][^2] at the beginning of our observations (16:54 UT), and moved to $\alpha$=01$^h$18$^m$20.$^s$56; $\delta$=$-$07$^o$52$'$33.9$''$ \[J2000.0\] by the end of our observations (20:58 UT). The comet was at a heliocentric distance of 0.73 AU and a geocentric distance of 0.44 AU (1=319 km at 0.44 AU). The spectral window containing the HCN hyperfine components had a bandwidth of 50 MHz and was divided into 128 channels giving a channel spacing of 0.39 MHz (1.321 km s$^{-1}$). W3(OH) was used as the flux density calibrator for this observation. The quasar 0108+015 was used to calibrate the antenna based gains.
The HCN observations of Comet NEAT, using JPL reference orbit 123, were taken 2004 May 23 toward the topocentric coordinates $\alpha$=09$^h$13$^m$54.$^s$67; $\delta$=36$^o$46$'$30.7$''$ \[J2000.0\] at the beginning of our observations (20:58 UT), and moved to $\alpha$=09$^h$15$^m$23.$^s$16; $\delta$=37$^o$18$'$34.9$''$ \[J2000.0\] by the end of our observations (06:51 May 24 UT). The comet was at a heliocentric distance of 0.97 AU and a geocentric distance of 0.61 AU (1=442 km at 0.61 AU). The spectral resolution was the same as for Comet LINEAR. Mars was used as the flux density calibrator and 0927+390 was used to calibrate the antenna based gains.
The absolute amplitude calibration is accurate to within $\sim$20%. We note that our observations may cover a significant amount of the rotation period of Comets LINEAR and NEAT. However, to date no rotation period has been given for either comet, thus we are unable to comment on any effects this may have on our results. The data were combined and imaged using the MIRIAD software package [@sault95]. Table \[tab:hcn\] lists the HCN molecular line parameters. The HCN spectroscopic constants were taken from @maki74. In the following, our analysis is for the strongest component, the $J=1-0,$ $F=2-1$ transition.
RESULTS {#sec:res}
=======
Figure \[fig:spec\](a-c) shows our map and spectra of HCN around Comet LINEAR (C/2002 T7). Figure \[fig:spec\]a shows the map of the $J=1-0, F=2-1$ transition of HCN in 1 $\sigma$ contours, starting at 2 $\sigma$. The synthesized beam of $25\farcs 4\times20\farcs 3$ is shown at the bottom left of the map. The line segment in the image shows the projection of the direction toward the sun. The origin of the line segment is anchored at the predicted position of the comet nucleus. The coordinates are given in offset arcseconds centered on the comet nucleus. We note that the peak intensity of the HCN emission is offset from the predicted position of the nucleus by $\sim$5 along the semi-major axis of the synthesized beam. In general, the positional uncertainty roughly scales as the beamsize/SNR. For Comet LINEAR this uncertainty is 4-5, so the offset is not significant[^3]. Figure \[fig:spec\]b shows the cross-correlation spectrum of this transition. The dashed line corresponds to the rest frequency of the $J=1-0, F=2-1$ line for a cometocentric rest velocity of 0 km s$^{-1}$. The 1 $\sigma$ rms noise level is seen at the left of the panel. The $F=2-1$ line for Comet LINEAR was fit with a Gaussian by a least-squares method which gives a peak intensity of 0.59$\pm$0.14 Jy beam$^{-1}$, a FWHM of 1.38$\pm$0.34 km s$^{-1}$, and a cometocentric velocity of -0.29$\pm$0.28 km s$^{-1}$. Figure \[fig:spec\]c shows the cross-correlation spectrum (Hanning smoothed over three channels) of this transition.
Figure \[fig:spec\](d-f) shows our map and spectra of HCN around Comet NEAT (C/2001 Q4). Figure \[fig:spec\]d shows the map of the $J=1-0, F=2-1$ transition of HCN in 1 $\sigma$ contours, starting at 2 $\sigma$. The synthesized beam of $21\farcs 3\times17\farcs 5$ is shown at the bottom left of the map. We note, as with Comet LINEAR, that the HCN peak intensity is offset by $\sim$5 along the semi-major axis of our synthesized beam and that there is also some elongation of the source along this axis. We consider neither the offset nor the elongation to be significant because these are most likely due to the beam size and the low SNR. Figure \[fig:spec\]e shows the cross-correlation spectrum of this transition. The dashed line is similar to Figure \[fig:spec\]b for a cometocentric rest velocity of 0 km s$^{-1}$. The $F=2-1$ line appears in only a single channel so we will assume a FWHM of $\sim$1.3 km s$^{-1}$ for HCN. Figure \[fig:spec\]f shows the cross-correlation spectrum (Hanning smoothed over three channels) of this transition.
DISCUSSION
==========
Column Densities and Production Rates {#sec:NT}
-------------------------------------
In the innermost coma, collisions between cold cometary species dominate the rotational population of the gas, but in the less dense outer coma the collision time becomes longer than the time for absorption of solar photons and the subsequent cascade of emission In that case, the population can also be determined by solar radiation driven fluorescence. Fluorescence effects could allow LTE to be maintained at a lower density than required in optically thin cases [e.g., @crov84; @b-m87]. @lovell04 determined that for the $J=1-0$ transition of HCN for Comet Hyakutake (C/1996 B2) the transition between collisionally dominated and fluorescence dominated emission is between 26,000 and 38,000 km from the nucleus. Since both Comet LINEAR and Comet NEAT have similar water production rates relative to Comet Hyakutake (D. G. Schleicher, 2004, private communication)(see §\[sec:h2o\]) at comparable heliocentric distances, we assume their transition radii are also comparable. On the sky this translates to 82-119 for Comet LINEAR and 59-86 for Comet NEAT.
The synthesized beams sample a cylinder of gas through each comet[^4], and because the HCN volume density falls off faster than $r^{-2}$ due to photodissociation, most of the contribution to the integrated line intensity will come from a sample on the order of the size of the projected synthesized beam. Since the synthesized beam is much smaller than the outer radii of the collisionally dominated regions, conditions significantly outside of the beam are not likely to affect our observations.
The contribution from different cometocentric radii (i.e. from different source sizes) is determined by two factors. The first is that sources of differing size but equal total flux do not have equal peak fluxes and thus, when summed together, do not contribute equally to the total peak flux of a map. The second is that the array starts to resolve out flux from sources that are much larger than the synthesized beam. The first effect is dominant for source sizes that are on the order of the synthesized beam while the second becomes more dominant for larger source sizes. These two effects are illustrated in Figure \[fig:resp\]. The top panel is from our Comet LINEAR observations and the lower panel is from our Comet NEAT observations. The abscissa is cometocentric radius in arcseconds of a source on the sky and the ordinate is $r_i$, the array recovery factor (see Appendix \[adx:model\] for a detailed explanation). The collisionally dominated region of the coma is labeled “Collisional Zone”, the transition between the collisionally dominated and fluorescence dominated regions is denoted by the hatching, and the fluorescence dominated region is labeled “Fluorescence Zone”. The solid line shows the peak flux detected by the array from each source size as a percentage of the peak flux of a point source of equal total flux. Thus, both from this figure and the above argument, it is clear that we are sampling the collisionally dominated region and are insensitive to fluorescence effects.
Our calculations are made assuming optically thin emission, since the limits on the satellite hyperfine components show that they are significantly weaker than the main component. For cross-correlation observations, $<N_T>$, the beam-averaged molecular column density, is $$<N_T> = {2.04~W_{\rm I}~Z~e^{E_{\rm u}/T_{\rm rot}}\over \theta_{\rm a}\theta_{\rm b} S \mu^2 \nu^3} \times~10^{20}~{\rm cm}^{-2}.\label{eq:NTOT}$$ In equation (\[eq:NTOT\]), $W_{\rm I} = \int I_\nu dv$ in Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$, and $I_\nu$ is the flux density per beam. $Z$ is the rotational partition function ($Z=0.47T_{\rm rot}$), $E_u$ is the upper state energy of the transition, $T_{\rm rot}$ is the rotation temperature, $\theta_{\rm a}$ and $\theta_{\rm b}$ are the FWHM synthesized beam dimensions in arcsec, $S$ is the line strength, $\mu$ the dipole moment in Debye, and $\nu$ is the frequency in GHz.
From the least squares fit to the Comet LINEAR spectrum, we find an integrated line intensity of 1.46$\pm$0.49 Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ for the $J=1-0, F=2-1$ HCN line around Comet LINEAR[^5]. From Figure \[fig:spec\]e, we find an integrated line intensity of 0.22$\pm$0.11 Jy beam$^{-1}$ km s$^{-1}$ for the $J=1-0, F=2-1$ HCN line around Comet NEAT[^6].
### Model 1: Assuming Variable Temperatures and Outflow Velocities {#sec:non}
We consider the case where the temperature and outflow velocity vary with cometocentric distance, as has been observed and modeled in previous comets (e.g. Comet Hyakutake and Comet Hale-Bopp [@combi99; @combi99b]). We label this as the variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV) model. In order to do this, we modeled the HCN emission as concentric shells (of thickness 100 km out to a radius of 10,000 km and a thickness of 2000 km for radii of 10,000-30,000 km) around the nucleus and calculated the total column density and production rate. Since we consider both comets to be similar to Comet Hyakutake, we used the velocity profiles from Figure 3 of @combi99 or the fit to that data from @lovell04 to give velocities to each shell. The April 9 profile was used for Comet LINEAR and the March 30 profile and fit was used for Comet NEAT, since on these dates Comet Hyakutake was at a similar heliocentric distance. These velocities were scaled to match the observed velocity profile of the spectral line, taking into account thermal broadening. Similarly, the temperature profiles for each comet were also taken from @combi99. Our VTOV model is explained in detail in Appendix \[adx:model\], and gives total beam averaged column densities of $<N_T>$ = 6.4$\pm$2.1$\times~10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$ for Comet LINEAR and $<N_T>$ = 8.5$\pm$4.5$\times~10^{11}$ cm$^{-2}$ for Comet NEAT and production rates of Q(HCN)=6.5$\pm2.2\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$ for Comet LINEAR and Q(HCN)=8.9$\pm4.7\times10^{25}$ s$^{-1}$ for Comet NEAT.
### Model 2: Assuming Constant Temperatures and Outflow Velocities {#sec:haser}
In the case of assuming a constant $T_{rot}$ the calculation of total beam averaged column density is straightforward, using equation (\[eq:NTOT\]). For Comet LINEAR we assume a rotation temperature of 115 K [@disanti04; @magee04; @kuppers04] and for Comet NEAT we assume a rotation temperature of 52 K. The temperature for Comet NEAT was derived from Figure 3 of @combi99 by averaging across the section of their March 30 curve we are sensitive to, when Comet Hyakutake was at a similar heliocentric distance. Using the above temperature for Comet LINEAR we find a total beam averaged HCN column density (corrected for the other hyperfine components) of $<N_T>$ = 9.5$\pm$3.2$\times~10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$. Using the above temperature for Comet NEAT we find a total beam averaged HCN column density (corrected for the other hyperfine components) of $<N_T>$ = 9.6$\pm$5.1$\times~10^{11}$ cm$^{-2}$.
To calculate $Q_p$, the parent molecule production rate, we use the total beam averaged column densities with the Haser model [@haser]. Since the Haser model assumes a constant outflow velocity, it is better suited for the fluorescence region rather than the inner, collisionally dominated, coma. However, we will compare the Haser model results with our model since the Haser model has been commonly used by previous cometary observations [@hoger04; @snyder01; @veal00; @wright98].
For a photodissociation scale length $\lambda _p$, nuclear radius $r_n$, and constant radial outflow velocity $v_0$, the density as a function of $r$, $n_p(r)$, is given by @snyder01: $$n_p(r) = \frac{Q_p}{4 \pi r^2 v_0} e^{- \frac{(r-r_n)}{\lambda _p}}.\label{eq:np}$$
For Comets LINEAR and NEAT, we assume a nuclear radius of $r_n$ = 5 km. We use a radial outflow velocity of $v_0$ = 0.62 km s$^{-1}$ for Comet LINEAR, based on the HWHM of the Gaussian fit and taking into account the 10% increase in line width due to thermal broadening [@biver99a] and $v_0$ = 0.59 km s$^{-1}$ for Comet NEAT, based on the single channel half width of the line and taking into account thermal broadening.
Consider a point on the line of sight that passes a projected distance, $p$, in the plane of the sky from the nucleus. For a given value of $z$, measured along the line of sight, this will correspond to a radial distance $r=\surd (p^2 + z^2)$ from the nucleus. The column density, $N_p$, is given by @snyder01: $$N_p(p) = \frac{Q_p}{4 \pi v_0} e^{\frac{r_n}{\lambda _p}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{{\rm exp}\{-[(p^2+z^2)^{1/2}/\lambda_p]\}}{(p^2+z^2)} dz.\label{eq:Npp}$$ Finally, $N_p$ from equation (\[eq:Npp\]) may be averaged over the synthesized beam and equated to $<N_T>$, the beam-averaged molecular column density, in order to obtain $Q_p$, the parent molecule production rate from the Haser model.
The Quiet Sun HCN photodissociation rate in the Solar UV field at $r_{hel}$ = 1 AU is given by @heub92a as $\alpha$(1 AU) = 1.3 $\times ~10^{-5}$ s$^{-1}$ and by @crov94 as 1.5 $\times ~10^{-5}$ s$^{-1}$. The expected accuracy is 10-20% [@crov94], so this is reasonable agreement. Thus we will assume $\alpha$(1 AU)=1.3 $\times ~10^{-5}$ s$^{-1}$ (equivalent to ${\sim}3.7{\times}10^4$ km for Comet NEAT and ${\sim}2.2{\times}10^4$ km for Comet LINEAR). We find that the May 11 data around Comet LINEAR give a production rate, Q(HCN), of 5.1$\pm$1.7$\times~10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$, and the May 23 data around Comet NEAT give a production rate of 5.7$\pm$3.0$\times~10^{25}$ s$^{-1}$.
### Comparison of Models {#sec:comp}
The column densities calculated with the VTOV model (model 1) are 11-33% lower than those calculated with model 2. However, the production rates calculated with the VTOV model are 22-36% higher than those calculated with the Haser model (see model 2 in $\S$\[sec:haser\]). These differences are not large. However, the VTOV model provides a better approximation than the Haser model for the physical conditions in the cometary collisional regions that the BIMA Array sampled. Consequently, for the interferometric observations discussed in this paper, the VTOV model should produce more realistic results than the Haser model. Table \[tab:comp\] gives a comparison of the two methods. Column 1 gives the comet name, column 2 gives the total column density, column 3 gives the production rate, column 4 gives the HCN/H$_2$O ratio (see §\[sec:h2o\]) and column 5 gives the HCN/CN ratio (see §\[sec:cn\]).
Relative Production Rates of HCN to H$_2$O {#sec:h2o}
------------------------------------------
### Comet NEAT
D. G. Schleicher (2005, private communication) measured H$_2$O production rates from Comet NEAT and derived a scaling law of $Q(H_2O)\sim r_H^{-4.3}$, where $r_H$ is the heliocentric distance of the comet. From his observations in May and June of 2004 and the scaling law, we scaled the H$_2$O production rates from the heliocentric distances when they were measured to 0.97 AU for Comet NEAT to match the $r_H$ of our observations. Table \[tab:h2o\] gives the measurements and their scaled values. Column 1 gives the date of observation, column 2 gives the heliocentric distance of the comet, columns 3 and 4 give the measured production rates of H$_2$O and CN (see §\[sec:cn\]), and columns 5 and 6 give the scaled production rates for H$_2$O and CN, respectively. The average value for Comet NEAT is Q(H$_2$O)$\sim1.2\times10^{29}$ s$^{-1}$, which is very similar to water production rates measured from Comet Hyakutake at similar heliocentric distances to our observations ($\sim1\times10^{29}$ s$^{-1}$ [@lis97]). If we assume a constant temperature and outflow velocity we find the production rate of HCN relative to H$_2$O for Comet NEAT is $\sim4.7\pm2.5\times10^{-4}$. On the other hand, if we assume the more realistic VTOV model, we find the production rate of HCN relative to H$_2$O to be $\sim7.4\pm3.9\times10^{-4}$ for Comet NEAT. This is similar to the ratios observed around previous comets such as Comet Hyakutake ($1\times10^{-3}$) [@lis97].
### Comet LINEAR
H$_2$O production rates were also measured for Comet LINEAR by D. G. Schleicher (2005, private communication). From his data, he estimated the H$_2$O production rate to be $\sim2\times10^{29}$ s$^{-1}$ during our May 11 observations. If we assume a constant temperature and outflow velocity, we find the production rate of HCN relative to H$_2$O is $\sim2.6\pm0.9\times10^{-3}$ for Comet LINEAR. On the other hand, if we assume the more realistic VTOV model, we find the production rate of HCN relative to H$_2$O to be $\sim3.3\pm1.1\times10^{-3}$. This is similar to the ratio observed around Comet Hale-Bopp ($2.1-2.6\times10^{-3}$) [@snyder01].
Relative Production Rates of HCN to CN {#sec:cn}
--------------------------------------
### Comet NEAT
D. G. Schleicher (2005, private communication) measured CN production rates from Comet NEAT and derived a scaling law of $Q(CN)\sim r_H^{-2.1}$. From his observations in May and June 2004 and the scaling law, we scaled these values from the heliocentric distances when they were measured to the heliocentric distance of Comet NEAT during our observations (see Table \[tab:h2o\]). Averaging these values gives Q(CN) $\sim2.6\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$ for Comet NEAT. If we assume a constant temperature and outflow velocity we find the production rate of HCN relative to CN is $\sim0.2\pm0.1$ for Comet NEAT. On the other hand, if we assume the more realistic VTOV model, we find the production rate of HCN relative to CN of $\sim0.3\pm0.2$ for Comet NEAT. The photodissociative branching ratio of HCN implies that $\sim$97% of HCN will be photodissociated into H and CN [@heub92b]. @wood02 concluded that HCN is most likely the primary parent species of CN. Thus, one would expect the HCN to CN ratio to be near 1. However, the ratio for Comet NEAT is a factor of $\sim$3 smaller than the expected ratio.
### Comet LINEAR
CN production rates were measured for Comet LINEAR by D. G. Schleicher (2005, private communication). From his data, he estimated the CN production rate to be $\sim1.4\times10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$ during our May 11 observations. If we assume a constant temperature and outflow velocity we find the production rate of HCN relative to CN is $\sim3.6\pm1.2$ for Comet LINEAR. On the other hand, if we assume the more realistic VTOV model, we find the production rate of HCN relative to CN to be $\sim4.6\pm1.5$.
SUMMARY
=======
We have detected the $J=1-0$ transition of HCN in Comets NEAT (C/2001 Q4) and LINEAR (C/2002 T7). We have calculated the total column density and production rates by two different models. The first (VTOV) model assumes the realistic scenario of temperature and outflow velocity that vary with cometocentric distance. We compare this model to one where the temperature and outflow velocity are constant throughout the coma (Haser model). The differences between the outcomes of the models are $\sim$11-33% for $N_T$ and $\sim$22-36% for $Q$. However, for the interferometric observations described in this paper, more realistic results will be obtained by using the VTOV model outlined in Sec. \[sec:non\] and Appendix \[adx:model\]. This model gives production rates of Q(HCN)=$6.5\pm2.2\times~10^{26}$ s$^{-1}$ and ratios of HCN/H$_2$O and HCN/CN of $\sim3.3\pm1.1\times10^{-3}$ and $\sim4.6\pm1.5$, respectively, for Comet LINEAR and Q(HCN)=$8.9\pm4.7\times~10^{25}$ s$^{-1}$ and ratios of HCN/H$_2$O and HCN/CN of $\sim7.4\pm3.9\times10^{-4}$ and $\sim0.3\pm0.2$, respectively, for Comet NEAT.
The HCN production rate relative to H$_2$O for Comet NEAT is similar to that found previously for Comet Hyakutake [@lis97], while the ratio for Comet LINEAR is similar to that observed from the highly productive Comet Hale-Bopp [@snyder01]. The HCN production rate relative to CN for Comet LINEAR is consistent with HCN being the primary parent of CN, as was suggested in @wood02. However, for Comet NEAT the value is too low.
We thank J. R. Dickel for assisting with the observations, an anonymous referee for many helpful comments, and D. G. Schleicher for providing H$_2$O and CN production rates. This work was partially funded by: NSF AST02-28953, AST02-28963, AST02-28974 and AST02-28955; and the Universities of Illinois, Maryland, and California, Berkeley.
APPENDIX
DESCRIPTION OF THE VTOV MODEL {#adx:model}
=============================
The variable temperature and outflow velocity (VTOV) model consists of concentric spherical shells centered on a cometary nucleus of radius 5 km. The shells had a thickness of 100 km (with the exception of the 1st shell (95 km)) out to a cometocentric radius of 10,000 km and a thickness of 2,000 km for radii from 10,000 to 30,000 km. 30,000 km is equivalent to a cometocentric radius of 94on the sky for Comet LINEAR and 67.9for Comet NEAT. This distance was chosen as the outer limit of our model because the structures of this size contribute less than 0.1% to the peak flux and the population of HCN at this radius is less than 40% that of the central shell due to photodissociation. Thus, by the combination of these factors the contribution from any shells beyond 30,000 km would be negligible.
While quantities such as the outflow velocity and temperature vary in a very non-linear way across the coma of each comet, the changes across any given shell are small enough to be considered linear. Thus, the quantities calculated for each shell, unless otherwise specified, are calculated at the average radius of each shell, since they will be very close to the average value for the entire shell.
For the model we calculate the following quantities for each shell $i$ in our model :
1. The time, $t_i$, each molecule spends in the shell, is given by\[it:ti\] $$t_i=\frac{(R_i - R_{i-1})}{V_i},\label{eqn:ti}$$ where $R_i$ and $R_{i-1}$ are the outer and inner radii of shell $i$, respectively, and $V_i$ is the average velocity of the molecule across the shell (from @combi99).
2. The total time, $t_{i,\rm tot}$, it takes a molecule to travel from the nucleus to the center of the shell, is given by\[it:ttot\] $$t_{i,\rm tot}=\left( \sum_{j=1}^{i-1}t_j\right) + \frac{t_i}{2}.\label{eqn:ttot}$$
3. The number of molecules, $n_i$, in each shell, is given by\[it:num\] $$n_i=Qt_ie^{-\alpha t_{i,\rm tot}/r_H^2},\label{eqn:num}$$ where $Q$ is the production rate, $\alpha$ is the photodissociation rate (assumed to be $\alpha$(1 AU)=1.3 $\times ~10^{-5}$ s$^{-1}$), and $r_h$ is the heliocentric radius of the comet. [*Note*]{}: At this point it does not matter what value we give $Q$ since it does not vary from shell to shell and thus is a constant for this part of the model.
4. The BIMA Array’s flux recovery factor for the projected size of the shell on the sky is defined as the peak flux of a shell compared to that of a point source. This is a combination of a geometric effect (i.e. the flux is spread out over larger areas for larger shells), which is dominant for source sizes comparable to our synthesized beam size, and the fact that the array resolves out flux from sources that are much larger than the synthesized beam (array filtering effect). The recovery factor is found in the following way:
1. Each source size (or shell) is modeled by first creating a Gaussian[^7] source image for each concentric shell, of the appropriate FWHM and at the position on the sky of the comet, with the MIRIAD task IMGEN[^8]. Every Gaussian shell is assumed to contribute equally to the flux recovery for a uniformly extended source.
2. In order to remove geometric and filtering effects each image is run through UVMODEL to produce a $u-v$ data set that is the array’s response to the input source based on the $u-v$ tracks of our actual observations.
3. Each data set is then INVERTed, CLEANed, and RESTORed as normal to produce the final output map.
4. The peak intensity ($p_i$) of each map is compared to that of a point source ($p_{\rm ps}$) model of equal integrated intensity to give the array’s recovery factor, $r_i$, where, $$r_i=\frac{p_i}{p_{\rm ps}}.$$ Note that $r_i{\rightarrow}0$ for an infinitely extended source, $r_i{\rightarrow}1$ for a point source, and $r_i=0.5$ if the source just fills the beam.
The array’s recovery factor is illustrated in Figure \[fig:resp\]. The top panel is for Comet LINEAR and the bottom panel is for Comet NEAT. The abscissa is cometocentric radius and the ordinate is $r_i$. The solid line shows $r_i$ for all shells.\[it:resp\]
5. The production rate $Q$ of the comet is found by modifying equation (\[eq:NTOT\]), $$\frac{4ln(2)n_ir_i}{\pi ab}=<N_i>=\frac{2.04 W_i Z_i e^{E_u/T_{i}}}{\theta_{\rm a}\theta_{\rm b}S\mu^2\nu^3}\times10^{20} {\rm cm}^{-2}.\label{eqn:Ni}$$ We note that $4ln(2)/\pi ab$ is the projected area on the sky of our Gaussian synthesized beam (in cm$^2$), $N_i$ is the beam averaged column density of the shell, $W_i$ is the integrated line intensity of the shell, and $T_i$ is the rotation temperature for the shell (from @combi99). Rearranging equation (\[eqn:Ni\]) and incorporating the fact that $$W=\sum_{i}W_i$$ gives $$W=\frac{1.36\theta_a\theta_b S\mu^2\nu^3}{\pi ab}\sum_{i}\frac{n_ir_i}{Z_ie^{E_u/T_{i}}}\times10^{-20}\label{eqn:sum1}.$$ Incorporating equation (\[eqn:num\]) and rearranging equation (\[eqn:sum1\]) gives $$Q=\frac{0.736W\pi ab}{\theta_a\theta_b S\mu^2\nu^3}\left(\sum_{i}\frac{r_it_ie^{-\alpha t_{i,\rm tot}/r_H^2}}{Z_ie^{E_u/T_{i}}}\right)^{-1}\times10^{20}.\label{eqn:sum2}$$ Since all factors on the right hand side of equation (\[eqn:sum2\]) are known, $Q$ can be found. [*Note*]{}: In equation (\[eqn:Ni\]) we divided $n_i$ by the projected beam area rather than the projected area of the shell, even for those shells with a projected area larger than our beam. This is done because, even though there are some molecules outside of the synthesized beam, they are contributing flux to the area inside the synthesized beam.
6. Now that $Q$ has been found, use it in equation (\[eqn:num\]) to find $n_i$. Then use each $n_i$ in equation (\[eqn:Ni\]) to find $N_i$ for each shell. Then the total beam averaged column density, $<N_T>$, is given by the sum over all shells, $$<N_T>=\sum_{i}<N_i>.$$
Biver, N., et al. 1999a, , 118, 1850
Biver, N., et al. 1999b, Earth Moon and Planets, 78, 5
Blake, G. A., Qi, C., Hogerheijde, M. R., Gurwell, H. A., & Muhleman, D. O. 1999, , 398, 213
Bockelée-Morvan, D., Crovisier, J., Despois, D., Forveille, T., Gerard, E., Schraml, J., & Thum, C. 1987, , 180, 253
Bockelée-Morvan, et al. 2001, Science, 292, 1339
Combi, M. R., Cochran, A. L., Cochran, W. D., Lambert, D. L., & Johns-Krull, C. M. 1999, , 512, 961
Combi, M. R., Kabin, K., DeZeeuw, D. L., Gombosi, T. I., & Powell, K. G. 1999, Earth Moon and Planets, 79, 275 Crovisier, J. 1984, , 130, 361
Crovisier, J. 1994, , 99, 3777
Despois, D., Crovisier, J., Bockelee-Morvan, D., Gerard, E., & Schraml, J. 1986, , 160, L11
DiSanti, M. A., Reuter, D. C., Mumma, M. J., Dello Russo, N., Magee-Sauer, K., Gibb, E. L., Bonev, B., & Anderson, W. M. 2004, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, 36, 25.08
Fitzsimmons, A. & Cartwright, I. M. 1996, , 278, L37
Haser, L. 1957, Academie royale de Belgique, Bulletin de la classe des Sciences, Ser 5, 43, 740
Hirota, T., Yamamoto, S., Kawaguchi, K., Sakamoto, A., & Ukita, N. 1999, , 520, 895
Hogerheijde, M. R., et al. 2004, , 127, 2406
Huebner, W. F., Keady, J. J., & Lyon, S. P. 1992a, , 195, 291
Huebner, W. F., Keady, J. J., & Lyon, S. P. 1992b, , 195, 7
Irvine, W. M., Dickens, J. E., Lovell, A. J., Schloerb, F. P., Senay, M., Bergin, E. A., Jewitt, D., & Matthews, H. E. 1999, Earth Moon and Planets, 78, 29
K[" u]{}ppers, M., Hartogh, P., & Villanueva, G. 2004, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, 36, 25.05
Lis, D. C., et al. 1997, Icarus, 130, 355
Lovell, A. J., Kallivayalil, N., Schloerb, F. P., Combi, M. R., Hansen, K. C., & Gombosi, T. I. 2004, , 613, 615
Magee-Sauer, K., Mumma, M. J., DiSanti, M. A., Russo, N. D., & Rettig, T. W. 1999, Icarus, 142, 498
Magee-Sauer, K., Dello Russo, N., DiSanti, M. A., Bonev, B., Gibb, E. L., & Mumma, M. J. 2004, AAS/Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting Abstracts, 36, 25.03
Maki, A. G. 1974, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 3, 221
Mumma, M. J., Disanti, M. A., dello Russo, N., Fomenkova, M., Magee-Sauer, K., Kaminski, C. D., & Xie, D. X. 1996, Science, 272, 1310
Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., & Wright, M.C.H. 1995, in: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV, ASP Conference Series 77, ed. R.A. Shaw, H.E. Payne, & J.J.E. Hayes, 433
Snyder, L. E., et al. 2001, , 121, 1147
Veal, J. M., et al. 2000, , 119, 1498
Womack, M., Festou, M. C., & Stern, S. A. 1997, , 114, 2789
Woodney et al. 2002, Icarus, 157, 193
Wright, M. C. H., et al. 1998, , 116, 3018
Ziurys, L. M., Savage, C., Brewster, M. A., Apponi, A. J., Pesch, T. C., & Wyckoff, S. 1999, , 527, L67
[cccc]{} $J=1-0, F=1-1$ & 88,630.4157(10) & 4.3 & 3.0\
$J=1-0, F=2-1$ & 88,631.8473(10) & 4.3 & 4.9\
$J=1-0, F=0-1$ & 88,633.9360(10) & 4.3 & 1.0\
\[tab:hcn\]
[cccccc]{} LINEAR & $9.5\pm3.2\times10^{12}$ & $5.1\pm1.7\times10^{26}$ & $2.6\pm0.9\times10^{-3}$ & & $3.6\pm1.2$\
NEAT & $9.6\pm5.1\times10^{11}$ & $5.7\pm3.0\times10^{25}$ & $4.7\pm2.5\times10^{-4}$ & & $0.2\pm0.1$\
LINEAR & $6.4\pm2.1\times10^{12}$ & $6.5\pm2.2\times10^{26}$ & $3.3\pm1.1\times10^{-3}$ & & $4.6\pm1.5$\
NEAT & $8.5\pm4.5\times10^{11}$ & $8.9\pm4.7\times10^{25}$ & $7.4\pm3.9\times10^{-4}$ & & $0.3\pm0.2$\
\[tab:comp\]
[cccccc]{} 2004 May 11 & 0.97 & $1.3\times10^{29}$ & $2.6\times10^{26}$ & $1.3\times10^{29}$ & $2.6\times10^{26}$\
2004 May 12 & 0.96 & $1.3\times10^{29}$ & $2.5\times10^{26}$ & $1.2\times10^{29}$ & $2.4\times10^{26}$\
2004 June 09 & 1.05 & $8.9\times10^{28}$ & $2.4\times10^{26}$ & $1.3\times10^{29}$ & $2.8\times10^{26}$\
2004 June 10 & 1.06 & $7.9\times10^{28}$ & $2.1\times10^{26}$ & $1.2\times10^{29}$ & $2.6\times10^{26}$\
\[tab:h2o\]
[^1]: Operated by the University of California, Berkeley, the University of Illinois, and the University of Maryland with support from the National Science Foundation.
[^2]: We believe the positional accuracy to be good to a few arcseconds for our observations. This error is insignificant relative to the size of the synthesized beams (see $\S$\[sec:res\]).
[^3]: This does not include any uncertainties in the ephemeris.
[^4]: In a small cylinder passing through the cometary gas, only a small fraction of the HCN will be in the less dense fluorescent zone. Hence, unlike the case for some optical molecular observations, here we assume that the HCN in the fluorescence zone can be ignored relative to that in the denser collisional zone.
[^5]: To convert this to integrated main beam brightness temperature multiply by 0.30 K/(Jy beam$^{-1}$).
[^6]: To convert this to integrated main beam brightness temperature multiply by 0.42 K/(Jy beam$^{-1}$).
[^7]: In this step we approximate the shells as Gaussian sources rather than as actual shells because any structure on the sky that has sharp edges, such as a shell, will produce ringing in the $u-v$ plane and artifacts in the final map. Since the actual observations of the comets observed continuous distributions on the sky with no sharp edges, approximating the shell by a Gaussian is reasonable.
[^8]: Detailed descriptions of all MIRIAD tasks can be found at: http://bima.astro.umd.edu/miriad/ref.html
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We consider the billiard map in a convex polyhedron of $\mathbb{R}^3$, and we prove that it is of zero topological entropy.'
author:
- 'Nicolas Bédaride[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'bibio.bib'
title: Entropy of polyhedral billiard
---
Introduction
============
A billiard ball, i.e. a point mass, moves inside a polyhedron $P$ with unit speed along a straight line until it reaches the boundary $\partial{P}$, then it instantaneously changes direction according to the mirror law, and continues along the new line.
Label the faces of $P$ by symbols from a finite alphabet $\mathcal{A}$ whose cardinality equals the number of faces of $P$. Consider the set of all billiard orbits. After coding, the set of all the words is a language. We define the complexity of the language, $p(n)$, by the number of words of length $n$ that appears in this system. How complex is the game of billiard inside a polygon or a polyhedron? For the cube the computations have been done, see [@moi1; @moi2], but there is no result for a general polyhedron. One way to answer this question is to compute the topological entropy of the billiard map.
There are three different proofs that polygonal billiard have zero topological entropy [@Ka; @Ga.Kr.Tr; @Gu.Ha]. Here we consider the billiard map inside a polyhedron. We want to compute the topological entropy of the billiard map in a polyhedron. The idea is to improve the proof of Katok. Thus we must compute the metric entropy of each ergodic measure. When we follow this proof some difficulties appear. In particular a non atomic ergodic measure for the related shift can have its support included in the boundary of the definition set. Such examples were known for some piecewise isometries of $\mathbb{R}^2$ since the works of Adler, Kitchens and Tresser [@Ad.Ki.Tr]; Goetz and Poggiaspalla [@Go; @Go.Pog]. Piecewise isometries and billiard are related since the first return map of the directional billiard flow inside a rational polyhedron is a piecewise isometry.
Our main result is the following
\[entro\] Let $P$ be a convex polyhedron of $\mathbb{R}^3$ and let $T$ be the billiard map, then $$h_{top}(T)=0.$$
The complexity of the billiard map satisfies $$\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\frac{\log{p(n)}}{n}=0.$$
For the standard definitions and properties of entropy we refer to Katok and Hasselblatt [@Ha.Ka].
Overview of the proof
---------------------
We consider the shift map associated to the billiard map, see Section 2, and compute the metric entropy for each ergodic measure of this shift. We must treat several cases depending on the support of the measure. If the ergodic measure has its support included in the definition set, then the method of Katok can be used with minor changes, see Section 3. The other case can not appear in dimension two and represent the main problem in dimension three. We treat this case by looking at the billiard orbits which pass through singularities. By a geometric argument we prove in Section 4 that the support of a such measure is the union of two sets: a countable set and a set of words whose complexity can be bounded, see Proposition \[entroscruc\] and Lemma \[3entrosur\].
If we want to generalize this result to any dimension some problems appear. Im dimension three, we treat two cases by different methods depending on the dimension of the cells. In dimension $d$ there would be at least $d-1$ different cases and actually we have no method for these cases. Moreover we must generalize Lemma \[eqdim3\] and the followings . Unfortunately this is much harder and cannot be made with computations.
Background and notations
========================
Definitions
-----------
We consider the billiard map inside a convex polyhedron $P$. This map is defined on the set $E\subset\partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$, by the following method:
First we define the set $E'\subset\partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$. A point $(m,\theta)$ belongs to $E'$ if and only if one of the two following points is true:\
$\bullet$ The line $m+\mathbb{R}^*[\theta]$ intersects an edge of $P$, where $[\theta]$ is a vector of $\mathbb{R}^3$ which represents $\theta$.\
$\bullet$ The line $m+\mathbb{R}^*[\theta]$ is included inside the face of $P$ which contains $m$.
Then we define $E$ as the set $$E=(\partial{P}\times
\mathbb{PR}^3)\setminus E'.$$
Now we define the map $T$: Consider $(m,\theta)\in E$, then we have $T(m,\theta)=(m',\theta')$ if and only if $mm'$ is colinear to $[\theta]$, and $[\theta']=s[\theta]$, where $s$ is the linear reflection over the face which contains $m'$. $$T:E\rightarrow \partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$$ $$T:(m,\theta)\mapsto (m',\theta')$$
In the following we identify $\mathbb{PR}^3$ with the unit vectors of $\mathbb{R}^3$ ([*i.e*]{} we identify $\theta$ and $[\theta]$).
The set $E$ is called the phase space.
Combinatorics
-------------
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite set called the alphabet. By a language $L$ over $\mathcal{A}$ we mean always a factorial extendable language: a language is a collection of sets $(L_n)_{n\geq 0}$ where the only element of $L_0$ is the empty word, and each $L_n$ consists of words of the form $a_1a_2\dots
a_n$ where $a_i\in\mathcal{A}$ and such that for each $v\in L_n$ there exist $a,b\in\mathcal{A}$ with $av,vb\in L_{n+1}$, and for all $v\in L_{n+1}$ if $v=au=u'b$ with $a,b\in\mathcal{A}$ then $u,u'\in L_n$.\
The complexity function of the language $L$, $p:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}$ is defined by $p(n)=card(L_n)$.
Coding
------
We label each face of the polyhedron with a letter from the alphabet $\{1\dots N\}$. Let $E$ be the phase space of the billiard map and $d=\{d_1\dots d_N\}$ the cover of $E$ related to the coding. The phase space is of dimension four : two coordinates for the point on the boundary of $P$ and two coordinates for the direction.
Let $E_0$ be the points of $E$ such that $T^n$ is defined, continuous in a neighborhood for all $n\in\mathbb{Z}$. Denote by $\phi$ the coding map, it means the map
$$\phi : E_0\rightarrow\{1,\dots, N\}^{\mathbb{Z}},$$ $$\phi(p)=(v_n)_\mathbb{Z},$$ where $v_n$ is defined by $T^n(p)\in d_{v_n}$. Let $S$ denote the shift map on $\{1\dots N\}^{\mathbb{Z}}$. We have the diagram, $$\begin{CD}
E_0 @>T>> E_0\\
@V{\phi}VV @VV{\phi}V\\
\phi(E_0) @>>S> \phi(E_0)
\end{CD}$$ with the equation $\phi\circ T=S\circ\phi.$
We want to compute the topological entropy of the billiard map. We define the topological entropy of the billiard map as the topological entropy of the subshift, see Definition \[htop\].
We remark that the proof of Theorem \[entro\] given in [@Ga.Kr.Tr] as a corollary of their result is not complete: They do not consider the case, where the ergodic measure is supported on the boundary of $\phi(E_0)$.
Notations
---------
Let $\Sigma$ be the closure of $\phi(E_0)$, and consider the cover $$d\vee T^{-1}d\vee \dots\vee T^{-n+1}d.$$ The cover $d$, when restricted to $E_0$, is a partition. The sets of this cover are called $n$-cells. If $v\in\Sigma$ we denote $$\sigma_v=\bigcap_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\overline{T^{-n}(d_{v_n}\cap E_0)}=
\displaystyle\bigcap_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}T^{-n}d_{v_n}.$$ It is the closure of the set of points of $E_0$ such that the orbit is coded by $v$. If $v\in\phi(E_0)$ then $\sigma_v$ is equal to $\phi^{-1}(v)$. We denote $d^{-}=\displaystyle \bigvee^{\infty}_{n=0}T^{-n}d$ and $$\sigma_v^{-}=\displaystyle\bigcap_{n\geq 0}\overline{T^{-n}(d_{v_n}\cap\phi(E_0))}
=\displaystyle\bigcap_{n\geq 0}T^{-n}d_{v_n}.$$
\[xi\] Let $\xi=\{c_1,\dots,c_k\} $ be the partition of $\Sigma$ given by $$c_k=\overline{\phi(d_k\cap E_0)}.$$
Finally we can define the topological entropy
\[htop\] Consider a polyhedron of $\mathbb{R}^3$, and $T$ the billiard map, then we define $$h_{top}(T)=\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\log p(n)}{n},$$ where $p(n)$ is the number of $n$-cells.
This definition is made with the help of the following lemma which links it to the topological entropy of the shift.
\[entrodef\] With the same notation $$\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\log{p(n)}}{n}=h_{top}(S|\Sigma).$$
The partition $\xi$, see Definition \[xi\], is a topological generator of $(S|\Sigma)$ (see [@Pet] for a definition), thus $$h(S|\Sigma)=\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\log{card \xi_n}}{n},$$ and we have ${\rm card}(\xi_n)=p(n).$
The number of cells, $p(n)$, is equal to the complexity of the language $\Sigma$.\
There are several other possible definitions (Bowen definition $\dots$) but we use this one since we are interested in the complexity function of the billiard map.
Billiard
--------
### Cell
We denote by $\pi$ the following map:
$$\pi: \partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3\mapsto \mathbb{PR}^3$$ $$\pi:(m,\theta)\rightarrow \theta.$$ Consider an infinite word $v\in\phi(E_0)$.
We consider the elements $(m,\theta)$ of $\partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$ as vectors $\theta$ with base point $m$.\
We say that $X\subset \partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$ is a strip if all $x\in X$ are parallel vectors whose base points form an interval.\
We say that $X\subset \partial{P}\times\mathbb{PR}^3$ is a tube if all $x\in X$ are parallel vectors whose base points form an open polygon or an open ellipse.\
Now we recall the theorem of Galperin, Kruger and Troubetzkoy [@Ga.Kr.Tr], which describe the shape of $\sigma_v^-$:
\[dim\] Let $v\in\phi(E_0)$ be an infinite word, then there are three cases:\
The set $\sigma_v^-$ consists of only one point.\
The set $\sigma_v^-$ is a strip.\
The set $\sigma_v^-$ is a tube.\
Moreover if $\sigma_v^-$ is a tube then $v$ is a periodic word.
The preceding lemma shows that $\phi$ is not bijective on $E_0$.
By the preceding lemma for each infinite word $v$ the set $\pi(\sigma_v^-)$ is unique. If the base points form an interval we say that $\sigma_v^-$ is of dimension one, and of dimension two if the base points form a polygon or an ellipse.
\[def\] As in the preceding lemma, if $v$ is an infinite word we say that $\pi(\sigma_v^-)$ is the direction of the word.\
Moreover if $v$ is an infinite word, we identify $\sigma_v^-$ with the set of base points $a$ which fulfills $\sigma_v^-=a\times \pi(\sigma_v^-)$.
### Geometry
First we define the rational polyhedron. Let $P$ be a polyhedron of $\mathbb{R}^3$, consider the linear reflections $s_i$ over the faces of $P$.
We denote by $G(P)$ the group generated by the $s_i$, and we say that $P$ is rational if $G(P)$ is finite.
In $\mathbb{R}^2$ a polygon is rational if and only if all the angles are rational multiples of $\pi$. Thus the rational polygons with $k$ edges are dense in the set of polygons with $k$ edges. In higher dimension, there is no simple characterization of rational polyhedrons, moreover their set is not dense in the set of polyhedrons with fixed combinatorial type (number of edges, vertices, faces).
An useful tool in the billiard study is the unfolding. When a trajectory passes through a face, there is reflection of the line. The unfolding consists in following the same line and in reflecting the polyhedron over the face. For example for the billiard in the square/cube, we obtain the usual square/cube tiling. In the following we will use this tool, and an edge means an edge of an unfolded polyhedron.
Related results
---------------
If $P$ is a rational polyhedron, then we can define the first return map of the directional flow in a fixed direction $\omega$. This map $T_{\omega}$ is a polygon exchange (generalization of interval exchange). Gutkin and Haydn have shown :
[@Gu.Ha] Let $P$ be a rational polyhedron and $w\in\mathbb{S}^2$ then $$h_{top}(T_{\omega})=0.$$ Moreover if $\mu$ is any invariant measure then $$h_{\mu}(T)=0.$$
Buzzi [@Bu], has generalized this result. He proves that each piecewise isometrie of $\mathbb{R}^n$ have zero topological entropy. Remark that a polygonal exchange is a piecewise isometry.
Variational principle
=====================
We use the variational principle to compute the entropy $$h_{top}(S|\Sigma)=\displaystyle\sup_{\substack{\mu\\ ergo}}
h_{\mu}(S|\Sigma).$$ Remark that we cannot apply it to the map $T$ since it is not continuous on a compact metric space. The knowledge of $h_\mu(T)$ does not allow to compute $h_{top}(T)$. We are not interested in the atomic measures because the associated system is periodic, thus their entropy is equal to zero. We split into two cases $supp(\mu)\subset\phi(E_0)$ or not. We begin by treating the first case which is in the same spirit as the argument in Katok [@Ka].
\[lemka\] Let $\mu$ be an ergodic measure with support in $\phi(E_0)$. We denote $\xi^{-}=\displaystyle\bigvee^{\infty}_{n=0}S^{-n}\xi$, where $\xi$ is defined in Definition \[xi\]. Up to a set of $\mu$ measure zero we have $$S\xi^{-}=\xi^{-}.$$
As $\mu(\phi(E_0))=1$, the cover $\xi$ can be thought as a partition of $\phi(E_0)$. Let $v\in\phi(E_0)$, then the set $\sigma_v^-$ can be thought as an element of $d^{-}$. The set $\overline{\phi(\sigma_{v}^-\cap E_0)}$ coincides with the set of $\xi^{-}$ which contains $v$.
By Lemma \[dim\] the dimension of $\sigma_v^-$ can take three values.
We have $\sigma_{S^{-1}v}^-\subset T^{-1}\sigma_{v}^-$, thus the set of $v$ such that $\sigma_{v}^-$ is a point is invariant by $S$. The ergodicity of $\mu$ implies that this set either has zero measure or full measure.
Assume it is of full measure, then $d^{-}$ is a partition of points, and same thing for $\xi^{-}$. Then $\xi^{-}$ is a refinement of $S\xi^{-}$ , this implies that those two sets are equal.
Assume it is of zero measure. Then by ergodicity there are two cases : $\sigma_{v}^-$ is an interval or of dimension two for a set of full measure.
$\bullet$ Assume $\sigma_{v}^-$ is an interval for a full measure set of $v$. If $\theta$ is the direction of $v$, then consider the strip $\sigma_v^-+\mathbb{R}\theta$. Consider a line included in the plane of the strip and orthogonal to the axis $\mathbb{R}\theta$, and denote $L(\sigma_v^-)$ the length of the set at the intersection of the line and the strip, see Figure \[e31\].
Clearly we have $T(\sigma_{v}^-)\subset \sigma_{Sv}^-,$ thus we have $L(T\sigma_{v}^-)\leq L(\sigma_{Sv}^-).$ Since $L(T\sigma_v^-)=L(\sigma_v^-)$ we conclude that the function $L$ is a sub-invariant of $S$.
Since $\mu$ is ergodic the function $L$ is constant $\mu$ [*a.e*]{}. Thus for $\mu$ [*a.e*]{} $v$ we obtain two intervals of same length, one included in the other. They are equal. We deduce $\sigma_{Sv}^-=T\sigma_{v}^-.$ This implies that $v_1,v_2,\dots$ determines $v_0$ almost surely. It follows that $$S\xi^-=\xi^- \mu {\it a.e}.$$
$\bullet$ If $\sigma_{v}^-$ is of dimension $2$ for a positive measure set of $v$, by ergodicity it is of the same dimension for $\mu$ [*a.e*]{} $v$. It implies that $v$ is a periodic word $\mu$ [*a.e*]{}, thus $S\xi^{-}=\xi^{-} \mu$ [*a.e*]{}.
Since $h(S,\xi)=H(S\xi^-|\xi^-)=0$ we have :
\[supmes1\] If $supp(\mu)\subset\phi(E_0)$ then $h_{\mu}(S|\Sigma)=0$.
Measures on the boundary
========================
We will treat the cases of ergodic measures, satisfying $$X=supp(\mu)\subset\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0).$$ First we generalize Lemma \[dim\]:
\[entro3gkt\] For a convex polyhedron, for any word $v\in\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)$ the set $\sigma_v^-$ is connected and is a strip.
We remark that Lemma \[entro3gkt\] is the only place where we use the convexity of $P$.
First the word $v$ is a limit of words $v^n$ in $\phi(E_0)$. Each of these words $v^n$ have a unique direction $\theta_n$ by Lemma \[dim\]. The directions $\theta_n$ converge to $\theta$, this shows that the direction of $\sigma_v^-$ is unique. Now by convexity of $P$ the set $\sigma_v^-$ is convex as intersection of convex sets. By definition the projection of $\sigma_v^-$ on $\partial{P}$ is included inside an edge, thus it is of dimension less than or equal to one. This implies that the set is an interval or a point.
[*A priori*]{} there are several cases as $dim\sigma_v^-$ can be equal to $0$ or $1$. We see here a difference with the polygonal case. In this case the dimension was always equal to zero.
Orbits passing through several edges
------------------------------------
In this paragraph an edge means the edge which appears in the unfolding of $P$ corresponding to $v$. We represent an edge by a point and a vector. The point is a vertex of a copy of $P$ in the unfolding and the vector is the direction of the edge. We consider two edges $A,B$ in the unfolding. Consider $m\in A$ and a direction $\theta$ such that the orbit of $(m,\theta)$ passes through an edge. We identify the point $m$ with the distance $d(m,a)$ if $a$ is one endpoint of the edge $A$. Moreover we denote by $u$ an unit vector colinear to the edge $A$.
\[entro3eq\] The set of $(m,\theta), m\in A_0$ such that the orbit of $(m,\theta)$ passes through an edge $A_1$ satisfies either
\(i) $(m,\theta)$ is in the line or plane which contains $A_0,A_1$. Then there exists an affine map $f$ such that $f(\theta) = 0$.
or
\(ii) there exists a map $F :\mathbb{R}^3 \to \mathbb{R}$ such that $m=F(\theta)$ (it is the quotient of two linear polynomials). Moreover the map $(A_0,A_1)\mapsto F$ is injective.
The case where $A_0,A_1$ are colinear is included in the first case. In this case there are two equations of the form $f(\theta)=0$ but we only use one of them.
Consider the affine subspace generated by the edge $A_0$ and the line $m+\mathbb{R}\theta$. There are two cases :
$\bullet\quad A_1\in Aff(A_0,m+\mathbb{R}\theta)$. Assume $A_0,A_1$ are not colinear, then the affine space generated by $A_0,A_1$ is of dimension two (or one), and several points $m$ can be associated to the same direction $\theta$. In the case it is of dimension 2, $\theta$ is in the plane which contains $A_0,A_1$. Then there exists an affine map $f$ which gives the equation of the plane and we obtain $f(\theta)=0$.
$\bullet\quad A_1\notin Aff(A_0,m+\mathbb{R}\theta)$, then the space $Aff(A_0,A_1)$ is of dimension three. If the direction is not associated to a single point then the edges $A_0,A_1$ are coplanar. Thus in our case the direction is associated to a single point $m$. There exists a real number $\lambda$ such that $m+\lambda\theta\in A_1$. Since $A_1$ is an edge, it is the intersection of two planes (we take the planes of the two faces of the polyhedron). We denote the two planes by the equations $h=0;g=0$ where $h,g\quad \mathbb{R}^3\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. We obtain the system $$h(m+\lambda\theta)=0,$$ $$g(m+\lambda\theta)=0.$$ Here $h(x)=<v_h,x>+b_h$ where $v_h$ is a vector and $<\cdot,\cdot>$ is the scalar product and similarly for $g$. Then we write $h(m)=<v_h,mu>+b_h=m<v_h,u>+b_h$, we do the same thing for $g$. Since $A_0,A_1$ are not coplanar the terms $<v_g,\theta>,<v_h,\theta>$ are non null, thus we obtain the expression for $\lambda$ : $$\lambda=\frac{-b_h-m<v_h,u>}{<v_h,\theta>}=
\frac{-b_g-m<v_g,u>}{<v_g,\theta>}.$$ For a fixed $\theta$, there can be only one point $m\in A_0$ which solves this equation, otherwise we would be in case $(i)$. Thus we find $m=F(\theta)$ where $F$ is the quotient of two linear polynomials : $$m=\frac{b_g<v_h,\theta>-b_h<v_g,\theta>}{<v_h,u><v_g,\theta>-<v_g,u><v_h,\theta>}\quad (*).$$ Note that $F$ does not depend on the concrete choices of the planes $h,g$, but only on the edges $A_0,A_1$.
We prove the last point by contradiction. If we have the same equation for two edges, it means that all the lines which pass through two edges pass through the third. We claim it implies that the three edges $A_0,A_1,A_2$ are coplanar : the first case is when $A_1,A_2$ are coplanar. Then the assumption implies that the third is coplanar, contradiction. Now assume that the three edges are pairwise not coplanar. Indeed consider a first line which passes through the three edges. Call $m$ the point on $A_0$, and $u$ the direction. Now consider a line which contains $m$ and passes through $A_1$ with a different direction. Those two lines intersect $A_1$, thus $m$ and the two lines are coplanar. Since $A_2$ is not coplanar with $A_0$, both lines can not intersect $A_2$, contradiction. To finish consider the case when two edges are colinear but the third one is not colinear with either of the other two. This case can be reduced to the first case by looking at the first and third edges.
\[entrogeom\] Consider two edges $A_0,A_i$ which give the equation $m=F_i(\theta)$. Denote by $p_i$ a point on $A_i$ and $x_i$ the direction of the line $A_i$. Then we have $$F_i(\theta)=\frac{<p_i\wedge x_i,\theta>}{<u\wedge x_i,\theta>},$$ where $u$ is an unit vector colinear to the edge $A_0$.
By Lemma \[entro3eq\] each $F_i$ is the quotient of two polynomials. Consider the denominator of $F_i$ as function of $\theta$ ( we use the notations of the preceding proof). By equation $(*)$ we obtain: $$F_i(\theta)=\frac{N(\theta)}{D(\theta)},$$ $$D(\theta)= -<v_{h_i},u><v_{g_i},\theta>+<v_{g_i},u><v_{h_i},\theta>.$$ We remark for the map $F_i$ that $$-<v_{h_i},u>v_{g_i}+<v_{g_i},u>v_{h_i},$$ is orthogonal to $u$ and to $x_i$. Thus this vector is colinear to $u\wedge x_i$ : $$-<v_{h_i},u>v_{g_i}+<v_{g_i},u>v_{h_i}=C_iu\wedge x_i.$$
Consider the numerator $(b_{h_i}v_{g_i}-b_{g_i}v_{h_i},\theta)$ of $F_i$. The scalar product of $b_{h_i}v_{g_i}-b_{g_i}v_{h_i}$ with $x_i$ is null, moreover the scalar product with $p_i$ equals again zero by definition of $v_{g_i},b_{g_i},v_{h_i},b_{h_i}$. Thus we obtain : $$b_{h_i}v_{g_i}-b_{g_i}v_{h_i}=C'_ip_i\wedge x_i,$$ and : $$F(\theta)=\frac{C'_i}{C_i}\frac{<p_i\wedge x_i,\theta>}{<u\wedge x_i,\theta>}.$$ We claim that $C_i=C'_i=1$. We can choose the vectors $v_{g_i},v_{h_i}$ such that they are orthogonal and of norm 1. Then $x_i$ is colinear to $v_{g_i}\wedge v_{h_i}$ and is of norm one, thus if we choose the proper orientation of $x_i$ they are equal. Then we can have $$-<v_{h_i},u>v_{g_i}+<v_{g_i},u>v_{h_i}=u\wedge(v_{g_i}\wedge v_{h_i})=u\wedge x_i.$$ Thus we deduce $K_i'=1$.
Now we compute the norm of the vector of the numerator $|b_{h_i}v_{g_i}-b_{g_i}v_{h_i}|^2=b_{h_i}^2+b_{g_i}^2$. By definition of $b_{g_i}, b_{h_i},p_i$ we obtain $$b_{g_i}=-<v_{g_i},p_i>; b_{h_i}=-<v_{h_i},p_i>.$$ Thus we have $|b_{h_i}v_{g_i}-b_{g_i}v_{h_i}|^2=<v_{g_i}|p_i>^2+<v_{h_i}|p_i>^2$. Moreover by definition we have that $x_i=v_{g_i}\wedge v_{h_i}$ this implies that $|p_i\wedge x_i|^2=<v_{g_i},p_i>^2+<v_{h_i},p_i>^2$. Finally we deduce $$|p_i\wedge x_i|^2(C'_{i})^2=
|p_i\wedge x_i|^2.$$
\[eqdim3\] Consider three edges $A_0,A_1,A_2$ such that $dim Aff(A_i,A_j)=3$ for all $i,j$. Then the sets of lines $d$ which pass through $A_0,A_1,A_2$ is contained in a surface which we call $S(A_0,A_1,A_2)$. Consider an orthonormal basis such that the direction $u$ of $A_0$ satisfies $u=\begin{pmatrix}1\\0 \\ 0\end{pmatrix}$. If we call $(P_1,P_2,P_3)$ the coordinates of a point on this surface, then
$(i)$ the equation of the surface can be written as $P_1=f(P_2,P_3)$, where $f$ is a polynomial.
$(ii)$ there exists $N\leq 4$ such that any line which is not contained in $S$ intersects $S$ at most $N$ times.
Consider a line $d=m+\mathbb{R}\theta, m\in A_0$ which passes through $A_1,A_2$. By Lemma \[entro3eq\] we obtain two equations $m=F_i(\theta)$. Then Lemma \[entrogeom\] implies that $F_i(\theta)=\frac{\sum a_{j,i}\theta_j}{\sum_{j=2}^{3}b_{i,j}\theta_j}$. Now call $P_i$ the coordinates of a point $P$ on $d$. We have $P=m+\lambda\theta$, thus we obtain
$$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+a_2\theta_2+a_3\theta_3}{b_2\theta_2+b_3\theta_3}+\lambda\theta_1\\ P_2=\lambda
\theta_2\\ P_3=
\lambda\theta_3\\ (F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ where $a_j=a_{j,1}$ and $b_j=b_{1,j}$.\
$\bullet$ First case $P_2\neq 0$. This is equivalent to $\theta_2\neq 0$.
$$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+a_2\theta_2+a_3\theta_3}{b_2\theta_2+b_3\theta_3}+\lambda\theta_1\\ P_2=\lambda
\theta_2\\ \theta_3=\frac{P_3}
{P_2}\theta_2\\ (F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$
$$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+\theta_2(a_2+a_3\frac{P_3}{P_2})}{\theta_2(b_2+\frac{P_3}{P_2})}+
P_2\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}\\ P_2=\lambda \theta_2\\
\theta_3=\frac{P_3}{P_2}\theta_2 \\ (F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ $$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}}{(b_2+\frac{P_3}{P_2})}\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}+\frac{a_2+
a_3\frac{P_3}{P_2}}{b_2+\frac{P_3}{P_2}}+
P_2\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}\\ P_2=\lambda
\theta_2\\
\theta_3=\frac{P_3}{P_2}\theta_2 \\ (F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ $$\begin{cases}P_1=(\frac{a_{1}}{b_2P_2+P_3}+1)P_2\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}+\frac{a_2P_2+a_3P_3}{b_2P_2+P_3}\\
P_2=\lambda
\theta_2\\
\theta_3=\frac{P_3}{P_2}\theta_2 \\ (F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ Now the equation $(F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0$ can be written as $$(\sum_{j=1}^3 a_{j}\theta_j)(\sum_{j=2}^{3}b'_{j}\theta_j)=(\sum_{j=1}^3 a'_{j}\theta_j)(\sum_{j=2}^{3}b_{j}\theta_j),$$ where $a'_j=a_{j,2}$ and $b'_j=b_{2,j}$.\
$$(a_{1}\theta_1+a_{2}\theta_2+a_{3}\theta_3)(b'_{2}\theta_2+b'_{3}\theta_3)=
(a'_{1}\theta_1+a'_{2}\theta_2+a'_{3}\theta_3)(b_{2}\theta_2+b_{2}\theta_3).$$ With the equation $\theta_3=\frac{P_3}{P_2}\theta_2$ we obtain an equation of the following form.
$$\begin{gathered}
(a_1\theta_1P_2+(a_2P_2+a_3P_3)\theta_2)(b'_2P_2+b'_3P_3)=\\
(a'_1\theta_1P_2+(a'_2P_2+a'_3P_3)\theta_2)(b_2P_2+b_3P_3).\\
(a_1\theta_1/\theta_2P_2+(a_2P_2+a_3P_3))(b'_2P_2+b'_3P_3)=\\
(a'_1\theta_1/\theta_2P_2+(a'_2P_2+a'_3P_3))(b_2P_2+b_3P_3).\end{gathered}$$
Thus we obtain the value of $\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}$. $$\begin{gathered}
\theta_1/\theta_2[a_1(b'_2P_2+b'_3P_3)-a'_1(b_2P_2+b_3P_3)]P_2=\\
(a'_2P_2+a'_3P_3)(b_2P_2+b_3P_3)-(a_2P_2+a_3P_3)(b'_2P_2+b'_3P_3).\end{gathered}$$
If the coefficient of $\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}$ is null we obtain an equation of the form $P_2=KP_3$. This implies that $P$ is on a plane. It is impossible since the lines $A_i$ are non coplanar. Thus we can obtain the value of $\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_2}$. Then the first line of the system gives an equation of the form $$f(P_2, P_3)=P_1,$$ where $f$ is a homogeneous rational map of twp variables.
$\bullet$ Second case $P_2=0$. We obtain
$$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+a_3\theta_3}{b_3\theta_3}+\lambda\theta_1\\ P_3=\lambda\theta_3\\
(F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ Remark that $P_3\neq0$. Indeed if not the direction is included in $A_0$. Thus the system becomes $$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+a_3\theta_3}{b_3\theta_3}+\lambda\theta_1\\ \lambda=P_3/\theta_3\\
(F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ $$\begin{cases}P_1=\frac{a_{1}\theta_1+a_3\theta_3}{b_3\theta_3}+P_3/\theta_3\theta_1\\ P_3/\theta_3=\lambda\\
(F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0
\end{cases}$$ And the equation $(F_1-F_2)(\theta)=0$ gives as in the first case the values of $\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_3}$.
$\bullet$ Now consider a transversal line $d'$. A point on this line depends on one parameter. If the point is on the surface, the parameter verifies a polynomial equation of degree four, thus there are a bounded number of solutions.
\[entro3inde\] Consider four edges $A_0,A_1,A_2,A_3$ two by two non coplanar such that $A_3\notin S(A_0,A_1,A_2)$. Then the maps $F_1-F_2, F_1-F_3$ are linearly independent.
We make the proof by contradiction. If the maps $F_1-F_2,F_1-F_3$ are linearly dependent, it means that $F_3$ is a linear combination of $F_1,F_2$. It implies that the system $\begin{cases}m=F_1(\theta)\\m=F_2(\theta)\\m=F_3(\theta)\end{cases}$ is equivalent to $\begin{cases}m=F_1(\theta)\\m=F_2(\theta)\end{cases}$. Thus each line which passes through $A_0,A_1,A_2$ must passes through $A_3$. By preceding Lemma it implies that $A_3$ is in $S(A_0,A_1,A_2)$, contradiction.
Key point
---------
\[3Ka\] Consider a point $(m,\theta)\in \overline{E_0}$; then the set of words $v$ such that $(m,\theta)\in
\sigma_v^-$ is at most countable.
For the proof we refer to [@Ka]. This proof does not depend on the dimension.
### Definitions
For a fixed word $v\in\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)$, the set $\sigma_v^-$ is of dimension 0 or 1 and the direction $\theta$ is unique, see Lemma \[entro3gkt\]. Fix a word $v\in\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)$, we will consider several cases:
$\bullet$ First $\sigma_v^-$ is an interval with endpoints $a,b$. For any $m\in]a,b[$ we consider the set of discontinuities met in the unfolding of $(m,\theta)$. This set is independent of $m\in ]a,b[$ since $\sigma_v^-$ is an interval. We denote it $Disc(v,int)$. If the endpoint $a$ (resp. $b$) is included in the interval then the orbit of $(m,\theta)$ can meet other discontinuities. We call $Disc(v,a)$ (resp. $Disc(v,b)$) the set of those discontinuities.
$\bullet$ If $\sigma_v^-$ is a point it is the same method as $Disc(v,int)$, we denote the set of discontinuities by $Disc(v,int)$.
Here there are two sorts of discontinuities. First the singularity is a point of the boundary of a face whose code contributes to $v$. Then the orbit is not transverse to the edge. Secondly they meet in the transversal sense. If the orbit is included in an edge, then the discontinuities met are the boundary points of that edge (and similarly if the orbit is in a face).
Let $V=\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)$ and $X\subset V$ be the set of $v\in V$ such that the union of the elements $A_i$ of $Disc(v,int),Disc(v,a),Disc(v,b)$ are contained in a finite union of hyperplanes and of surfaces $S(A_0,A_1,A_2)$.
Suppose $v\in X$. Let $N(\sigma_v^-)$ be the number of planes containing $Disc(v)$ if $\sigma_v^-$ is a point or $Disc(v,a)$ or $Disc(v,b)$ if $\sigma_v^-$ is an interval.
In the following Lemma the function $L$ refers to the width of the strip of singular orbits as it does in the proof of Lemma \[lemka\].
\[entroprobpaq\] Suppose $\mu$ is an ergodic measure with support in $\Sigma \backslash\phi(E_0)$. Then
$(i)$ there exists a constant $L$ such that $L(\sigma_v^-)=L$ for $\mu$-a.e. $v\in \Sigma$ and thus for $\mu$-a.e $v,w \in \Sigma$ if $w_i = v_i$ for $i \ge 0$ then $\sigma_w = \sigma_v$.
$(ii)$ there exists a constant $N$ such that $N(\sigma_v^-)=N$ for $\mu$-a.e $v\in\Sigma$.
$(i)$ If $\sigma_v^-$ is a point then there is nothing to show. Let $L(\sigma_v^-)$ be as before. We have $L(\sigma_v^-)\leq
L(\sigma_{S(v)}^-)$. Since $S$ is ergodic, $L$ is constant almost everywhere. Thus $L(\sigma_v) = L(\sigma_v^-)$ thus $\sigma_v=\sigma_v^-$. The same holds for $w$, thus since $\sigma_w^-=\sigma_v^-$ we have $\sigma_v= \sigma_w$.
$(ii)$ We have $N(\sigma_v^-)\leq N(\sigma_{Sv}^-)$, thus the lemma follows since $S$ is ergodic.
Let $D$ stand for $Disc(v,int),Disc(v,a),\text{or}\quad Disc(v,b)$.
\[entrorem\] For two sets $A_i,A_j\in D$ the relation $dim Aff(A_i,A_j)=2$ is a transitive relation. Indeed consider three sets $A_i,A_j,A_k$ such that $A_i\sim A_j$, and $A_j\sim A_k$. Since the line $m+\mathbb{R}\theta$ passes through $A_i,A_j,A_k$, we deduce $A_i\sim A_k$.
Then we can show
\[entroscruc\] The set $V\setminus X$ is at most countable.
Let $v\in V$. Lemma \[entro3eq\] implies that we have for each pair of discontinuities an equation $m=F(\theta)$ or $f(\theta)=0$. Denote the set $D$ by $A_0,\dots,A_n,\dots$. Either there exist discontinuities $A_{i_0},A_{i_1},A_{i_2},A_{i_3}$, such that the equations related to $(A_{i_0},A_{i_j})$, for all $j\leq 3$, are of the form $m=F(\theta)$ or not. In the following we will assume, for simplicity, that these three discontinuities (if they exist) are denoted by $A_0,A_1,A_2,A_3$.
$\bullet$ First assume it is not the case. Then for any subset of $D\setminus\{A_0,A_1,A_2,A_3\}$ two elements give equations of the form $f(\theta)=0$. By Remark \[entrorem\] all the discontinuities in the set $D\setminus\{A_0,A_1,A_2,A_3\}$ are in a single hyperplane. Thus all the discontinuities of $D$ are in a finite union of hyperplanes. We do the same thing for $Disc(v,a)$ and $Disc(v,b)$. We conclude $v\in X$.
$\bullet$ Now we treat the case where we obtain at least three equations of the form $m=F(\theta)$ for some choice of $(m,\theta)$.
Corollary \[entro3inde\] shows that two such equations are different since the discontinuities are not in the union of surfaces. Thus consider the three first equations $m=F(\theta)=G(\theta)=H(\theta)$. It gives two equations $(F-G)(\theta)=(F-H)(\theta)=0$. Those two equations are different by Corollary \[entro3inde\], since $F,G,H$ are different. We deduce that the direction $\theta$ is solution of a system of two independant equations, thus it is unique. We remark that the vertices which appear in unfolding have their coordinates in a countable set $\mathcal{C}$. Indeed we start from a finite number of points corresponding to the vertices and at each step of the unfolding we reflect them over some faces of $P$. Thus at each step there are a finite set of vertices. Moreover the coefficients of the edges are obtained by difference of coordinates of vertices. By the same argument the coefficients of cartesian equations of the hyperplanes which contains faces live in a countable set $\mathcal{C}$. There are only a countable collection of functions $m=F(\theta)$ which arise. Thus the solution $\theta$ corresponding to the equations $m=F(\theta)=G(\theta)=H(\theta)$ lives in a countable set. It determines $(m,\theta)$. The number of words associated to the orbit of $(m,\theta)$ is countable by Lemma \[3Ka\]. Thus the set of such words is countable.
Proof of Theorem \[entro\]
==========================
\[3entrosur\] Suppose that $\mu$ is an ergodic measure supported in $\Sigma \backslash \phi(E_0)$ such that $\mu(X) = 1$. Then $h_{\mu}(S) = 0$.
By Lemma \[entroprobpaq\] we can assume there is a constant $L \ge 0$ such that $L(\sigma_v^-) = L$. Suppose first that $L > 0$. Suppose $v \in \hbox{support}(\mu)$. This implies that $Disc(v,int)$ is contained in a single plane. If $w \in \hbox{support}(\mu)$ satisfies $w_i = v_i$ for $i \ge 0$ then $Disc(w,int)$ is contained in the same plane. Each trajectory in $\phi(E_0)$ which approximates the future of $v$ cuts this plane in a single point. Consider these sequence of approximating trajectories which converges to $(m,\theta)$. The limit of these trajectories cuts the surface at one (or zero) points. The point where it cuts the surface determines the backwards unfolding, and thus the backwards code. Thus if we ignore for the moment the boundary discontinuities the knowing the future $v_0,v_1,v_2,\dots$ determines $O(n)$ choices of the past $v_{-n},\dots,v_{-1}$.
The boundary discontinuities and the case $L(\sigma_v^-) = 0$ are treated analogously. Let $(m,\theta) = \sigma_v^-$ (or one of the boundary points of $\sigma_v^-$ in the case above). By Lemma \[entroprobpaq\] we can assume that $Disc(v,m)$ is contained in $N$ planes, and that if $w \in \hbox{support}(\mu)$ satisfies $w_i
= v_i$ for $i \ge 0$ then $Disc(w,int)$ is contained in the same planes. Arguing as above, the point where an approximating orbit cuts these planes determines the past. Thus the future $v_0,v_1,v_2,\dots$ determines $O(n^N)$ choices of the past $v_{-n},\dots,v_{-1}$. Since $\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\frac{\log{n^N}}{n}=0$ we deduce the result.
The preceding lemma and proposition allow to conclude
\[supmes2\] Let $\mu$ an ergodic measure with support in $\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)$, then $$h_{\mu}(S)=0.$$
This follows immediately from Lemma \[3entrosur\] and Proposition \[entroscruc\].
Lemma \[entrodef\] reduces the problem to the computation of $h_{top}(S|\Sigma)$. Moreover we have $$h_{top}(S|\Sigma)=\sup_{\substack{\mu \\ ergo, \\
supp(\mu)\subset\phi(E_0)}}h_{\mu}(S|\Sigma)+\sup_{\substack{\mu \\ ergo, \\
supp(\mu)\subset\Sigma\setminus\phi(E_0)}}h_{\mu}(S|\Sigma),$$ then Corollaries \[supmes1\] and \[supmes2\] imply: $$h_{top}(S|\Sigma)=0.$$
[^1]: Laboratoire d’Analyse Topologie et Probabilités UMR 7353 , Université Aix Marseille, avenue escadrille Normandie Niemen 13397 Marseille cedex 20, France. [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- '[^1]'
title: Hadron modification in a dense baryonic matter
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
Current and future experiments focus on observables which are sensitive to QGP phase transition, especially to the range of the phase diagram which close the critical point. Observables indicating non-monotonic and unexpected (from theoretical point of view) behavior of emitted particles are particularly important.
[r]{}[0.4]{} {width="40.00000%"}
\[horn\]
In this way the study of the strange particle production in heavy ion collisions is promising as they could serve a good diagnostic tool to investigate the properties of nuclear matter under extreme conditions. The systematic study of hadron production in central Pb+Pb collisions at SPS performed by NA49 collaboration revealed a sharp structure in energy dependence of positive kaon to pion multiplicity ratio, $K^{+}/\pi^{+}$ [@horn-SPS]. That peculiarity, called “horn”–effect, was later confirmed by Beam Energy Scan (BES) program of STAR collaboration at RHIC [@horn-STAR] (Fig. \[horn\]). At the same time there were no any peculiarities observed in the energetic behaviour of $K^{-}/\pi^{-}$ ratio. The idea that strangeness is a good signal of deconfinement was put forward by J. Rafelski in 1982 [@Rafelski]. The argument was the following: it is energetically favourable to produce $s\overline{s}$ - pairs in deconfined medium than a pairs strange hadrons in hadron gas. Interpretation of the non–monotonic structure of $K^{+}/\pi^{+}$ has initiated intense theoretical activity. Authors attempted to reproduce the horn structure employing approaches either with phase transition to QGP or without it. “Horn” – like structure has been predicted in Ref. [@gasd], as a manifestation of phase transition between thermalized hadronic and partonic phases. Albeit a variety of models, statistical [@hrgm1; @hrgm2; @hrgm3; @hrg-Hag] and kinetic [@nayak; @tomas] (with or without deconfinement) have been proposed for interpretation of “horn” structure its satisfactory understanding is still not complete.
[r]{}[0.4]{} {width="40.00000%"}
\[dilep\]
Another promising observable is a yield of dileptons. Dileptons are an ideal probe to study the properties of hot and dense nuclear matter, since they are emitted at different stages of reaction and escape the medium nearly unperturbed. They allow unique access to the properties both of the medium and resonances that decay within a strongly interacting medium. Measurements of emission of dielectrons in different nuclear reactions at wide range of collision energy revealed an enhancement of invariant mass spectra of di-leptons yield in the interval 0.2 - 0.6 GeV [@di1; @di2; @di3] (Fig. \[dilep\]). This enhancement was interpreted as in-medium modifications of hadrons at high temperature and density resulting in strong broadening of the $\rho$–meson and/or its“mass–dropping” [@leo; @hay; @bratkov]. We propose our interpretation of the observed phenomena using for this purpose the Strongly Correlated Quark Model, SCQM, developed by the author [@Mus0].
The model {#sec-1}
=========
The real physical vacuum, the energy of which is below the “empty” perturbative vacuum, is populated by gluon and quark–antiquark condensates. Imagine hypothetically a single quark of a certain color embedded in the physical vacuum. The color field of the quark polarizes the surrounding vacuum creating a condensate. At the same time it experiences the pressure of the vacuum, as a reaction on the ordering, because of the presence of quantum fluctuations of gluon and quark–antiquark fields, or zero point radiation field in a classical sense. Suppose we place a corresponding antiquark in the vicinity of the first quark. Owing to their opposite signs, color polarization fields of the quark and antiquark interfere destructively in the overlap regions eliminating each other maximally at the middle-point between them. This effect leads to a decreasing value of the condensate density in that region and overbalancing of the isotropic vacuum pressure acting on the quark and antiquark. As a result, an attractive force between the quark and antiquark emerges and the quark and antiquark start to move towards each other. The density of the remaining condensate around the quark (antiquark) is identified with the hadronic matter distribution which is associated with a dynamical mass of the quark. At maximum displacement in the $\overline{q}q$ system corresponding to small overlap of color fields, hadronic matter distributions have maximum extent and densities. The quark (antiquark) in this state possesses a constituent mass. The closer they come each other, the larger is the destructive interference effect and the smaller hadronic matter distributions around quarks and the larger their kinetic energies. In this state the quark (antiquark) becomes relativistic with a current mass. So, the quark and antiquark start to oscillate around their middle-point. For such interacting $\overline{q}q$ pair located from each other on a distance $2x$, the total Hamiltonian is
$$H=\frac{m_{\overline{q}}}{(1-\beta ^{2})^{1/2}}+\frac{m_{q}}{(1-\beta
^{2})^{1/2}}+V_{\overline{q}q}(2x),$$
where $m_{\overline{q}}$, $m_{q}$ are the current masses of the valence antiquark and quark, $\beta =\beta (x)$ is their velocity depending on displacement $x$, and $V_{\overline{q}q}$ is the quark–antiquark potential energy with separation $2x.$ It can be rewritten as $$H=\left[ \frac{m_{\overline{q}}}{(1-\beta ^{2})^{1/2}}+U(x)\right] +\left[
\frac{m_{q}}{(1-\beta ^{2})^{1/2}}+U(x)\right] =H_{\overline{q}}+H_{q},
\label{hamil}$$where $U(x)=\frac{1}{2}V_{\overline{q}q}(2x)$ is the potential energy of the quark or antiquark. We postulate that the potential energy of quark is equal to its dynamical mass: $$2U(x)=\int_{-\infty }^{\infty }dz^{\prime }\int_{-\infty }^{\infty
}dy^{\prime }\int_{-\infty }^{\infty }dx^{\prime }\rho (x,{\mathbf{r}%
^{\prime }})\approx 2M_{Q}(x)
\label{poten-mass}$$with $$\rho (x,\mathbf{r}^{\prime })=c\left| \varphi (x,\mathbf{r}^{\prime })\right|
^{2}=c\left| \varphi _{Q}(x^{\prime }+x,y^{\prime },z^{\prime })-\varphi _{%
\overline{Q}}(x^{\prime }-x,y^{\prime },z^{\prime })\right| ^{2}.
\label{color-field}$$ where $\rho$ is the resulting density of hadronic matter (quark-antiquark condensate) formed by color fields $\varphi$ and $\varphi _{\overline{Q}}$ of the quark and antiquark, respectively. The the structure and shape of vacuum polarization around the color quark/antiquark which could give us the information about the confining potential is not known.
It turnes out that our quark–antiquark system behaves similarly to the breather solution of one–dimensional Sine-Gordon equation [@Raja] which in scaled form reads $$\Box \phi (x,t)+\sin \phi (x,t)=0,$$ where $\phi(x,t)$ is a scalar function and $x$ and $t$ are dimensionless. It has a so-called [*breather*]{} solution $$\phi(x,t)_{br}=4\arctan \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-w^{2}}\sin(wt)}{w\cosh(\sqrt{1-w^{2}x})}\right),$$ which is the periodic soliton–antisoliton solution for frequencies $w<1$. The energy density profile of the soliton–antisoliton system $$\varphi(x,t)_{br}=d\phi(x,t)_{br}/dx$$ oscillate the same way as our quark–antiquark system. W. Troost [@troost] demonstrated that the Hamiltonian (\[hamil\]) corresponds to the breather (soliton–antisoliton) solution of Sine-Gornon equation. He derived the effective potential $U(x)$ for this solution $$U(x)=M\tanh ^{2}(\alpha x),
\label{poten}$$ where $M$ is a mass of soliton/antisoliton and $\alpha$ is an adjusting parameter. Hence, we can identify our potential of quark–antiquark interaction in hamiltonian (\[hamil\]) with the potential of soliton–antisoliton interaction.
Since quarks are the members of the fundamental color triplet, generalization to the 3-quark system (baryons, composed of Red, Green and Blue quarks) is performed according to $SU(3)_{color}$ symmetry: a pair of quarks has coupled representations $3\otimes 3=6\oplus \overline{3}$ and for quarks within the same baryon only the $\overline{3}$ (antisymmetric) representation is realized. Hence, an antiquark can be replaced by two correspondingly colored quarks to get a color singlet baryon; destructive interference takes place between color fields of three valence quarks (VQs). Putting aside the mass and charge differences of valence quarks one can consider three quarks oscillating synchronously along the bisectors of equilateral triangle turning from the constituent to current state and inversely. Therefore, the model unifies the features of bag models and constituent models. At a maximal displacement quark becomes nonrelativistic with constituent mass corresponding to the maximal value of condensate surrounding it. Further, owing to the prevailing condensate pressure from the outside, it moves under influence of the potential (\[poten\]) (see Fig. \[pot-force\]a) towards two other quarks, and at the origin of oscillation it becomes relativistic with the current mass. Thus, during oscillation quarks transit from constituent states to current states that corresponds to dynamical chiral symmetry braking and restoration. Important feature of the model is that there is no a confining potential/force inside a nucleon. During oscillations (putting aside Coulomb and spin interactions) the interaction force between quarks vanishes both at the origin of oscillation and at a maximal displacement (Fig. \[pot-force\]b). It becomes maximal in between the origin and maximal displacement. Thus, at the origin of oscillations quark and antiquark in mesons and three quarks in baryons do not interact, i.e. they are in the state of asymptotic freedom. As to real confining potential, it should act at distances exceeding hadronic radii. Apparently, “imprisonment” of quarks is a consequence of the topological nature of hadrons. Hereinafter we assume that the quark–antiquark describing mesons and three quark systems describing baryons are topological solitons. Topological solitons are characterized by the conserving numbers, so–called, winding numbers. For baryons a winding number is identified with the baryonic number. It means that at any temperature and density of nuclear environment baryon conserves its identity and baryonic number.
{width="4.5in"}
\[pot-force\]
The model meets the local gauge invariance. Indeed, suppose $\psi_{color}$ is a wave function of a single quark in color space where index [*color*]{} accepts one of the values Red, Green, Blue. Interactions of of R, G, and B quarks in a nucleon which result in their oscillations can be reduced to the phase rotation the wave function $\psi_{color}$ of each quark in color space $$\psi_{color}(x) \rightarrow e^{i\theta(x)}\psi_{color}(x).
\label{psi_col}$$ This phase rotation results in dressing (undressing) of the quark by quark/qluon condensate that can be linked with transformation of the gauge field $A^{\mu}$: $$A^{\mu}(x) \rightarrow A^{\mu}(x)+\partial^{\mu}\theta(x).
\label{gauge-eq}$$ Here we dropped color indices $A^{\mu}_{a}(x) \rightarrow A^{\mu}(x)$ since interactions of color quarks via non–Abelian fields of QCD in our model are reduced to its electrodynamical analog $$F^{\mu\nu}_{a}=\partial^{\mu}A^{\nu}_{a}-\partial^{\nu}A^{\mu}_{a}-\lambda f^{abc}A^{\mu}_{b}A^{\nu}_{c} \rightarrow F^{\mu\nu}=\partial^{\mu}A^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}A^{\mu}.
\label{Field}$$
The parameters of the model are the maximum displacement of valence quark and antiquark in mesons and 3 quarks in baryons, $x_{\max }$, and the parameters of the hadronic matter distribution formed by quark–antiquark condensate around them. In the absence of knowledge about the shape of quark–antiquark condensate around valence quarks, or the form of hadronic matter in a constituent quark $\varphi_{Q(\overline{Q})}$, we take it in a gaussian form $$\varphi _{Q(\overline{Q})}(x,y,z)=\varphi _{Q(\overline{Q})}(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3})=%
\frac{(\det \hat{A})^{1/2}}{(\pi )^{3/2}}\exp \left( -\mathbf{X}^{T}\hat{A}%
\mathbf{X}\right) ,
\label{gaussian}$$ where the exponent is written in a quadratic form.
The value of the maximal quark (antiquark) displacement, and parameters of the gaussian function for hadronic matter distribution around VQ are chosen to be $x_{\max }=0.64\ $[fm]{}$,\ \sigma _{x,y}=0.24\ $[fm]{}$,\ \sigma
_{z}=0.12\ $[fm]{}$.$ They are adjusted by comparison of calculated and experimental values of the total, inelastic and differential cross sections for $pp$ and $\overline{p}p$ collisions [Mus2]{}. The mass of the constituent quark at maximum displacement is taken as $%
M_{Q(\overline{Q})}(x_{\max })=\frac{1}{3}\left( \frac{m_{\Delta }+m_{N}}{2}%
\right) \approx 360\ $[MeV]{}$,$ where $m_{\Delta }$ and $m_{N}$ are masses of the delta isobar and nucleon correspondingly. The current mass of the valence quark is taken to be $5\ $[MeV]{}.
Hadron properties in heavy ion collisions {#sec-2}
=========================================
In head–on collisions of two heavy ion nuclei the energy density in the overlap zone increases drastically. The time of “crossing” two symmetric nuclei through each other when they cease to overlap is $t_{cross}=2R/\gamma$, where $R$ is the rest–frame radius of the nucleus. Excited baryons and secondaries created in the overlap zone can be considered “formed” at some proper time $\tau_{form}$ which is $\sim$ 1 fm/c. At low and moderate collision energies where $\tau_{form} < t_{cross}$ particle production and their interactions take place mainly in the overlap zone with high baryonic density. At very high collision energies, once the remnants of Lorenz–contracted disks recede after their initial overlap, the region between them is occupied by a hot and dense “fireball” of interacting secondaries characterized by low baryonic density. The general point of view claims that the hadronic matter at these conditions undergoes the phase transition to quark gluon plasma where quarks become deconfined and the chiral symmetry is restored. Being based on the above model of nucleon structure we offer other scenario. We start with low and intermediate collision energies, when $\tau_{form} < t_{cross}$. In the initial stage of collision of nuclei, due to propagation through each other and their Lorenz contraction, the baryonic density in the overlap zone increases more than twice. Correspondingly, the accessible volume occupied by each nucleon composed of light quarks is reduced, at least, more than twice. As a result of accessible volume reduction, the vacuum condensate around the valence quarks decreases that, in turn, leads to reduction of the dynamic mass of quarks and amplitude of oscillation, as shown in Fig. \[poten-mod\]. Further compression of nuclear matter could lead to a collapse of nucleons. To avoid collapsing it is preferable to nucleons to transit to delta–isobars and their excited states: $p, n \rightarrow \triangle, \triangle^{\ast}$... Parallel alignment of spins of all three quarks leads to their repulsion (according to Pauli principle) that could prevent the collapsing process. Therefore, there should be a limit of accessible volume reduction which can be specified as a “hard-core” of delta isobars and their excited states. However, at higher compression this mechanism is not sufficient because the cores of light quarks need to occupy relatively large volume. Moreover, at higher compression it is preferable for nucleons to be converted to hyperons, as their dimensions/cores are small compared with cores of deltas. This transition of nucleons to hyperons can be described in the framework of $^{0}P_{3}-$model of vacuum. In a compression zone the production of $s\overline{s}-$pairs should be dominating in the content of condensate. $s-$quarks of the pairs replace one or more of $d/u-$quarks of the nucleons, and $\overline{s}-$quarks form with those replaced quarks strange mesons: $p,n\longrightarrow hyperons+kaons$. In these transition channels the $K^{+}$s and $K^{0}$s, but any $K^{-}$ are produced only [@Mus4]. At higher compression the production of heavier resonances with all three quark spins aligned parallel should be dominating. However, the transition mechanism works if the “crossing” time, $t_{cross}$, is larger than formation time, $\tau_{form}$. With increasing collision energy $t_{cross}$ becomes very short, and the Lorenz-contracted disks with excited baryons fly away leaving behind the hot and dense fireball with a low baryonic chemical potential. Hence, at $\tau_{form} > t_{cross}$ the transition mechanism ceases to work. As demonstrated in [@Mus4], this mechanism can result in the non–monotonic behavior of the $K^{+}/\pi^{+}-$ratio, the “horn”–effect observed in the experiments. Obviously, this mechanism is additional to the particle production while nuclei propagate through each other. Among produced particles, according to the above arguments, the production of baryon resonances and vector mesons should be dominating.
[r]{}[0.4]{} {width="40.00000%"}
\[poten-mod\]
At essentially high energies the flying away excited remnants of colliding nuclei leave behind them a highly compressed fireball with a low composition of baryons. Its evolution starting with multiparticle production leads to its heating and thermalization and at the last stages to its expansion. Again, since the nuclear matter inside the fireball is highly compressed the production of pions composed of light $u$ and $d$ quarks in pseudoscalar state is suppressed, and vector mesons, $\rho, \omega, \phi$, and heavier mass resonances will be dominating in the composition of fireball. At the same time there should be essential modification of the features of mesons composed of light quarks ($\rho, \omega$) in a compressed medium. Because of reduction of available volume and, correspondingly, decreasing of condensates around quarks, the masses of these mesons will be depending on the compression value or medium density (Fig. \[poten-mod\]). What follows from our model, the more particle density is inside the fireball, the less is the mass of (vector) mesons produced. Without knowing the parameters of fireball we can be express this dependence as $$m^{*}=m_{0}(1-\alpha \rho/\rho_{0})^{\beta},
\label{mass-drop}$$ where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are adjustable parameters. In hadronic channels the vector mesons can decay up to the threshold, 2$m_{\pi}$. In dilepton decay mode the threshould continues down to 2$m_{e}$. Therefore, in the framework of our approach, the enhancement of spectral functions of vector mesons (Fig. \[dilep\]) can be explained by domination of their production and mass dropping. Moreover, the mass dropping effect can be accompanied by the resonance decay width dependence $$\Gamma_{R}\sim\Gamma_{R}^{0} (\rho/\rho_{0})^{\gamma},
\label{width-broad}$$ which results in increasing lifetime of resonances $\tau=1/\Gamma_{R}^{0}$. Both effects leads to suppression of multiparticle production in a hot and dense medium. During the expansion of fireball, accompanied simultaneously by its cooling, the physical vacuum inside it is restored, that leads to restoration of hadron features.
Analyzing the “horn”-effect and the enhancement of invariant mass spectra of dielectrons in the framework of proposed model, SCQM, we demonstrate that baryons and mesons in a hot and dense medium are essentially modified.
[88]{}
S. V. Afanasiev et al., Phys.Rev. **C66**, 054902 (2002); C. Alt et al., Phys. Rev. **C77**, 024903 (2008).
L. Kumar (STAR Collaboration), J. Phys. G:Nucl. Part. Phys. **38**, 124145 (2011).
J. Rafelski, Phys. Rep. **88**, 331 (1982).
M. Gazdzicki and M. Gorenstein, Acta. Phys. Pol. **B30**, 2705 (1999).
J. Cleymans, H. Oeschler, K. Redlich, and S. Wheaton, Phys.Lett. **B615** , 50 (2005).
A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger and J. Stachel, Nucl.Phys. **A834**, 237C (2010).
K.A. Bugaev et al., arXiv:1412.6571v2 (2014).
S. Chatterjee et al. Phys. Rev. **C81**, 044907 (2010).
J.K. Nayak et al., Acta Phys. Slov. **56**, 27 (2005).
B. Tomasik and E.E. Kolomeitsev, Eur. Phys. J. **C49**, 115 (2007).
G. Agakishiev et al. (HADES Collab.), Phys. Lett. B663, 43 (2008).
D. Adamova et al., (CERES Collab.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 152301 (2006).
A. Adare et al. (PHENIX Collab.), Phys. Rev. C 81, 034911 (2010)
S. Leupold, V. Metag, and U. Mosel, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E19, 147 (2010).
R. S. Hayano and T. Hatsuda, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2949 (2010).
E. Bratkovskaya, Nucl. Phys. **A931**, 194 (2014).
G. Musulmanbekov in *Frontiers of Fundamental Physics*, Kluwer Acad./Plenum Pub., New York, 2001, p. 109–120.
R. Rajaraman, [*Phys. Rep.*]{} [**21C**]{}, 229 (1975).
W. Troost, CERN Report TH.2105-CERN, 1975 (unpublished).
G. Musulmanbekov, Phys. Atom. Nucl. **67** 89 (2004).
G. Musulmanbekov, 03007, Eur. Phys. Jour., EDP Sciences, 138, 2100-014X, (2017).
[^1]:
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'ICD coding is a process of assigning the **I**nternational **C**lassification of **D**isease diagnosis codes to clinical/medical notes documented by health professionals (e.g. clinicians). This process requires significant human resources, and thus is costly and prone to error. To handle the problem, machine learning has been utilized for *automatic* ICD coding. Previous state-of-the-art models were based on convolutional neural networks, using a single/several fixed window sizes. However, the lengths and interdependence between text fragments related to ICD codes in clinical text vary significantly, leading to the difficulty of deciding what the best window sizes are. In this paper, we propose a new label attention model for automatic ICD coding, which can handle both the various lengths and the interdependence of the ICD code related text fragments. Furthermore, as the majority of ICD codes are not frequently used, leading to the extremely imbalanced data issue, we additionally propose a hierarchical joint learning mechanism extending our label attention model to handle the issue, using the hierarchical relationships among the codes. Our label attention model achieves new state-of-the-art results on three benchmark MIMIC datasets, and the joint learning mechanism helps improve the performances for infrequent codes.'
author:
- Thanh Vu$^1$
- |
Dat Quoc Nguyen$^2$Anthony Nguyen$^1$\
$^1$Australian e-Health Research Centre, CSIRO, Brisbane, Australia\
$^2$VinAI Research, Hanoi, Vietnam\
bibliography:
- 'ijcai20.bib'
title: A Label Attention Model for ICD Coding from Clinical Text
---
Introduction
============
International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is the global health care classification system consisting of metadata codes.[^1] ICD coding is the process of assigning codes representing diagnoses and procedures performed during a patient visit using the patient’s visit data, such as the clinical/medical notes documented by health professionals. ICD codes can be used for both clinical research and healthcare purposes, such as for epidemiological studies and billing of services [@o2005measuring; @nguyen2018computer].
Manual ICD coding performed by clinical coders relies on manual inspections and experience-based judgment. The effort required for coding is thus labor and time intensive and prone to human errors [@o2005measuring; @nguyen2018computer]. As a result, machine learning has been utilized to help automate the ICD coding process. This includes both conventional machine learning [@perotte2013diagnosis; @koopman2015automatic] and deep learning [@karimi2017automatic; @prakash2017condensed; @baumel2018multi; @mullenbach2018; @wang2018joint; @song2019generalized; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn]. Automatic ICD coding is challenging due to the large number of available codes, e.g. $\sim$17,000 in ICD-9-CM and $\sim$140,000 in ICD-10-CM/PCS,[^2] and the problem of highly long tailed codes, in which some codes are frequently used but the majority may only have a few instances due to the rareness of diseases [@song2019generalized; @xie2019ehr]. Previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) models on the benchmark MIMIC datasets [@lee2011open; @johnson2016mimic] were based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with single or several fixed window sizes [@mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn]. However, the lengths and interdependence of text fragments in clinical documentation related to ICD codes can vary significantly. For example, to identify the ICD code “V10.46: Personal history of malignant neoplasm of prostate” from the clinical text “…*past medical history* asthma/copd, htn, …*prostate cancer*…”, we need to highlight both the “past medical history” and “prostate cancer” fragments which are far from each other in the text. Although densely connected CNN [@xie2019ehr] and multi-filter based CNN [@li2020multirescnn] could handle the different sizes of a *single* text fragment, selecting optimal window sizes of the CNN-based models for interdependent fragments with different lengths is .
#### Our contributions.
As the *first contribution*, we propose a label attention model for ICD coding which can handle the various lengths as well as the interdependence between text fragments related to ICD codes. In our model, a bidirectional Long-Short Term Memory (BiLSTM) encoder is utilized to capture contextual information across input words in a clinical note. A new label attention mechanism is proposed by extending the structured self-attention mechanism [@lin2017] to learn label-specific vectors that represent the important clinical text fragments relating to certain labels. Each label-specific vector is used to build a binary classifier for a given label. As the *second contribution*, we additionally propose a hierarchical joint learning mechanism that extends our label attention model to handle the highly imbalanced data problem, using the hierarchical structure of the ICD codes. As our *final contribution*, we extensively evaluate our models on three standard benchmark MIMIC datasets [@lee2011open; @johnson2016mimic], which are widely used in automatic ICD coding research [@perotte2013diagnosis; @prakash2017condensed; @mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn]. Experimental results show that our model obtains the new SOTA performance results across evaluation metrics. In addition, our joint learning mechanism helps improve the performances for infrequent codes.
Related Work
============
Automatic ICD coding has been an active research topic in the healthcare domain for more than two decades [@larkey1996combining; @de1998hierarchical]. Many conventional machine learning and deep learning approaches have been explored to automatically assign ICD codes on clinical text data, in which the coding problem is formulated as a multi-label classification problem [@perotte2013diagnosis; @koopman2015automatic; @karimi2017automatic; @shi2017towards; @mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn].
@larkey1996combining proposed an ensemble approach combining three feature-based classifiers (i.e., K nearest neighbors, relevance feedback, and Bayesian independence) to assign ICD-9 codes to inpatient discharge summaries. They found that combining the classifiers performed much better than individual ones. @de1998hierarchical utilized the cosine similarity between the medical discharge summary and the ICD code description to build the classifier which assigns codes with the highest similarities to the summary. They also proposed a hierarchical model by utilizing the hierarchical relationships among the codes. Similarly, @perotte2013diagnosis explored support vector machine (SVM) to build flat and hierarchical ICD code classifiers and applied to discharge summaries from the MIMIC-II dataset [@lee2011open]. Apart from discharge summaries, @koopman2015automatic proposed a hierarchical model of employing SVM to assign cancer-related ICD codes to death certificates. @karimi2017automatic utilized classification methods for ICD coding from radiology reports. Deep learning models have been proposed to handle the task recently. @shi2017towards employed character-level LSTM to learn the representations of specific subsections from discharge summaries and the code description. They then applied an attention mechanism to address the mismatch between the subsections and corresponding codes. @wang2018joint proposed a joint embedding model, in which the labels and words are embedded into the same vector space and the cosine similarity between them is used to predict the labels. @mullenbach2018 proposed a convolutional attention model for ICD coding from clinical text (e.g. discharge summaries). The model is the combination of a single filter CNN and label-dependent attention. @xie2019ehr improved the convolutional attention model [@mullenbach2018] by using densely connected CNN and multi-scale feature attention. Graph convolutional neural network [@KipfW16] was employed as the model regularization to capture the hierarchical relationships among the codes. @li2020multirescnn later proposed a multi-filter residual CNN combining a multi-filter convolutional layer and a residual convolutional layer to improve the convolutional attention model [@mullenbach2018]. See Section \[ssec:bl\] of baseline models for additional information.
Approach
========
In this section, we first describe our new **la**bel **at**tention model (namely, **LAAT**) for ICD coding from clinical text. As most of ICD codes do not frequently occur in clinical text data [@koopman2015automatic; @xie2019ehr],[^3] we additionally propose a hierarchical joint learning mechanism to improve the performance of predicting less-frequent ICD codes.
We treat this ICD coding task as a multi-label classification problem [@mccallum1999multi]. Following @mullenbach2018 , our objective is to train $|\textbf{L}|$ binary classifiers (here, $\textbf{L}$ is the ICD code set), in which each classifier is to determine the value of $y_j \in \{0, 1\}$, the $j^{th}$ label in $\textbf{L}$ given an input text.
Our Label Attention Model {#ssec:labelatten}
-------------------------
![Architecture of our label attention model which contains an embbedding layer, a Bidirectional LSTM layer, a label attention layer and an output layer.[]{data-label="fig:ALAM"}](ALAM_FFN.pdf)
Figure \[fig:ALAM\] illustrates the architecture of our proposed label attention model. Overall, the model consists of four layers. The first layer is an embedding layer in which pretrained word embeddings are employed to produce embedding vectors of tokens in the input clinical text. The second layer is a bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network producing latent feature representations of all the input tokens. Given these latent representations, the third layer is an attention one producing label-specific weight vectors each representing the whole input text. The last layer consists of label-specific binary classifiers on top of the corresponding label-specific vectors. Each classifier uses a single feed-forward network (FFNN) to predict whether a certain ICD code is assigned to the input text or not.
### Embedding Layer
Assume that a clinical document $D$ consists of $n$ word tokens $w_1, w_2, ..., w_i, ..., w_n$. We represent each $i^{th}$ token $w_i$ in $D$ by a pre-trained word embedding $\boldsymbol{e}_{w_i}$ having the same embedding size of $d_e$.
### Bidirectional LSTM Layer
We use a BiLSTM architecture to capture contextual information across input words in $D$. In particular, we use the BiLSTM to learn latent feature vectors representing input words from a sequence $\boldsymbol{e}_{w_1:w_n}$ of vectors $\boldsymbol{e}_{w_1}, \boldsymbol{e}_{w_2}, ..., \boldsymbol{e}_{w_n}$. We compute the hidden states of the LSTMs corresponding to the $i^{th}$ word ($i\in \{1,\ldots, n\}$) as: $$\begin{aligned}
\overrightarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i} &= \overrightarrow{\text{LSTM}}(\boldsymbol{e}_{w_1:w_i}) \\
\overleftarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i} &= \overleftarrow{\text{LSTM}}(\boldsymbol{e}_{w_i:w_n})\end{aligned}$$ where $\overrightarrow{\text{LSTM}}$ and $\overleftarrow{\text{LSTM}}$ denote forward and backward LSTMs, respectively. Two vectors $\overrightarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i}$ and $\overleftarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i}$ are then concatenated to formulate the final latent vector $\boldsymbol{h}_i$:
$$\boldsymbol{h}_i = \overrightarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i} \oplus \overleftarrow{\boldsymbol{h}_i}$$
The dimensionality of the LSTM hidden states is set to $u$, resulting in the size of the latent vectors $\boldsymbol{h}_i$ at $2u$. All the hidden state vectors of words in $D$ are concatenated to formulate a matrix $\textbf{H} = [\boldsymbol{h}_1, \boldsymbol{h}_2, ..., \boldsymbol{h}_n] \in \mathbb{R}^{2u \times n}$.
### Attention Layer
As the clinical documents have different lengths and each document has multi-labels, our goal is to transform **H** into label-specific vectors. We achieve that goal by proposing a label attention mechanism. Our label attention mechanism takes **H** as the input and output $|\textbf{L}|$ label-specific vectors representing the input document $D$. First, we compute the label-specific weight vectors as: $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{Z} &= \mathrm{tanh}(\textbf{W}\textbf{H}) \\
\textbf{A} &= \mathrm{softmax}(\textbf{UZ}) \end{aligned}$$
Here, **W** is a matrix $\in \mathbb{R}^{d_a \times 2u}$, in which $d_a$ is a hyperparameter to be tuned with the model, resulting in a matrix $\textbf{Z} \in \mathbb{R}^{d_a \times n}$. The matrix **Z** is used to multiply with a matrix $\textbf{U} \in \mathbb{R}^{|\textbf{L}| \times d_a}$ to compute the label-specific weight matrix $\textbf{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{ |\textbf{L}| \times n}$, in which each $i^{th}$ row of **A** refers to as a weight vector regarding the $i^{th}$ label in $\textbf{L}$. $\mathrm{softmax}$ is applied at the row level to ensure that the summation of weights in each row is equal to 1. After that, the attention weight matrix **A** is then multiplied with the hidden state matrix **H** to produce the label-specific vectors representing the input document $D$ as:
$$\textbf{V} = \textbf{HA}^{\top}$$
Each $i^{th}$ column $\textbf{v}_i$ of the matrix $\textbf{V} \in \mathbb{R}^{2u \times |\textbf{L}|}$ is a representation of $D$ regarding the $i^{th}$ label in $\textbf{L}$.
### Output Layer
For each label-specific representation $\textbf{v}_i$, we pass it as input to a corresponding single-layer feed-forward network (FFNN) with a one-node output layer followed by a $\mathrm{sigmoid}$ activation function to produce the probability of the $i^{th}$ label given the document. Here, the probability is then used to predict the binary output $\in \{0, 1\}$ using a predefined threshold, such as 0.5. The training objective is to minimize the binary cross-entropy loss between the predicted label $\overline{y}$ and the target $y$ as: $$\mathrm{Loss}(D, y, \theta) = \sum_{j=1}^{|\textbf{L}|}y_j\log\overline{y}_j + (1 - y_j)\log(1 - \overline{y}_j)$$
Where $\theta$ denotes all the trainable parameters.
### Discussion
Our attention layer can be viewed as an extension of the structured self-attention mechanism proposed by @lin2017 for the multi-label classification task. In particular, different from @lin2017 , the number of attention hops is set to the number of labels; and we then use the document embedding from each hop separately to build a binary classifier for a certain label. Note that @lin2017 create a single final text embedding aggregated from all the attention hops to make the classification prediction. The approach of using a single aggregated text embedding is suitable for single-label classification problems, such as sentiment analysis [@lin2017], but not suitable for multi-label text classification tasks, such as ICD coding.
![The architecture of our hierarchical joint learning model JointLAAT has two levels: The first level is to predict the normalized codes composing of the first three characters of raw ICD codes. The second level utilizes the prediction produced from the first level to predict the raw ICD codes.[]{data-label="fig:JointALAM"}](JointALAM_FFN_US.pdf)
Hierarchical Joint Learning Mechanism
-------------------------------------
A challenge of the ICD coding task is that most of the ICD codes are not frequently used leading to an extremely unbalanced set of codes [@song2019generalized; @xie2019ehr]. As there are hierarchical relationships between ICD codes, in which codes starting with the same first three characters belong to the same higher-order category, we can utilize the hierarchical structure among the codes to help the model work better for infrequent codes. For example, “Nonpyogenic meningitis” (322.0), “Eosinophilic meningitis” (322.1), “Chronic meningitis” (322.2), “Meningitis, unspecified” (322.9) belong to a category of “Meningitis of unspecified cause” (322). To this end, we propose a hierarchical joint learning model (namely **JointLAAT**) based on our label attention model, as detailed in Figure \[fig:JointALAM\]. For each input document $D$, the model firstly produces the prediction for the first level of the ICD codes’ first three characters (i.e. normalized codes). The predicted output of the first level “normalization” is embedded into a vector $\boldsymbol{s}_D \in \mathbb{R}^p$ with the projection size $p$. The vector $\boldsymbol{s}_D$ is then concatenated with each label-specific vector $\textbf{v}_{i2}$ of the second level of the “raw” ICD codes before being fed into the feed-forward network to produce the final prediction. The model is trained by minimizing the sum of the binary cross-entropy losses of the “normalization” and “raw” levels.
Experimental Setup
==================
This section details the methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of our model.
Datasets
--------
We follow recent SOTA work on ICD coding from clinical text [@mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn]: using benchmark **M**edical **I**nformation **M**art for **I**ntensive **C**are (MIMIC) datasets MIMIC-III [@johnson2016mimic] and MIMIC-II [@lee2011open].
#### MIMIC-III.
Following previous work [@mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn], we focus on the discharge summaries, which condense all the information during a patient stay into a single document. Each admission was tagged manually by coders with a set of ICD-9 codes describing diagnoses and procedures during the patient stay. In this dataset, there were 52,722 discharge summaries and 8,929 unique codes in total. We conduct the experiments following the previous work [@mullenbach2018]. For the first experiment of using the full set of codes, the data was split using patient ID so that no patient is appearing in both training and validation/test sets. In particular, there are 47,719 discharge summaries for training, 1,631 for validation and 3,372 for testing. For the second experiment of using the 50 most frequent codes, the resulting subset of 11,317 discharge summaries was obtained, in which there are 8,067 discharge summaries for training, 1,574 for validation and 1,730 for testing. We denote the datasets used in the two settings as **MIMIC-III-full** and **MIMIC-III-50**, respectively.
#### MIMIC-II.
We also conduct experiments on the MIMIC-II dataset, namely **MIMIC-II-full**. Following the previous work [@perotte2013diagnosis; @mullenbach2018; @li2020multirescnn], 20,533 and 2,282 clinical notes were used for training and testing, respectively (with a total of 5,031 unique codes). From the set of 20,533 clinical notes, we further use 1,141 notes for validation, resulting in only 19,392 notes for training our model.
#### Preprocessing.
Following the previous work [@mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn], we tokenize the text and lowercase all the tokens. We remove tokens containing no alphabetic characters such as numbers, punctuations. For a fair comparison, similar to the previous work, on the preprocessed text from the discharge summaries in the MIMIC-III-full dataset, we pre-train word embeddings with the size $d_e = 100$ using CBOW Word2Vec method [@mikolov2013]. We then utilize the pretrained word embeddings for all experiments on the three MIMIC datasets. As shown in @li2020multirescnn , there were no significant performance differences when truncating the text to a maximum length ranging from 2,500 to 6,500. We, therefore, truncate all the text to the maximum length of 4,000 as in @xie2019ehr for the fairness and reducing the computational cost.
Evaluation Metrics
------------------
To make a complete comparison with the previous work on ICD coding, we report the results of our proposed model on a variety of metrics, including macro- and micro-averaged F1 and AUC (area under the ROC curve), precision at $k$ (P@k $\in \{5, 8, 15\}$). As detailed in @schutze2008introduction , “micro-averaged” pools per-pair of (text, code) decisions, and then computes an effectiveness measure on the pooled data, while “macro-averaged” computes a simple average over all labels. P@k is the precision of the top-k predicted labels with the highest predictive probabilities.
Implementation and Hyper-parameter Tuning
-----------------------------------------
#### Implementation.
We implement our LAAT and JointLAAT using PyTorch [@paszke2019]. We train the models with AdamW [@loshchilov2017fixing], and set its learning rate to the default value of 0.001.[^4] The batch size and number of epochs are set to 8 and 50, respectively. We use a learning rate scheduler to automatically reduce the learning rate by 10% if there is no improvement in every 5 epochs. We also implement an early stopping mechanism, in which the training is stopped if there is no improvement of the micro-averaged F1 score on the validation set in 6 continuous epochs. For both LAAT and JointLAAT, we apply a dropout mechanism with the dropout probability of 0.3. Before each epoch, we shuffle the training data to avoid the influence of the data order in learning the models. We choose the models with the highest micro-averaged F1 score over the validation sets to apply to the test sets. Note that we ran our models 10 times with the same hyper-parameters using different random seeds and report the scores averaged over the 10 runs.
#### Hyper-parameter tuning.
For LAAT, we perform a grid search over the LSTM hidden size $u \in \{128, 256, 384, 512\}$ and the projection size $d_a \in \{128, 256, 384, 512\}$, resulting in the optimal values $u$ at 512 and $d_a$ at 512 on the MIMIC-III-full dataset, and the optimal values $u$ at 256 and $d_a$ at 256 on both the MIMIC-III-50 and MIMIC-II-full datasets. For JointLAAT, we employ the optimal hyper-parameters ($d_a$ and $u$) from LAAT and fix the projection size $p$ at 128.
Baselines {#ssec:bl}
---------
Our LAAT and JointLAAT are compared against the following recent SOTA baselines, including both conventional machine learning and deep learning models:
#### LR.
**L**ogistic **R**egression was explored for ICD coding on the MIMIC datasets by building binary one-versus-rest classifiers with unigram bag-of-word features for all labels appearing in the training data [@mullenbach2018].
#### SVM.
@perotte2013diagnosis utilized the hierarchical nature of ICD codes to build hierarchical classifiers using **S**upport **V**ector **M**achine (SVM). Experiments on the MIMIC-II-full dataset showed that hierarchical SVM performed better than the flat SVM which treats the ICD codes independently. @xie2019ehr applied the hierarchical SVM for ICD coding on the MIMIC-III-full dataset using 10,000 unigram features with the tf-idf weighting scheme.
#### CNN.
The one-dimensional **C**onvolutional **N**eural **N**etwork [@kim2014convolutional] was employed by @mullenbach2018 for ICD coding on the MIMIC datasets.
#### BiGRU.
The **bi**directional **G**ated **R**ecurrent **U**nit [@Kyunghyun2014] was utilized by @mullenbach2018 for ICD coding on the MIMIC datasets.
#### C-MemNN.
The **C**ondensed **Mem**ory **N**eural **N**etwork was proposed by @prakash2017condensed , which combines the memory network [@NIPS2015_5846] with iterative condensed memory representations. This model produced competitive ICD coding results on the MIMIC-III-50 dataset.
#### C-LSTM-Att.
The **C**haracter-aware **LSTM**-based **Att**ention model was proposed by @shi2017towards for ICD coding. In the model, LSTM-based language models were utilized to generate the representations of clinical notes and ICD codes, and an attention method was proposed to address the mismatch between notes and codes. The model was employed to predict the ICD codes for the medical notes in the MIMIC-III-50 dataset.
#### HA-GRU.
The **H**ierarchical **A**ttention **G**ated **R**ecurrent **U**nit (HA-GRU) [@yang2016hierarchical] was utilized by @baumel2018multi for ICD coding on the MIMIC-II dataset.
#### LEAM.
The **L**abel **E**mbedding **A**ttentive **M**odel was proposed by @wang2018joint for text classification, where the labels and words were embedded in the same latent space, and the text representation was built using the text-label compatibility, resulting in competitive results on MIMIC-III-50.
#### CAML.
The **C**onvolutional **A**ttention network for **M**ulti-**L**abel classification (CAML) was proposed by @mullenbach2018 . The model achieved high performances on the MIMIC datasets. It contains a single layer CNN [@kim2014convolutional] and an attention layer to generate label-dependent representation for each label (i.e., ICD code).
#### DR-CAML.
**D**escription **R**egularized CAML [@mullenbach2018] is an extension of the CAML model, incorporating the text description of each code to regularize the model.
#### MSATT-KG.
The **M**ulti-**S**cale Feature **Att**ention and Structured **K**nowledge **G**raph Propagation approach was proposed by @xie2019ehr achieving the SOTA ICD coding results on the MIMIC-III-full and MIMIC-III-50 datasets. The model contains a densely connected convolutional neural network which can produce variable $n$-gram features and a multi-scale feature attention to adaptively select multi-scale features. In the model, the graph convolutional neural network [@KipfW16] is also employed to capture the hierarchical relationships among medical codes.
#### MultiResCNN.
The **Multi**-Filter **Res**idual **C**onvolutional **N**eural **N**etwork was proposed by @li2020multirescnn for ICD coding achieving the SOTA results on the MIMIC-II-full dataset and in-line SOTA results on the MIMIC-III-full dataset. The model contains a multi-filter convolutional layer to capture various text patterns with different lengths and a residual convolutional layer to enlarge the receptive field.
------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Macro Micro Macro Micro P@5 P@8 P@15
LR 56.1 93.7 1.1 27.2 - 54.2 41.1
SVM - - - 44.1 - - -
CNN 80.6 96.9 4.2 41.9 - 58.1 44.3
BiGRU 82.2 97.1 3.8 41.7 - 58.5 44.5
CAML 89.5 98.6 8.8 53.9 - 70.9 56.1
DR-CAML 89.7 98.5 8.6 52.9 - 69.0 54.8
MSATT-KG **91.0** **99.2** **9.0** **55.3** - 72.8 58.1
MultiResCNN **91.0** 98.6 8.5 55.2 - **73.4** **58.4**
LAAT 91.9 **98.8** 9.9 **57.5** **81.3** **73.8** **59.1**
JointLAAT **92.1** **98.8** **10.7$^{*}$** **57.5** 80.6 73.5 59.0
------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
: Results (in %) on the MIMIC-III-full test set. [**$*$** indicates that the performance difference between our two models LAAT and JointLAAT is significant]{} ($p < 0.01$, using the Approximate Randomization test). All scores in tables \[tbl:mimiciii-full\], \[tbl:mimiciii-50\] and \[tbl:mimicii-full\] are reported under the same experimental setup. Baseline scores are from the corresponding model papers as detailed in Section \[ssec:bl\].[]{data-label="tbl:mimiciii-full"}
Experimental Results
====================
Main Results
------------
### MIMIC-III-full
On the MIMIC-III-full dataset, Table \[tbl:mimiciii-full\] shows the results of the evaluation across all quantitative metrics. Specifically, using an attention mechanism, CAML [@mullenbach2018] produced better performance than both conventional machine learning models (i.e., LR and SVM) and deep learning models (i.e., CNN, BiGRU). Addressing the fixed window size problem of CAML [@mullenbach2018], MASATT-KG [@xie2019ehr] and MultiResCNN [@li2020multirescnn] achieved better results than CAML with improvements in micro-F1 by 1.4% and 1.3%, respectively. Our label attention model LAAT produces higher results in the macro-AUC, macro-F1, micro-F1, P@8 and P@15 metrics, compared to MASATT-KG [@xie2019ehr] and MultiResCNN [@li2020multirescnn], while achieving a slightly lower micro-AUC than that of MSATT-KG. In particular, LAAT improves the macro-AUC by [0.9%]{}, macro-F1 by 0.9%, micro-F1 by [2.2%]{}, P@8 by [0.4%]{} and P@15 by [0.7%]{}. LAAT also produces an impressive P@5 of 81.3%, indicating that on average at least 4 out of the top 5 predicted codes are correct.
Regarding JointLAAT where we utilized the hierarchical structures of ICD codes to improve the prediction of infrequent codes, Table \[tbl:mimiciii-full\] also shows that JointLAAT produces better macro-AUC score and significantly higher macro-F1 score than LAAT with the improvement of 0.8% ($p < 0.01$, using the Approximate Randomization test [@chinchor1992statistical] which is a nonparametric significance test suitable for NLP tasks [@dror2018hitchhiker]). Due to the macro-metrics’ emphasis on rare-label performance [@schutze2008introduction], this indicates that JointLAAT does better than LAAT for the infrequent codes (the P@k scores of JointLAAT are slightly lower than those of LAAT but the differences are not significant).
### MIMIC-III-50
Table \[tbl:mimiciii-50\] shows results on the MIMIC-III-50 dataset. LAAT outperforms all the baseline models across all the metrics. In particular, compared to the previous SOTA model MSATT-KG [@xie2019ehr], LAAT produces improvements of 1.1%, 1.0%, 2.8%, 3.1% and 3.1% in macro-AUC, micro-AUC, macro-F1, micro-F1 and P@5, respectively. From Table \[tbl:mimiciii-50\] , we also find that there is no significant difference between LAAT and JointLAAT regarding the obtained scores. The possible reason is that there is no infrequent codes in this dataset, which results in only 8 out of 40 normalized codes (i.e., three character codes) at the first “normalization” level that are linked to more than one raw ICD codes.
------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Macro Micro Macro Micro P@5 P@8 P@15
LR 82.9 86.4 47.7 53.3 54.6 - -
C-MemNN 83.3 - - - 42.0 - -
C-LSTM-Att - 90.0 - 53.2 - - -
CNN 87.6 90.7 57.6 62.5 62.0 - -
BiGRU 82.8 86.8 48.4 54.9 59.1 - -
LEAM 88.1 91.2 54.0 61.9 61.2 - -
CAML 87.5 90.9 53.2 61.4 60.9 - -
DR-CAML 88.4 91.6 57.6 63.3 61.8 - -
MSATT-KG **91.4** **93.6** **63.8** **68.4** **64.4** - -
MultiResCNN 89.9 92.8 60.6 67.0 64.1 - -
LAAT **92.5** **94.6** **66.6** 71.5 **67.5** **54.7** **35.7**
JointLAAT **92.5** **94.6** 66.1 **71.6** 67.1 54.6 **35.7**
------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
: Results on the MIMIC-III-50 test set.[]{data-label="tbl:mimiciii-50"}
------------- ---------- ---------- --------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Macro Micro Macro Micro P@5 P@8 P@15
LR 69.0 93.4 2.5 31.4 - 42.5 -
SVM - - - 29.3 - - -
HA-GRU - - - 36.6 - - -
CNN 74.2 94.1 3.0 33.2 - 38.8 -
BiGRU 78.0 95.4 2.4 35.9 - 42.0 -
CAML 82.0 96.6 4.8 44.2 - 52.3 -
DR-CAML 82.6 96.6 4.9 45.7 - 51.5 -
MultiResCNN **85.0** **96.8** **5.2** **46.4** - **54.4** -
LAAT 86.8 **97.3** 5.9 48.6 64.9 55.0 **39.7**
JointLAAT **87.1** 97.2 **6.8$^{*}$** **49.1$^{*}$** **65.2** **55.1** 39.6
------------- ---------- ---------- --------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
: Results on the MIMIC-II-full test set.[]{data-label="tbl:mimicii-full"}
### MIMIC-II-full
On the MIMIC-II-full dataset, Table \[tbl:mimicii-full\] shows that LAAT substantially outperforms all the baseline models. Specifically, the micro-F1 is 12.5% higher than HA-GRU [@baumel2018multi] which uses another attention mechanism and GRU for the ICD coding task. LAAT differs from HA-GRU in that our attention mechanism is label-specific. Compared to the previous SOTA model MultiResCNN [@li2020multirescnn], LAAT improves the macro-AUC, micro-AUC, macro-F1, micro-F1 and P@8 by 1.8%, 0.5%, 0.7%, 2.2% and 0.6%, respectively. Similar to the results on the MIMIC-III-full dataset (Table \[tbl:mimiciii-full\]), Table \[tbl:mimicii-full\] shows that JointLAAT does better on infrequent codes than LAAT on the MIMIC-II-full dataset with the improvement of 0.9% on the macro-F1 ($p < 0.01$).
Ablation Study
--------------
As discussed in Section \[ssec:labelatten\], our label attention mechanism extends the self-attention mechanism proposed by @lin2017 for a multi-label classification task. MASATT-KG [@xie2019ehr] and MultiResCNN [@li2020multirescnn] used another per-label attention mechanism proposed in CAML by @mullenbach2018 , in which the weight vector regarding each label was produced directly using the output of a CNN-based network. To better understand the model influences, we performed an ablation study on the *validation* set of the MIMIC-III-full dataset. In particular, for the first setting, namely LAAT~CAML~, we couple the label attention mechanism proposed by @mullenbach2018 with our BiLSTM encoder. Results of LAAT and LAAT~CAML~ in Table \[tbl:ablation\] show that our label attention mechanism does better than the label attention mechanism proposed in CAML by @mullenbach2018 .
For the second setting, namely CAML~LAAT~, we employ our attention mechanism on the output of the CNN network used in CAML. Results of LAAT and CAML~LAAT~ show that employing BiLSTM helps produce better scores than employing CNN under the same attention mechanism.
We further investigate a variant of LAAT, namely LAAT~GRU~, using a BiGRU encoder instead of a BiLSTM encoder. Table \[tbl:ablation\] shows that using BiLSTM helps obtain higher performance than using BiGRU. The reason might be that LSTM with the separate memory cells can theoretically remember longer-term dependencies than GRU, thus LSTM is more suitable for ICD coding from long clinical text, e.g. the discharge summaries which are typically *long*.[^5]
Conclusions
===========
In this paper, we have presented a label attention model for ICD coding from clinical text. We also extend our model with a hierarchical joint learning architecture to handle the infrequent ICD codes. Experimental results on three standard benchmark MIMIC datasets show that our label attention model obtains new state-of-the-art performance with substantial improvements across various evaluation metrics over competitive baselines. The hierarchical joint learning architecture also helps significantly improve the performances for infrequent codes, resulting in higher macro-averaged metrics.
[^1]: <https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/factsheet/en/>
[^2]: <https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm_pcs_background.htm>
[^3]: 5,411 (60%) of all the 8,929 ICD codes appear less than 10 times in the MIMIC-III dataset [@johnson2016mimic].
[^4]: In preliminary experiments, we find that though AdamW and Adam [@kingma2014adam] produce similar performances, AdamW converges faster than Adam when training our models.
[^5]: The number of word tokens per document in the MIMIC datasets is about 1,500 on average and can be greater than 6,500 [@mullenbach2018; @xie2019ehr; @li2020multirescnn].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We identify the quantum phases in a binary mixture of dipolar bosons in 2D optical lattices. Our study is motivated by the recent experimental realization of binary dipolar condensate mixture of Er-Dy \[Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 213601 (2018)\]. We model the system using the extended two-species Bose-Hubbard model and calculate the ground state phase diagrams using mean field theory. For selected cases we also obtain analytical phase boundaries using the site decoupled mean field theory. For comparison we also examine the phase diagram of two-species Bose-Hubbard model. Our results show that the quantum phases with the long range intra-species interaction phase separate with no phase ordering. The introduction of the long range inter-species interaction modifies the quantum phases of the system. It leads to the emergence of phase separated quantum phases with phase ordering. The transition from the phase separated quantum phases without phase ordering to phase ordered ones breaks the inversion symmetry.'
author:
- Rukmani Bai
- Deepak Gaur
- Soumik Bandyopadhyay
- Hrushikesh Sable
- 'K. Suthar'
- 'D. Angom'
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'Segregated quantum phases of dipolar bosonic mixtures in two-dimensional optical lattices'
---
Introduction
============
The Bose-Hubbard model (BHM) [@hubbard_63; @fisher_89] describes the physics of ultracold bosonic atoms trapped in optical lattices [@jaksch_98]. The variation of the hopping term, equivalent to kinetic term in continuum models, in the BHM drives a quantum phase transition from the Mott insulator (MI) to the superfluid phase (SF) phase. And this transition has been experimentally observed [@greiner_02]. The inter-particle interaction in the BHM is onsite or contact in nature. The introduction of the nearest neighbour (NN) interaction in the BHM generates two more phases, density wave (DW) and supersolid (SS) phase. This model with the NN interactions is referred to as the extended BHM (eBHM) [@kuhner_00] and shows rich physics compared to the BHM. Such a model captures the physics of dipolar ultracold quantum gases in optical lattices [@baier_16; @bandyopadhyay_19]. A more complex system, ideal to model several condensed matter systems, is to fill the optical lattice with two species Bose-Einstein Condensate (TBEC). A TBEC could be condensate mixture of two different atomic species [@modugno_02; @lercher_11; @mccarron_11; @pasquiou_13; @wacker_15; @wang_16], two hyperfine states of an atom [@myatt_97; @hall_98; @stamper_98; @stenger_98; @maddaloni_00; @delannoy_01; @sadler_06; @mertes_07; @anderson_09; @tojo_10] or two different isotopes of an atomic species [@papp_08; @handel_11; @sugawa_11a]. It was experimentally first realized in the two hyperfine states $|F = 2, m_F = 2 \rangle$ and $|F = 1, m_F = -1 \rangle$ of $^{87}$Rb atom [@myatt_97]. The TBECs, in the weakly interacting continuum systems, have been used to investigate novel phenomena such as pattern formation [@sasaki_09; @gautam_10_1; @gautam_10_2; @ronen_08; @hoefer_11; @hamner_11; @de_14], phase separation [@ho_96; @ao_98; @gautam_11; @roy_15_2; @bandyopadhyay_17; @papp_08; @tojo_10; @mccarron_11; @wacker_15; @wang_16], nonlinear dynamical excitations [@gautam_12; @gautam_13; @roy_14_2; @kuopanportti_19; @mertes_07; @eto_16a; @eto_16], collective excitations [@roy_14_1; @suthar_15; @roy_15_1; @suthar_16; @suthar_17; @pal_17; @pal_18], Kibble-Zurek mechanism [@nicklas_15], and the production of dipolar molecules [@molony_14; @guo_16; @will_16]. The phase separation, among all the phenomena is a unique property of TBECs. In this work we study the TBECs trapped in the optical lattices, and can be described by the BHM with appropriate modifications. The experimental realization of TBECs in optical lattices are reported in Ref. [@catani_08; @gadway_10] and early theoretical studies are presented in Ref. [@altman_03; @chen_03; @kuklov_03; @kuklov_04]. A remarkable recent achievement related to TBECs is the experimental realization of TBEC with dipolar quantum mixtures of Er-Dy was reported in a recent work [@trautmann_18].
The physics of the two-species BHM (TBHM), the lattice counterpart of TBEC, in 1D has been investigated in detail [@mishra_07; @zhan_14; @wang_14]. And, there has been some works on 2D as well [@altman_03; @chen_03; @kuklov_03; @kuklov_04; @isacsson_05; @iskin_10; @anufriiev_16]. The phase diagram of TBHM shows different combinations of mixed MI-SF phases apart from the MI and SF phases. And, these have been investigated using quantum Monte-Carlo [@kuklov_03; @kuklov_04], mapping to spin systems [@altman_03], and with mean field theory [@chen_03; @isacsson_05; @iskin_10; @pai_12; @anufriiev_16]. These studies, except for Ref. [@pai_12], considered homogeneous systems. However, hitherto the phenomenon of phase separation in 2D TBHM is yet to be investigated in detail.
The quantum phases of TBHM in the phase separated domain, unlike in the TBECs, do not show segregation into two spatial domains. We attribute this to the lack of long range interaction in the TBHM. The simplest modification to include the effect of long range interaction is to add nearest neighbour interaction. The eBHM, as mentioned earlier, supports two more quantum phases density wave (DW) [@capogrosso_10; @flottat_17; @iskin_11] and supersolid (SS) phase [@ng_08; @iskin_11; @yamamoto_11; @boninsegni_12; @leonard_17]. The DW phase is an insulating phase similar to the MI phase but it has crystalline order or diagonal long range order. And, the SS phase is a compressible phase with both diagonal and off diagonal long range order. In a recent study of extended TBHM (eTBHM) [@wilson_16], it was shown that the SS phase exists for small value of NN interaction. In this work, the NN interaction was limited to either one of the species or between the species. We address this research gap by including all the possible intra- and inter-species NN interactions. Such a model is apt to describe the physics of dipolar Bose-Bose mixtures in optical lattices. An example of such a combination is the recently realized Er-Dy mixture [@trautmann_18]. An important result of our work is the possibility to realize compressible and incompressible quantum phases with spatial segregation. Such a phase could be instrumental in examining superfluid instabilities and other non-equilibrium properties in the lattice models of quantum liquids.
The remaining of the paper is organized into four sections. In the Section \[sec\_theory\] we describe the zero temperature Hamiltonian of the TBHM and discuss the Gutzwiller mean-field theory of the model. We then discuss the mean-field decoupling theory to calculate the compressible-incompressible phase boundaries analytically. This is followed by a brief discussion on the characterization of quantum phases. The phase diagrams of TBHM are discussed in the Section \[sec\_phdiag\]. The Section \[sec\_phdiag\_ext\] discussed the phase diagram of eTBHM. In particular, the miscible and immiscible phases. We end the paper with conclusion in Section \[sec\_conclude\].
Theory {#sec_theory}
======
TBHM Hamiltonian
----------------
At zero temperature, the TBHM Hamiltonian which describes the physics of a TBEC in 2D optical lattice is [@damski_03] $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{H}^{{\rm TBH}} &=& -\sum_{p, q, k}\bigg [ \Big( J_x^k
\hat{b}_{p+1, q}^{\dagger k}\hat{b}_{p, q}^k + {\rm H.c.}\Big)
+ \Big( J_y^k \hat{b}_{p, q+1}^{\dagger k}
\hat{b}_{p, q}^k \nonumber\\
&&+ {\rm H.c.}\Big) - \frac{U_{kk}}{2}
\hat{n}_{p, q}^k (\hat{n}_{p, q}^k-1) +
\tilde{\mu}^k_{p,q}\hat{n}_{p, q}^k\bigg]
\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{p, q} U_{12}\hat{n}_{p, q}^1 \hat{n}_{p, q}^2,
\label{tbhm} \end{aligned}$$ where $k = 1$,$2$ is the species index, $(p,q)$ are the lattice indices, $J_x^k$ ($J_y^k$) is the nearest neighbour (NN) hopping strength along $x$ ($y$) directions, $\hat{b}^{\dagger k}_{p,q}$ ($\hat{b}^k_{p,q}$) is the creation (annihilation) operator and $\hat{n}_{p, q}^k$ is the number operator at ($p,q$)th site. $U_{kk}$ is intra-species interaction strength, and $U_{12}$ is inter-species interaction strength between two species. Further, $\tilde{\mu}^k_{p,q} =\mu^k - \varepsilon_{p,q}^k$, is the local chemical potential at each site for the two species where $\varepsilon_{p,q}^k$ is envelop potential for the species. For a system of $K \times L$ lattices sites, the index along $x$ ($y$) has values $p=1,\ldots K$ ($q=1,\ldots L$). The unique feature of the TBECs is the phase separation and for continuum systems, the criterion for phase segregation is $U_{12}^2 > U_{11}U_{22}$ [@ho_96; @Trippenbach_00]. Otherwise, the TBEC is in the miscible phase. For the case of strongly interacting TBECs in optical lattices, described by the above Hamiltonian, we show the existence of different phases in both the miscible and immiscible domains.
To obtain the ground state of the TBHM Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[tbhm\]), we use single site Gutzwiller mean field (SGMF) theory [@rokhsar_91; @sheshadri_93; @bai_18; @pal_19; @bandyopadhyay_19; @kuldeep_19]. The starting point of this theory is to separate the operators into mean-field and fluctuation operator components as $\hat{b}_{p, q}^k = \phi_{p,q}^k + \delta \hat{b}_{p, q}^k\;$ and $\;\hat{b}^{\dagger k}_{p,q} = \phi_{p,q}^{k*} +
\delta\hat{b}_{p,q}^{\dagger k}$. Then, the Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[tbhm\]) is reduced to sum of single-site mean-field Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{h}_{p,q}^{{\rm TBH}} &= &- \sum_{k}\left[J_x^k
\left(\hat{b}_{p+1, q}^{\dagger k}\phi_{p,q}^k
+ \phi^{k*}_{p + 1, q}\hat{b}_{p, q}^k \right ) + {\rm H.c.}
\right. \nonumber\\
&& + J_y^k\left(\hat{b}_{p, q+1}^{\dagger k} \phi_{p,q}^k
+ \phi^{k*}_{p, q+1}\hat{b}_{p, q}^k \right) + {\rm H.c.}
\nonumber \\
&&-\left . \frac{U_{kk}}{2}\hat{n}_{p, q}^k
\left (\hat{n}_{p, q}^k-1\right)
+ \tilde{\mu}^k_{p,q}\hat{n}_{p, q}^k\right]
\nonumber\\
&&+ U_{12}\hat{n}_{p, q}^1 \hat{n}_{p, q}^2,
\label{ham_ss_tbec}\end{aligned}$$ where, $\phi_{p,q}^k$ ($\phi_{p,q}^{k*}$) is the SF order parameter. With this definition of the single-site mean field Hamiltonian, the total Hamiltonian of the system is $$\hat{H}^{{\rm TBH}} = \sum_{p,q}\hat{h}_{p,q}^{{\rm TBH}}.$$ For the details of the derivations see [@bai_18]. To get the ground state we digonalize the Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]) at each site. And, for this we use the Gutzwiller ansatz, based on which the ground state at the ($p,q$)th site is [@anufriiev_16] $$|\psi\rangle_{p,q} = \sum_{n_1, n_2 }c^{(p,q)}_{n_1, n_2}
|n_1, n_2\rangle_{p,q}.
\label{gw_2s}$$ Here $|n_1, n_2\rangle$ is a Fock state, which is direct product of the $n_1$ and $n_2$ occupation number states of the 1st and 2nd species, respectively. The occupation number states $n_k\in [0,N_b -1]$ where $N_b$ is the total number of local Fock states used in the computation and $c_{n_1, n_2}^{p,q}$ are complex co-efficients with $\sum_{n_1,n_2} |c^{(p,q)}_{n_1,n_2}|^2$ = 1. From the ground state, we can compute the new SF order parameter of the two species as
$$\begin{aligned}
\phi_{p, q}^1& =& _{p,q}\langle\psi|\hat{b}_{p, q}^1|\psi\rangle_{p,q}
= \sum_{n_1, n_2}\sqrt{n_1}
{c^{(p,q)*}_{n_1-1, n_2}}c^{(p,q)}_{n_1,n_2},
\label{gw_phi2s_1}\\
\phi_{p, q}^2& =& _{p,q}\langle\psi|\hat{b}_{p, q}^2|\psi\rangle_{p,q}
= \sum_{n_1, n_2}\sqrt{n_2}
{c^{(p,q)*}_{n_1, n_2-1}}c^{(p,q)}_{n_1,n_2}.
\label{gw_phi2s_2}
\end{aligned}$$
Similarly, corresponding the lattice occupancies are
$$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{p, q}^1& =& _{p,q}\langle\psi|\hat{n}_{p, q}^1|\psi\rangle_{p,q}
= \sum_{n_1, n_2} n_1 |c^{(p,q)}_{n_1,n_2}|^2,
\label{num2s_1}\\
\rho_{p, q}^2& =& _{p,q}\langle\psi|\hat{n}_{p, q}^2|\psi\rangle_{p,q}
= \sum_{n_1, n_2}n_2|c^{(p,q)}_{n_1,n_2}|^2.
\label{num2s_2}
\end{aligned}$$
Using the new SF order parameters, the ground state of the next lattice site is computed and this process is repeated till all the lattices sites are covered. One such sweep is identified as an iteration and we then, start the process again for the next iteration. The iterations are carried out till the convergence criterion $|\phi_{p,q}^{n-1} - \phi_{p,q}^n| \lesssim 10^{-12}$ is satisfied at the $n^{{\rm th}}$ iteration. In the present work, to determine the phase diagrams, we consider lattice system of size $10 \times 10$ and choose $N_b = 7$. That is, $K$ and $L$ are both 10. We find that the phase boundaries remain unchanged when the system size is augmented to $20\times 20$. We also use the augmented system size to validate key findings. In addition, we employ periodic boundary conditions to model an infinite-sized system.
Extended TBHM
-------------
The BHM with NN interaction, referred to as the extended BHM (eBHM), exhibits richer phase diagram than BHM and it has the novel feature of harbouring the SS phase. The phase diagram of the single species eBHM consists of DW, SS, MI and SF phases. Similarly, the extended TBHM (eTBHM) also exhibits these phases as well as miscible and segregated phases and the model Hamiltonian of the system is $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{H}^{{\rm ext}} &=& \hat{H}^{{\rm TBH}}
+ \sum_{p, q, k} V_k \hat{n}^k_{p,q} \biggl [
\Big ( \hat{n}^k_{p-1,q} + \hat{n}^k_{p+1,q}
+ \hat{n}^k_{p,q -1} \nonumber\\
&& + \hat{n}^k_{p,q+1}\Big ) + V_{12} \hat{n}_{p,q}^k
\Big(\hat{n}^{3-k}_{p-1,q} + \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p+1,q}
+ \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p,q -1}
\nonumber \\
&& + \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p,q+1}\Big ) \biggr],
\label{bhm_ext}\end{aligned}$$ here $V_k$ is the intra-species NN interaction strength for both the species, and $V_{12}$ is the inter-species NN interaction strength. In the experiments the relative strengths of the NN interaction is controllable through the Feshbach resonances. Thus, to relate with the experimental observations and predict possible phases we vary the inter- and intra-species interaction strengths. We use SGMF theory to obtain the ground state of the system, then, in this method the total Hamiltonian is the sum of the single-site mean field Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{h}_{p,q}^{{\rm ext}} &=& \hat{h}_{p,q}^{{\rm TBH}}
+ \sum_{k} V_k \hat{n}^k_{p,q} \biggl [
\Big ( \hat{n}^k_{p-1,q} + \hat{n}^k_{p+1,q}
+ \hat{n}^k_{p,q -1} \nonumber\\
&& + \hat{n}^k_{p,q+1}\Big ) + V_{12} \hat{n}_{p,q}^k
\Big(\hat{n}^{3-k}_{p-1,q} + \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p+1,q}
+ \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p,q -1}
\nonumber \\
&& + \hat{n}^{3-k}_{p,q+1}\Big ) \biggr].
\label{bhm_ext_ss}\end{aligned}$$ For eTBHM also, we diagonalize the Hamiltonian at each site separately, and obtain the ground state. The NN interaction term contribute to the diagonal matrix element. From the single-site wavefunction the SF order parameter and lattice occupancy can be calculated from the expressions in Eqns. (\[gw\_phi2s\_1\]-\[gw\_phi2s\_2\]) and (\[num2s\_1\]-\[num2s\_2\]).
Mean-field decoupling theory
----------------------------
To calculate the phase boundaries between MI and SF phases analytically we use the site decoupled mean-field theory [@oosten_01; @iskin_09; @bandyopadhyay_19]. For this, we adapt perturbative analysis of the mean-field Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]). It is important to note that the SF order parameter $\phi^{k}_{p,q} $ is zero in the MI phase, but nonzero in the SF phase. So, the vanishing of the SF order parameter $\phi^{k}_{p,q} \rightarrow 0^{+}$ marks the MI-SF phase boundary in the phase diagram. With this consideration, in the site decoupled mean-field theory, the interaction and the chemical potential terms constitute the unperturbed Hamiltonian $\hat{h}_{p,q,0}^{\rm TBH}$. From Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{h}_{p,q,0}^{{\rm TBH}}
&= & \sum_{k}\left[ \frac{U_{kk}}{2}\hat{n}_{p, q}^k
\left (\hat{n}_{p, q}^k-1\right)
- \tilde{\mu}^k_{p,q}\hat{n}_{p, q}^k\right]
\nonumber\\
&&+ U_{12}\hat{n}_{p, q}^1 \hat{n}_{p, q}^2,
\label{ham_ss_h0}\end{aligned}$$ which is diagonal with respect to the Fock basis states.Then, the hopping terms in Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]) as the perturbation, $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{h}_{p,q,1}^{{\rm TBH}} &= &- \sum_{k}\Bigl [J_x^k
\left(\hat{b}_{p+1, q}^{\dagger k}\phi_{p,q}^k
+ \phi^{k*}_{p + 1, q}\hat{b}_{p, q}^k \right ) + {\rm H.c.}
\nonumber\\
&& + J_y^k\left(\hat{b}_{p, q+1}^{\dagger k} \phi_{p,q}^k
+ \phi^{k*}_{p, q+1}\hat{b}_{p, q}^k \right) + {\rm H.c.}
\Bigr ],
\label{ham_ss_h1}\end{aligned}$$ with the SF order parameter $\phi^{k}_{p,q}$ as the perturbation parameter. Then, from the first-order perturbative correction to the ground state wavefunction (details given in Appendix \[appendix\_a\]), we have $$\!\!\!\!\!\phi^{k}_{p,q} = J\bar{\phi}^{k}_{p,q}
\left(\frac{n^{k}_{p,q} +1}{n^{k}_{p,q}U -\bar{\mu}^{k}_{p,q}}
-\frac{n^k_{p,q}}{(n^k_{p,q} -1)U -\bar{\mu}^{k}_{p,q}}\right),
\label{order_par_ana}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\mu}^{k}_{p,q} &= &\tilde{\mu}^{k}_{p,q}-U_{12}n^{3-k}_{p,q},
\nonumber \\
\bar{\phi}^{k}_{p,q} &= &\left(\phi^{k}_{p+1,q}+\phi^{k}_{p-1,q}
+\phi^{k}_{p,q+1}+\phi^{k}_{p,q-1}\right).
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ For a homogeneous lattice system $\varepsilon^{k}_{p,q} = 0$. Then, in the MI phase the total density $\rho = \rho^{1}+\rho^{2}$ is integer commensurate and $\phi^{k}_{p,q}=0$. In the SF phase, the order parameter is non-zero and uniform, say $\phi^{k}_{p,q}=\varphi^{k}_{0}$. With these considerations, $\bar{\phi}^{k}_{p,q} = \bar{\phi}^{k} = 4\varphi^{k}_{0}$. Starting from the SF phase, at the SF-MI phase boundary $\varphi^{k}_{0}\rightarrow 0^{+}$. Considering this limit in Eq. (\[order\_par\_ana\]), we obtain the equation which defines the MI-SF phase boundary in terms of $J$ for a particular value of $\mu$.
### TBHM
For the MI phase with $\rho = 2$,in the miscible domain, atoms of both the species fill all the lattice sites. That is, $n^1_{p,q} =n^2_{p,q} =1$. The MI-SF phase boundary is, then, defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{4J}= \frac{2}{U -\mu +U_{12}} +\,\frac{1}{\mu -U_{12}}.
\label{tbhm_even}\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand for finite $U_{12}$, the system is in the immiscible domain for the MI phase with $\rho=1$. The density pattern has one atom at each lattice site chosen randomly from the two species. Thus, at a given lattice site $(p,q)$ we can have the occupancies as $n^{1}_{p,q} =1, n^{2}_{p,q} =0$ or $n^{1}_{p,q} =0, n^{2}_{p,q} =1$. In the perturbative analysis, without loss of generality, we consider neighbouring lattice sites are occupied by atoms of different species. This is also one realization of the energetically favourable configuration for $U_{12}<U$. Then, with the correction arising from $b^{\dagger 1}\phi^{1}$, the equation $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{4J}= \frac{2}{U_{12} -\mu} +\,\frac{1}{\mu},
\label{tbhm_odd}\end{aligned}$$ defines the phase boundary of the MI lobe with $\rho=1$. Based on similar analysis, we can obtain the phase boundary of other MI lobes. For which we have to use Eq.(\[tbhm\_even\]) and (\[tbhm\_odd\]) for the even and odd integer values of $\rho$, respectively.
### Extended TBHM
The MI-SF boundary of the eTBHM can also be calculated similar to the TBHM. The expression of the order parameter is similar to Eq. (\[order\_par\_ana\]) but $\bar{\mu}^{k}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\mu}^{k}_{p,q} &= &\tilde{\mu}^{k}_{p,q}-U_{12}n^{3-k}_{p,q}
-4V_k n^{k}_{p,q} -4V_{12} n^{3-k}_{p,q},\end{aligned}$$ For MI phase with $\rho=2n$, the occupancies are $n^{k}_{p,q}=n$. Further, assuming $V_1 =V_2$, the MI-SF boundary is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{4J}= \frac{2}{U -\bar{\mu}} +\,\frac{1}{\bar{\mu}}.
\label{exTBHM_MI2}\end{aligned}$$ with $\bar{\mu} = \mu -U_{12} -4V_1 -4V_{12}$. A similar analysis of MI phase with odd integer occupancies require specific approximations based on the density configuration. And, a general unified analysis in not applicable.
Characterization of the phases
------------------------------
--------------------- -------- ---------- ---------------- ----------------
$\rho$ $\phi$ $\Delta\rho^k$ $\Delta\phi^k$
Mott Insulator (MI) $ = 0$ $ = 0$ $ = 0$
Superfluid (SF) $ \ne 0$ $ = 0$ $ = 0$
Density Wave (DW) $ = 0$ $ \ne 0$ $ = 0$
Super Solid (SS) $ \ne 0$ $ \ne 0$ $ \ne 0$
--------------------- -------- ---------- ---------------- ----------------
: Classification of different quantum phases with order parameters for our systems.[]{data-label="table"}
To identify different quantum phases of the system we compute the density contrast $\Delta\rho^k$, order parameter contrast $\Delta\phi^k$ and compressibility $\kappa^k$. To define $\Delta\rho^k$, divide the lattice site occupancies as $$n^k_{p,q}=\begin{cases}
n^{k,A} & \text{if $(p,q) \in$ sublattice A}, \\
n^{k,B} & \text{if $(p,q) \in$ sublattice B},
\end{cases}
\label{occ_def}$$ then, the density contrast of the $k$th species is $$\Delta\rho^k = n^{k,A}-n^{k,B}.
\label{den_con}$$ The order parameter contrast is defined similarly as $$\Delta\phi^k = \phi^{k,A}-\phi^{k,B},
\label{den_con}$$ where, $\phi^{k,A}$ and $\phi^{k,B}$, like in the case of density are the values of the order parameters at lattice sites with $(p,q)$ belonging to sublattices A and B, respectively. The compressibility of each species are calculated using the definition $\partial \mu^k/\partial \rho^k$.
The TBHM, like the single species BHM, shows two phases MI and SF phases. The MI phase is an incompressible phase with integer commensurate density $n^{k,A}=n^{k,B}\in\mathbb{N}$. And, incompressibility implies zero SF order parameter $\phi^{k,A}=\phi^{k,B}=0$. The SF phase, on the other hand is compressible. Hence, it has $n^{k,A}=n^{k,B}\in \mathbb{R}$, $\phi^{k,A}=\phi^{k,B}\in \mathbb{R}$ and $\kappa^k\neq0$. For these two phases, the density and SF order parameters are uniform, so the contrast order parameters $\Delta\rho^k$ and $\Delta\phi^k$ are zero. In the eTBHM, the NN interaction leads to the emergence of two more quantum phases, DW and SS. These two phases have non-uniform density and SF order parameters. As a result the distinguishing features of these phases are non-zero contrast order parameters. The DW phase has integer $n^k_{p,q}$ with $n^{k,A}\neq n^{k,B}$ and $\Delta \rho^k\in\mathbb{N}$. This phase has zero SF order parameter $\phi^{k,A}=\phi^{k,B}=0$ and hence, incompressible. The SS phase has real $n^k_{p,q}$ with $n^{k,A}\neq n^{k,B}$ and $\Delta \rho^k\in\mathbb{R}$. The SF order parameter in this phase is non-zero and non-uniform. This implies that $n^{k,A}\neq n^{k,B}$ and $\phi^{k,A}\neq\phi^{k,B}$. So, both the contrast order parameters are non-zero in the SS phase. For easy reference the properties of the different quantum phases are listed in Table. \[table\].
Phase diagram of TBHM {#sec_phdiag}
=====================
![Phase diagram of TBEC by varying the inter-species interaction strength $U_{12}$. Blue solid lines represent numerically obtained phase boundaries for the mean field hamiltonian. Filled dots marks analytically obtained phase boundaries between compressible and incompressible phases, obtained analytically by perturbative analysis of the mean-field hamiltonian. The odd occupancy MI lobes appear for non zero $U_{12}$ and enlarges with increasing $U_{12}$.[]{data-label="tbec_ph"}](tbc_ph.pdf){width="8.0cm"}
To compute the ground state wavefunction and determine the phase, we initialize the SF order parameter $\phi$. This, then, defines the Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]) and Hamiltonian matrix elements are computed using Gutzwiller wavefunction in Eq. (\[gw\_2s\]). By digonalizing the Hamiltonian matrix for each site we obtain the ground state wavefunction. From the results, the MI-SF phase boundary is identified based on the SF order parameter and the lattice occupancy. For the incompressible MI phase, at each lattice site, $\phi$ is zero and $\rho$ is integer commensurate. For the SF phase, $\phi$ is nonzero and $\rho$ is real commensurate. The phase diagrams of BH Hamiltonian of TBEC in Eq. (\[ham\_ss\_tbec\]) for different values of $U_{12}$ are shown in Fig. \[tbec\_ph\].
For simplicity, we consider symmetric hopping $J_x^k = J_y^k = J$, equal chemical potential $\tilde{\mu}^1_{p,q} = \tilde{\mu}^2_{p,q} = \mu$ and identical intra-species interactions $U_{kk} = U$. We scale all the energies with $U$, and define the phase diagram in the $J/U-\mu/U$ plane. The phase diagram consists of a sequence of MI lobes having integer $\rho$. Without the inter-species interaction $U_{12} = 0$, as shown in Fig. \[tbec\_ph\](a), the phase diagram is equivalent to the case of single species. But, with twice the occupancy. That is the MI lobes have $\rho=2n$ with $\rho^1=\rho^2=n$ and $n\in\mathbb{N}$. So, the lowest MI lobe has $\rho=2$ and each lattice has one atom from each of the two species. As a result, the phase diagram is identical to single species. With the introduction of the inter-species interaction ($U_{12} \neq 0$) the half filled lobes like $\rho = 1$ emerge in the phase diagram with $0 < \rho^1 <1$, and then, $\rho^2 = 1-\rho^1$. This is discernible for $U_{12} =0.4 U$ from the Fig. \[tbec\_ph\](b). Based on the form of the interactions in the Hamiltonian of the system, the energies of system is degenerate for all the possible combinations of $\rho^1$ and $\rho^2$ in the allowed ranges. For example, with $U_{12}= 0.4U$ and for $\mu/U=0.2$, $J/U=0.01$ we observe $0.33\lesssim \rho^1\lesssim 0.7$. In the figure, the half filling lobe $\rho^k = 0.5$ and $\rho = 1$ at $J/U=0$ lies in the domain $0\leqslant\mu/U \leqslant 0.4$. In general, in the miscible domain, the half filling lobe $\rho =1$ at $J/U=0$ lies in the domain $0\leqslant\mu/U \leqslant U_{12}/U$. The other MI lobes with higher $\rho$ occur at the higher values $\mu/U$. In general, the MI lobes have $\rho=n$ with $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\rho^k = n/2$. Thus, for MI lobes with odd $n$ the average occupancy of each species is half integer.
With increasing $U_{12}$ the MI lobes with odd integer occupancies grows in size, but the size of MI lobes with even integer occupancies remain the same till $U_{12}=U_{kk}$ but shifts to higher $\mu/U$. This can be understood from Eq. (\[order\_par\_ana\]). The trend is discernible from the phase diagrams in Fig.\[tbec\_ph\](b-c). This, in the case of weakly interacting TBECs, is equivalent to a march towards phase separation [@ho_96; @ao_98; @gautam_11; @roy_15_2; @bandyopadhyay_17]. For $U_{12}>U_{kk}$, the criterion for phase separation, the size of the MI lobe $\rho =2$ is different. But, once the phase separation criterion is met, there is no change in the phase diagram with further increase in $U_{12}$. As an example the phase diagram for $U_{12}=1.2U$ is shown in Fig.\[tbec\_ph\](d). The lobes in this phase diagram are the same as in Fig.\[tbec\_ph\](a). The only difference is the occupancy is $\rho=n$ with $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\rho^k=n/2$. As a result, the density pattern of the lowest MI lobe ($\rho=1$) has one atom at each lattice site chosen randomly from the two species. The important point is, the MI lobes have the same sizes for $U_{12}=0$ and $U_{12}\geqslant U_{kk}$. But, the occupancy and hence the density patterns are different.
Phase diagram with long range interactions {#sec_phdiag_ext}
==========================================
$V_{12}=0$
----------
![Phase diagram of extended BHM for TBEC at the different inter-species interaction strength $U_{12}$ and for inter-species NN interaction $V_{12} = V_{21} = 0$, $V_1 = V_2 = 0.05U$. Brown lines forms the boundary of region comprising of incompressible phases (MI, DW). Around DW phase, SS phase exists and the boundary between SS and SF phases is represented by green lines. The SS region around the DW region enlarges with increasing $U_{12}$. In DW(n,0) phase both species have DW(n,0) pattern and in MI(1,1) phase both species have uniform unit occupancy. For $U_{12} > U$ the MI lobes are replaced by DW as seen in Fig(d).[]{data-label="ebhm_v12_0"}](ebh_v12p0_ph.pdf){width="8.0cm"}
The ground state of the extended BHM Hamiltonian in Eq. (\[bhm\_ext\_ss\]), like in the previous case, is obtained using the Gutzwiller ansatz. The long range interactions in the extended BHM introduce two more phases, DW and SS, in the phase diagram. To analyse and highlight the effect of long range intra- and inter-species interactions, we first consider the case of $V_{12} = 0$. And, set the intra-species NN interaction strength $V_k = 0.05U$. Then, vary the inter species onsite interaction strength $U_{12}$, which can be achieved in experiments through Feshbach resonance. The choice of low value of $V_k$ is based on the parameters realized in dipolar BEC experiments [@baier_16]. In these experiments, $V/\hbar$ is in the range $\sim 10-100$ Hz, whereas $U/\hbar$ has typical values in kHz. In addition, this choice of parameters has the unique possibility to study the MI-DW quantum phase transition by changing $U_{12}$ keeping $V_k$ fixed. This is to be contrasted with the eBHM, where the NN interaction strength $V\ge0.25U$ [@iskin_11; @kuldeep_19] marks the critical point for such quantum phase transitions. Like in the BHM case, we consider symmetric hopping $J_x^k = J_y^k = J$, identical chemical potential $\tilde{\mu}^k_{p,q} = \mu$ and $U_{kk} = U$. The phase diagram for $U_{12} =0$ is shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0\] (a). It is identical to the phase diagram of single species extended BHM [@iskin_11; @kuldeep_19] and consists of the DW(1,0), MI(1,1), DW(2,1), MI(2,2), SS (green line) and SF phases. In the figure, the SS phase occurs as a thin envelope around the DW lobes. On increasing $V_k$ but keeping the other parameters fixed, the size of the DW lobes and the accompanying envelope of SS phase are enhanced. However, the MI lobes shrinks and disappear from the phase diagram. This is due to the higher energy cost of having commensurate occupancy due to the intra-species NN interaction. The same effect is reported in the single species eBHM [@iskin_11; @kuldeep_19].
The DW phases with $U_{12} =0$ are four-fold degenerate. Two of the states have $\Delta \rho^1=\Delta\rho^2$ and the other two have $\Delta \rho^1=-\Delta\rho^2$. For both set of states, one of the degenerate states is obtained by shifting both of the species by one lattice constant either along $x$ or $y$ direction. For the $\Delta \rho^1=\Delta\rho^2$ states, the occupancies of the two species at each lattice sites are the same $n^1_{p,q}=n^2_{p,q}$. From this the $\Delta \rho^1=-\Delta\rho^2$ states are obtained after translation of one of the species by one lattice constant either along $x$ or $y$ direction. Thus, in the latter we have $n^{1,A}=n^{2,B}$ and $n^{1,B}=n^{2,A}$. It is to be noted that the $\rho=1$ phase of the TBHM has the same average density as the DW(1,0). However, the two have different symmetries. The $\rho=1$ phase of the TBHM has atoms from the two species with random occupancies and has no diagonal long range order. But, the DW(1,0) has diagonal order arising from the non-zero $\Delta\rho^k$. As an example consider the DW(1,0) phase, the two degenerate states correspond to $\Delta\rho^1=\Delta\rho^2=1$ and $\Delta\rho^1=-\Delta\rho^2=1$. At higher $\mu$, the DW(2,1) intervenes the transition from MI(1,1) to MI(2,2) phase.
To study the effect of the inter-species interaction we increase $U_{12}$ retaining $V_{12}$ and $V_k$ fixed at $0$ and $0.05U$, respectively. The phase diagram corresponding to $U_{12} = 0.4U$ is shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0\] (b). At finite $U_{12}$ the MI phase is energetically costly due to repulsion between atoms of the two-species co-existing on the same lattice site. So MI phase shifts to higher $\mu/U$ values with increasing $U_{12}$ which can be understood from Eq. (\[exTBHM\_MI2\]). As seen from the figure, the finite $U_{12}$ enhances the DW(1,0) lobe. The finite $U_{12}$ also lifts the degeneracy of the DW states, and the state with $n^1_{p,q}=n^2_{p,q}$ has higher energy. So, the density of the DW states with finite $U_{12}$ has $n^{1,A}=n^{2,B}$ and $n^{1,B}=n^{2,A}$.
The MI(1,1) lobe remains unchanged in size, but, it is shifted upward in the phase diagram. The shift is attributed to the increase in effective chemical potential arising from the interaction energy associated with finite $U_{12}$. Similar trend, enhancement of DW(1,0) lobe, occur in the case of $U_{12}=0$ on increasing $V_k$. In addition to the MI phase, the DW(2,1) and similar DW phase with non-zero $n^{k,A}$ and $n^{k,B}$ are also energetically disfavoured. However, the most important feature is the emergence of prominent SS phase envelope around each of the DW lobes. On increasing $U_{12}$ further, as seen from the Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0\] (c-d), the MI lobes are transformed into DW lobes. And, at higher $U_{12}$ only the DW(n,0) phase, with $n\in\mathbb{N}$, are present in the system. The domain of the SS phase also increases. Ultimately, the SS envelopes around each of DW lobes merge into single large SS domain and this is discernible in these figures.
$V_{12}>0$
----------
One of the phenomena unique to TBEC is the phase separation. This provides important insights to understand novel phenomena in nonlinear dynamics, pattern formation, quantum phase transitions in condensed matter systems, etc. [@gautam_10_1; @gautam_10_2; @gautam_11; @roy_15_2; @bandyopadhyay_17; @gautam_12; @gautam_13; @roy_14_2; @kuopanportti_19; @roy_14_1; @suthar_15; @roy_15_1; @suthar_16; @suthar_17; @pal_17; @pal_18] Phase separation of TBECs in the weakly interacting regime, as mentioned earlier, is well studied. This, however, is not the case for the strongly interacting two-species ultracold atoms in optical lattices.
![Phase diagram of extended BHM for TBEC at the different inter-species interaction strength $U_{12}$ and for inter-species NN interaction $V_{12} = V_{21} = 0.05$, $V_1 = V_2 = 0.05U$. The incompressible (MI, cDW) and compressible phase(SS, SF) regions are separated by brown lines. In cDW phase the two species occupy lattice sites randomly in such a way such that total density $\rho= \rho^1 +\rho^2$ have DW pattern. Around DW phase, SS phase exists and the boundary of the SS region is marked by green lines. (d) For $U_{12} = 1.2$ the DW and SF phases are phase separated.[]{data-label="ebhm_v12_0p05"}](ebh_v12p0p05_ph.pdf){width="8.0cm"}
As discussed earlier, in the TBHM we observe phase separation in the SF phase, where the density of the two species are spatially separated into two domains. The phase separated MI phases, on the other hand, has random filling of the two species and are not separated into two distinct domains. The inclusion of the NN interactions modify the density distribution of the MI phases in the phase separated domain. To study this, we solve the Eq. (\[bhm\_ext\_ss\]) with finite $V_{12}$ and keep it fixed to a value of $0.05U$. We, then, increase the inter-species interaction $U_{12}$ from the miscible domain $U_{12}^2 < U_{11}U_{22}$ to the immiscible domain $U_{12}^2 > U_{11}U_{22}$. The phase diagrams for selected values of $U_{12}$ are shown in the Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\].
### Miscible phase
In the miscible domain, $U_{12}^2 < U_{11}U_{22}$, the phase diagram has lobes of incompressible quantum phases having $\rho=n$ with $n\in \mathbb{N}$. These lobes are similar to those in the TBHM. In the present case, however, the $\rho=n$ lobes are intervened by lobes of DW quantum phases with half-integer total average occupancies $\rho = (2m+1)/2$ with $m\in \{0,\mathbb{N}\}$. The total occupancy $n_{p,q} = n^1_{p,q} + n^2_{p,q}$ of these phases have diagonal long-range order. This is essentially induced by the non-zero inter-species NN interaction, $V_{12}>0$. The particle densities $n^k_{p,q}$, however, posses no diagonal long-range order. For this reason we refer to these as correlated DW (cDW) phases. This is to distinguish from the DW phases with $V_{12}=0$, in which case $n^k_{p,q}$ have diagonal long range order. Another important property of the cDW lobes is, these are surrounded by a thin envelope of SS phase. As an example, the phase diagram for $U_{12}=0.9U$ is shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\](a). In the figure, the cDW(1,0) has the lowest average occupancy $\rho=1/2$. One of the possible density distribution of this phase is $n^{k,A}=0$. And, at the other sub-lattice the occupancy is $n^{2,B}_{p,q} = 1 - n^{1,B}_{p,q}$. The values of $n^{1,B}_{p,q}$ is either 0 or 1 distributed randomly. And, the random distribution implies that there is no diagonal long range order. In other words, the lattice occupancies of the individual species are not structured but the total lattice occupancy is a structured quantum phase. Around the cDW phase, as $J/U$ is increased for fixed $\mu/U$, the quantum fluctuations drive a second order quantum phase transition from cDW to the SS phase. For the SS phase around the cDW(1,0) phase, the occupancies of the two sub-lattices are identical, and lie in the range $0\lesssim n^{1,A}_{p,q}=n^{2,A}_{p,q}\lesssim 0.25$ and $0.25\lesssim n^{1,B}_{p,q}=n^{2,B}_{p,q}\lesssim 0.50$. Hence, both the species have the same diagonal long-range orders. Here, the occupancies of the SS phase are defined over a finite range due to it’s finite compressibility. The SF order parameters, although different in value, follow similar trends $\phi^{1,A}_{p,q}=\phi^{2,A}_{p,q}$, $\phi^{1,B}_{p,q}=\phi^{2,B}_{p,q}$ and $\phi^{k,B}_{p,q}\neq\phi^{k,A}_{p,q}$. In short, the fluctuations drive the cDW(1,0) phase with random integer $n^{k,B}_{p,q}$ to identical occupancies. And, $n^{k,A}_{p,q}$ also acquire non-zero value. On increasing $J/U$ further, the quantum fluctuations drive another phase transition from SS to SF phase. In this transition, the diagonal long-range order is destroyed and translational invariance of the system is restored.
![Phase separation with side by side pattern of species occupancies, obtained with periodic boundary conditions along both $x$ and $y$ axes. The density distribution of the species over lattice sites is shown in Fig (a,b,c) for DW(2,1) phase, in Fig(d,e,f) for SS phase and in Fig(g,h,i) for SF phase.[]{data-label="dw_ss_sf_occ"}](dw_ss_sf_occupancy.pdf){width="8.0cm"}
The insulating phase with average occupancy $\rho=1$, has uniform total lattice occupancy $n_{p,q}=n^1_{p,q} + n^2_{p,q}=1$. And, the occupancies of the two species satisfy the condition $n^1_{p,q}=1-n^2_{p,q}$ with $n^2_{p,q}\in \{ 0,1\}$, where the values between the two possibilities are chosen at random. Thus, this phase like the conventional MI phase with integer commensurate integer occupancies, but in terms of the total occupancy $n_{p,q}$. Similar to cDW phase, we refer to this phase as correlated MI (cMI) phase. This implies that increasing the chemical potential or on adding more particles to the system, at a fixed but low $J/U$, the system starting from cDW(1,0) passes through SS, SF and then to the $\rho=1$ phase. At still higher $\mu$, the cDW(2,1) phase appears. The total occupancies of the two sub-lattices in this quantum phase are $n^A_{p,q} = n^{1,A}_{p,q} + n^{2,A}_{p,q} =2$ and $n^B_{p,q} = n^{1,B}_{p,q} + n^{2,B}_{p,q} =1$. This implies that both the species have same occupancies in the $A$ sub-lattice $n^{1,A}_{p,q} = n^{2,A}_{p,q} = 1$. And, it is equivalent to the DW(2,0) phase in the eTBHM with $V_{12}=0$. From this phase we obtain the cDW(2,1) phase by randomly adding one atom of either species at the $B$ sub-lattice sites. That is $n^{1,B}_{p,q}=1-n^{2,B}_{p,q}$ with $n^{2,B}_{p,q}\in \{ 0,1\}$, where the values between the two possibilities are chosen at random. So, effectively, the cDW(2,1) is a superposition of the DW(2,0) with the cDW(1,0). At higher $\mu$ the other lobes with increasing $\rho$ appear. And, these have similar occupancies and order parameter structure as the lobes with lower $\rho$. It is to be highlighted that the phase diagrams are different, qualitatively and quantitatively, from the two-species BHM where only one of the species is dipolar [@wilson_16].
![Phase separation with side by side pattern of species SF order parameter, obtained with periodic boundary conditions along both $x$ and $y$ axes. The SF order parameter at the lattice sites is shown in Fig (a,b,c) for SS phase and in Fig(d,e,f) for SF phase.[]{data-label="ss_sf_phi"}](ss_sf_phi.pdf){width="8.0cm"}
### Immiscible phase
The criterion for phase separation of the two species in the TBECs or weakly interacting domain is $U_{12}^2>U_{11}U_{22}$ [@ho_96; @ao_98]. And, as discussed earlier, at phase separation the atoms of different species do not occupy the same lattice site. This is the energetically favourable configuration. However, the local nature of the inter-particle interaction preserves the inversion symmetry and the species do not separate into two spatial domains. In the TBECs or weakly interacting domain, the contact interaction is sufficient to break the inversion symmetry and leads to formation of two spatial domains [@papp_08; @tojo_10; @mccarron_11; @wacker_15; @wang_16] at phase separation. The introduction of the long range inter-species interaction ($V_{12}>0$) in the eTBHM introduces the possibility to lower the energy of the density configurations which breaks inversion symmetry. Thus, there is phase ordering of the two species.
In the present case, for the parameters considered ( $U_{11}=U_{22}=U$) the phase separation criterion is equivalent to $U_{12}>U$. This choice of the parameters, as a representative case, capture the key qualitative and quantitative features of the eTBHM. More importantly, the long range nature of the $V_{12}$ introduce phase ordering at phase separation. As an example, the phase diagram for $U_{12}=1.2U$ is shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\](b). The structure of the insulating or incompressible and compressible phases are similar to the case of $U_{12}<U$ as shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\](a). But, there is one key difference, the cDW, SS and SF phases in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\](b) are phase separated. This is the combined effect of the onsite and long range inter-species interactions. And, this is indicated in the phase diagram with annotation PS (phase separated). But, the insulating phases with $\rho=1$ and $\rho=2$ are not phase separated. In $\rho=1$ phase, like in the case of $U_{12}<U$, each lattice site is singly occupied by an atom from the two species chosen randomly. If the phase separation is along one of the axes, say $x$-axis, the DW($n_A, n_B$) phase has occupancies $$n^k_{p,q}=
\begin{cases}
\Theta\left [(-1)^k (p-(K-1)/2)\right ]n_A
& \text{for $(p,q) \in$ A}, \\
\Theta\left [(-1)^k (p-(K-1)/2)\right ]n_B
& \text{for $(p,q) \in$ B},
\end{cases}
\label{dw_ps_stripe1}$$ here, $k$, as defined earlier, is the species index, $K$ is the size of the system along $x$-axis, and $n_A$ and $n_B$ are integers with $n_A\neq n_B$. The ground state is doubly degenerate as the above density configuration has the same energy when the species are interchanged. The occupancies of the phase separated SS and SF phases can also be defined in a similar way. However, in these two phases $n_A$ and $n_B$ are real. Furthermore, in the SS phase $n_A\neq n_B$ but in the SF phase $n_A= n_B$. The SF order parameters in the SS and SF phases are also defined in the same form. The presence of the Heaviside step functions in Eq. (\[dw\_ps\_stripe1\]) indicates inversion symmetry is broken. The Hamiltonian is, however, invariant under the inversion symmetry. Thus, the phase mixed to separation transition breaks the inversion symmetry spontaneously. And, the observed ground state is one of the degenerate configurations.
As an example, the phase diagram in the immiscible domain $U_{12} = 1.2 U$ is shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\] (b). In the phase diagram, the global features of the phase domains are qualitatively similar to phase diagram in the miscible parameter domain $U_{12} = 0.9 U$ shown in Fig. \[ebhm\_v12\_0p05\] (a). There is, however, an important difference. All the phases in the figure are phase separated and this is indicated in the phase diagram with PS. In the SF phase, phase separation occurs for all parameter domain. The density profiles of the DW(2,1) phase, and the SS and SF phases around it are shown in Fig.(\[dw\_ss\_sf\_occ\]). In the figure, consider the lattice sites with odd (even) values of $(p+q)$ as the $A$ ($B$) sublattice. And, for better representation of the density orders of the structured phases, we consider a system size of $10\times 10$. Then, from the density pattern in Fig.(\[dw\_ss\_sf\_occ\])(a) and (b), both the species have occupancies $n_A=2$ and $n_B=1$. And, as it is phase separated, from Eq. (\[dw\_ps\_stripe1\]), $$\!\!n^k_{p,q}=
\begin{cases}
\Theta\left [(-1)^k(p-\frac{9}{2}) \right ]2 &
\text{for odd $(p+q)$}, \\
\Theta\left [(-1)^k(p-\frac{9}{2}) \right ]1 &
\text{for even $(p+q)$}.
\end{cases}
\label{dw21_sp12}$$ The density pattern shown in the figures Fig.(\[dw\_ss\_sf\_occ\])(a-c) correspond to the parameters $\mu/U=1.35 $ and $J/U=0.010$. The above occupancies of the species implies that each of the species are confined within a subsystem of $5\times 10$ lattice. The other species, as we apply periodic boundary conditions along both the directions, effectively provides a confining potential. This is better visualised when the system is mapped to a torus. Then, phase separation along one of the axes, divides the torus into two equal halves. And, each one occupied by one of the species. For such a configuration, there are two inter-species boundaries which segregate the two species. Thus, with a $10\times 10$ system size, the total length of the boundary is $20a$, where $a$ as defined earlier is the lattice constant. From the figure it is evident that other configuration is phase separation along the diagonal. This, however, is energetically not favourable as it has larger interface energy due to longer boundary $10(2+\sqrt{2})a$.
For the same value of chemical potential $\mu/U=1.35$, on increasing the hopping amplitude to $J/U=0.011$ we are in the SS phase domain. It is also phase separated and the lattice site occupancies has similar form as in Eq.(\[dw21\_sp12\]). The occupancies are real, have checker board order and are shown in Fig.(\[dw\_ss\_sf\_occ\])(d-f) . Another important point is, as seen from the figures, boundary effects are present in the SF order parameter. The reason is that the effective potential which segregates the two species is like a soft boundary condition. And, this is due to the long range interspecies interaction. The SS phase is a superfluid phase with diagonal long range order, and hence, has non-zero SF order parameter $\phi^k_{p,q}$. The SF order parameters of the two species are shown in Fig.\[ss\_sf\_phi\](a-c). The boundary effects are much prominent in these figures and at the boundaries, the deviations from the checker board order of $\phi^k_{p,q}$ are visible without ambiguity. It is to be mentioned here that the domain of the SS phase, for the parameters considered, is rather small. Despite this, SS quantum phase with phase segregation is a novel one and it deserves detailed investigations. On increasing $J/U$ further, we reach the SF phase, which is also phase separated. As an example, the occupancies and SF order parameters for $\mu/U=1.35$ and $J/U=0.015$ are shown in Fig.(\[dw\_ss\_sf\_occ\])(g-i) and Fig.\[ss\_sf\_phi\](d-f), respectively. In the SF phase, there is phase separation, but the occupancies and SF order parameter are uniform within the domains of each species. Thus, the average occupancies and lattice site occupancies are the same $n^1_{p,q, p\leqslant 5}=\rho^1$ and $n^2_{p,q, p>5}=\rho^2$. As we consider identical parameters for both the species $\rho=\rho^1=\rho^2$, where $\rho\in \mathbb{R}$ and $1\leqslant \rho\leqslant 2$. The values and range are also discernible from the figures. The key point from these case studies is that, for non-zero inter-species long range interaction and $U_{12}^2>U_{11}U_{22}$ the eTBHM has quantum phases which are phase separated.
Conclusions {#sec_conclude}
===========
In conclusion, we obtain the phase diagram of TBHM (two-species Bose-Hubbard model) and it’s extended version eTBHM with long range interactions in 2D optical lattices. Our finding are pertinent and timely in view of the recent experimental realization of the Er-Dy binary dipolar BEC mixture [@trautmann_18]. The phase diagram of the TBHM has the unique feature of additional MI lobes with average occupancies which are half integer. These lobes emerge due to the presence of the second species. And, the domain of these lobes are enhanced with the increase of the inter-species interaction strength. In the case of eTBHM, we obtain insulating phases with the non-overlapping density distributions even with $U_{12}^2<U_{11}U_{22}$, where the atoms of the two species are distributed across the system randomly. The non-overlapping densities is like phase separation, but in this work, we use phase separation to mean the configuration where the densities of the two species are segregated into two non-overlapping domains. One key finding of our study is that the DW-MI quantum phase transitions may occur by varying $U_{12}$ while keeping $V_{k}$ fixed. This is in contrast to the single species eBHM, where the NN interaction strength is required to be large to observe such quantum phase transitions. With finite inter-species NN interaction, we obtain the phase diagram in the miscible and immiscible regimes. Our novel result is that the DW, SS and SF phases in the eTBHM in the immiscible domain $U_{12}^2>U_{11}U_{22}$ are phase separated. And, they have side by side order.
Acknowledgements {#sec_acknowledge}
================
The results presented in the paper are based on computations using Vikram-100, the 100TFLOP HPC Cluster at Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad, India. K.S. acknowledges the support of the National Science Centre, Poland via project 2016/21/B/ST2/01086.
Perturbation analysis of the TBH model {#appendix_a}
======================================
The unperturbed ground state at the lattice site $(p,q)$ has the form $|\psi\rangle_{p, q}^{(0)} =|n^1,n^2\rangle_{p, q}$. The energy of this unperturbed ground state is $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(0)}_{n^{1}_{p,q},n^{2}_{p,q}}
&=& \frac{U}{2} \left[n^{1}_{p,q}(n^{1}_{p,q} -1)+n^{2}_{p,q}
(n^{2}_{p,q} -1)\right]\nonumber\\
&+& U_{12} n^{1}_{p,q} n^{2}_{p,q} -\mu^{1}_{p,q}n^{1}_{p,q}
-\mu^{2}_{p,q}n^{2}_{p,q},
\label{unperturb_energy}\end{aligned}$$ where we have chosen $U_{11}=U_{22}=U$. Then, to the first order of the SF order parameter $\phi^{k}_{p,q}$ the perturbed ground state can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
|\psi\rangle &=& |n^1,n^2\rangle_{p,q} \nonumber\\
&+& \sum_{\substack{m^1,m^2\\ \neq n^1,n^2}}
\frac{_{p,q}\langle m^1,m^2| \hat{T} |n^1,n^2
\rangle_{p,q}}
{E^0_{n^1_{p,q},n^2_{p,q}} -E^0_{m^1_{p,q},m^2_{p,q}}}
|m^1,m^2\rangle_{p.q},
\label{perturb_gs} \end{aligned}$$ where, considering uniform tunnelling strengths for both the species ($J_x^1 =J_x^2 =J_y^1 =J_y^2 =J$) and SF order parameters as real numbers $$\hat{T}_{p, q} = -J \left[ \bar{\phi}_{p, q}^1 \left(
\hat{b}_{p, q}^{\dagger 1} +\hat{b}_{p, q}^1 \right)
+ \bar{\phi}_{p, q}^2 \left(\hat{b}_{p, q}^{\dagger 2}
+ \hat{b}_{p, q}^2 \right) \right],
\label{hop_perturb}$$ with $\bar{\phi}^{k}_{p,q} = \left(\phi^{k}_{p+1,q}+\phi^{k}_{p-1,q}
+\phi^{k}_{p,q+1}+\phi^{k}_{p,q-1}\right)$. Then, using Eqs. (\[unperturb\_energy\])–(\[hop\_perturb\]) the ground state can be calculated as $$\begin{aligned}
|\psi\rangle_{p,q} =&& |n^1,n^2\rangle_{p,q} \nonumber\\
+J \bar{\phi}^1_{p,q}
&&\left\{\frac{\sqrt{n^1_{p,q} +1}}
{n^{1}_{p,q}U -\mu^{1}_{p,q} +U_{12}n^{2}_{p,q}}
|n^{1} +1,n^{2}\rangle_{p,q} \right. \nonumber\\
&&\left. - \frac{\sqrt{n^1_{p,q}}}{(n^1_{p,q}-1)U
-\mu^{1}_{p,q} +U_{12}n^2_{p,q}}
|n^1 -1,n^2 \rangle_{p,q}\right\} \nonumber\\
+J \bar{\phi}^2 &&\left\{\frac{\sqrt{n^2_{p,q} +1}}
{n^2_{p,q}U -\mu^{2}_{p,q} +U_{12}n^1_{p,q}}
|n^1,n^2 +1\rangle_{p,q} \right. \nonumber \\
&&\left.-\frac{\sqrt{n^2_{p,q}}}{(n^2_{p,q}-1)U
-\mu^{2}_{p,q} +U_{12}n^1_{p,q}}
|n^1,n^2 -1\rangle_{p,q}\right\}. \nonumber \\
\label{perturb_psi}\end{aligned}$$ From this state, we obtain the SF order parameter $\phi^{k}_{p,q} = _{p,q}\langle\psi|\hat{b}^{k}_{p,q}|\psi\rangle_{p,q}$, which is mentioned in Eq. (\[order\_par\_ana\]).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Recently, researchers showed that dirty paper coding (DPC) is the optimal transmission strategy for multiple-input multiple-output broadcast channels (MIMO-BC). In this paper, we study how to determine the maximum weighted sum of DPC rates through solving the maximum weighted sum rate problem of the dual MIMO multiple access channel (MIMO-MAC) with a sum power constraint. We first simplify the maximum weighted sum rate problem such that enumerating all possible decoding orders in the dual MIMO-MAC is unnecessary. We then design an efficient algorithm based on conjugate gradient projection (CGP) to solve the maximum weighted sum rate problem. Our proposed CGP method utilizes the powerful concept of Hessian conjugacy. We also develop a rigorous algorithm to solve the projection problem. We show that CGP enjoys provable convergence, nice scalability, and great efficiency for large MIMO-BC systems.'
author:
-
title: 'Maximum Weighted Sum Rate of Multi-Antenna Broadcast Channels'
---
Introduction
============
The capacity region of multiple-input multiple-output broadcast channels (MIMO-BC) has received great attention in recent years. MIMO-BC belong to the class of nondegraded broadcast channels, for which the capacity region is notoriously hard to analyze [@Cover91:Info_Thry]. Very recently, researchers have made significant progress in this area. Most notably, Weigarten [*et. al.*]{} finally proved the long-open conjecture in [@Weingarten06:MIMO_BC] that the “dirty paper coding” (DPC) strategy is the capacity achieving transmission strategy for MIMO-BC. Moreover, by the remarkable channel [*duality*]{} between MIMO-BC and its dual MIMO multiple access channel (MIMO-MAC) [@Vishwanath03:duality; @Viswanath03:duality; @Yu06:duality], the nonconvex MIMO-BC capacity region (with respect to the input covariance matrices) can be transformed to the convex dual MIMO-MAC capacity region with a sum power constraint.
In this paper, we study how to determine the [*maximum weighted sum of DPC rates*]{} (MWSR) of MIMO-BC through solving the maximum weighted sum rate problem of the dual MIMO-MAC. Important applications of the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC include but are not limited to applying Lagrangian dual decomposition for the cross-layer optimization for MIMO-based mesh networks [@Liu07_CL_MIMO_BC_TR]. The MWSR problem of MIMO-BC is the [*general*]{} case of the maximum sum rate problem (MSR) of MIMO-BC, which has been solved by using various algorithms in the literature. Such algorithms include the minimax method (MM) by Lan and Yu [@Lan_Yu_GLOBECOM04], the steepest descent (SD) method by Viswanathan [*et al.*]{} [@Viswanathan03:MIMO_BC_SD], the dual decomposition (DD) method by Yu [@Yu_CISS03], two iterative water-filling methods (IWFs) by Jindal [*et al.*]{}[@Jindal04:MIMO_BC_IWF], and the conjugate gradient projection method recently proposed by us [@Liu07:MIMO_BC_CGP]. Among these algorithms, IWFs and CGP appear to be the simplest. However, all of these existing algorithms have limitations in that they cannot be readily extended to the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC. As we show later, the objective function of the MWSR problem has a very different and much more complex objective function. The aforementioned algorithms can only handle the objective function of MSR, which is just a special case of MWSR (by setting all weights to one). These limitations of the existing algorithms motivate us to design an efficient and scalable algorithm with a modest storage requirement to solve the MWSR problem of large MIMO-BC systems.
In this paper, we significantly extend our CGP method in [@Liu07:MIMO_BC_CGP] to handle the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC. Our CGP method is inspired by [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc], where a gradient projection method was used to heuristically solve the MSR problem of MIMO interference channels. However, unlike [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc], we use the [*conjugate*]{} gradient directions instead of gradient directions to eliminate the “zigzagging” phenomenon. Also different from [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc], we develop a rigorous algorithm to exactly solve the projection problem. Our main contributions in this paper are three-fold:
1. To the best of our knowledge, our paper is the first work that considers the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC. Studying the MWSR problem is more useful and more important because the MWSR problem is the general case of MSR, and it has much wider application in systems and networks that employ MIMO-BC.
2. We simplify the MWSR problem of the dual MIMO-MAC such that enumerating all different decoding orders in the dual MIMO-MAC is [*unnecessary*]{}, thus paving the way to design an algorithm to efficiently solve the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC.
3. We extend the CGP method in [@Liu07:MIMO_BC_CGP] for the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC. This extended CGP method still enjoys provable convergence as well as nice scalability, and has the desirable linear complexity. Also, the extended CGP method is insensitive to the increase of the number of users and has a modest memory requirement.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:model\], we discuss the network model and the problem formulation. Section \[sec:framework\] introduces the key components in of CGP, including the computation of conjugate gradients and performing projection. We analyze the complexity of CGP in Section \[sec:complexity\]. Numerical results of CGP’s convergence behavior and performance comparison with other existing algorithms are presented in Section \[sec:results\]. Section \[sec:conclusions\] concludes this paper.
System Model and Problem Formulation {#sec:model}
====================================
We begin with introducing notations. We use boldface to denote matrices and vectors. For a complex-valued matrix ${\mathbf{A}}$, ${\mathbf{A}}^{*}$ and ${\mathbf{A}}^{\dag}$ denote the conjugate and the conjugate transpose of ${\mathbf{A}}$, respectively. ${\mathrm{Tr}}\{{\mathbf{A}}\}$ denotes the trace of ${\mathbf{A}}$. We let ${\mathbf{I}}$ denote the identity matrix with dimension determined from context. ${\mathbf{A}}\succeq 0$ represents that ${\mathbf{A}}$ is Hermitian and positive semidefinite (PSD). ${\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ {\mathbf{A}}_{1} \ldots {\mathbf{A}}_{n} \right\}$}}$ denotes the block diagonal matrix with matrices ${\mathbf{A}}_{1},\ldots,{\mathbf{A}}_{n}$ on its main diagonal.
Suppose that a MIMO Gaussian broadcast channel has $K$ users, each of which is equipped with $n_{r}$ antennas, and the transmitter has $n_{t}$ antennas. The channel matrix for user $i$ is denoted as ${\mathbf{H}}_{i} \in \mathbb{C}^{n_{r} \times n_{t}}$. In [@Weingarten06:MIMO_BC], it has been shown that the capacity region of MIMO-BC is equal to the dirty-paper coding region (DPC). In DPC rate region, suppose that users $1,\ldots,K$ are encoded subsequently, then the rate of user $i$ can be computed as [@Vishwanath03:duality] $$\label{eqn_dpc_rate}
R_{i}^{\mathrm{DPC}}({\mathbf{\Gamma}}) = \log \frac{{\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{i} \left(\sum_{j=i}^{K} {\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{j} \right)
{\mathbf{H}}_{i}^{\dag} \right)}}{{\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{i} \left( \sum_{j=i+1}^{K} {\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{j} \right) {\mathbf{H}}_{i}^{\dag} \right)} },$$ where ${\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{i} \in \mathbb{C}^{n_{t}\times n_{t}}$, $i=1,\ldots,K$, are the [*downlink*]{} input covariance matrices, ${\mathbf{\Gamma}}\triangleq \{{\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{1},\ldots{\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{K}\}$ denotes the collection of all the downlink covariance matrices. As a result, the MWSR problem can then be written as follows: $$\label{eqn_bc_mws}
\begin{array}{rl}
\mbox{Maximize} & \sum_{i=1}^{K} u_{i} R_{i}^{\mathrm{DPC}} ({\mathbf{\Gamma}})
\\
\mbox{subject to} & {\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{i} \succeq 0, \quad i=1,\ldots,K \\
& \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}({\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{i}) \leq P,
\end{array}$$ where $u_{i}$ is the weight of user $i$, $P$ represents the maximum transmit power at the transmitter. It is evident that (\[eqn\_bc\_mws\]) is a nonconvex optimization problem since the DPC rate equation in (\[eqn\_dpc\_rate\]) is neither a concave nor a convex function in the input covariance matrices ${\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{1},\ldots,{\mathbf{\Gamma}}_{K}$. However, the authors in [@Vishwanath03:duality] showed that due to the duality between MIMO-BC and MIMO-MAC, the rates achievable in MIMO-BC are also achievable in MIMO-MAC. That is, given a feasible ${\mathbf{\Gamma}}$, there exists a set of feasible [*uplink*]{} input covariance matrices for the dual MIMO-MAC, denoted by ${\mathbf{Q}}$, such that $R_{i}^{\mathrm{MAC}}({\mathbf{Q}}) = R_{i}^{\mathrm{DPC}}({\mathbf{\Gamma}})$. Thus, (\[eqn\_bc\_mws\]) is equivalent to the following maximum weighted sum rate problem of the dual MIMO-MAC with a sum power constraint: $$\label{eqn_mac_mws}
\begin{array}{rl}
\hspace{-.1in} \mbox{Maximize} & \sum_{i=1}^{K} u_{i} R_{i}^{\mathrm{MAC}}({\mathbf{Q}}) \\
\hspace{-.1in} \mbox{subject to} & {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \succeq 0, \quad i=1,\ldots,K\\
\hspace{-.1in} & R_{i}^{\mathrm{MAC}}({\mathbf{Q}}) \in \mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{MAC}}(P,{\mathbf{H}}^{\dag}), \,\, i=1,\ldots,K\\
\hspace{-.1in} & \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}({\mathbf{Q}}_{i}) \leq P, \\
\end{array}$$ where ${\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \in \mathbb{C}^{n_{r}\times n_{r}}$, $i=1,\ldots,K$, are the uplink input covariance matrices, ${\mathbf{Q}}\triangleq \{{\mathbf{Q}}_{1},\ldots{\mathbf{Q}}_{K}\}$ represents the collection of all the uplink covariance matrices, $\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{MAC}}(P,{\mathbf{H}}^{\dag})$ represents the capacity region of the dual MIMO-MAC. It is known that the capacity region of a MIMO-MAC can be achieved by the successive decoding [@Cover91:Info_Thry]. However, in order to determine the capacity region of a MIMO-MAC, all possible successive decoding orders need to be enumerated, which is very cumbersome. In the following theorem, however, we show that the enumeration of all successive decoding orders is indeed [*unnecessary*]{} when solving the MWSR problem of the dual MIMO-MAC. This result significantly reduces the complexity and paves the way to efficiently solve the MWSR problem by using CGP method.
\[thm\_weighted\_sum\] The MWSR problem in (\[eqn\_mac\_mws\]) can be solved by the following equivalent optimization problem: $$\label{eqn_mac_equiv}
\begin{array}{rl}
\!\!\!\!\!\! \mbox{Maximize} & \!\!\! \sum_{i=1}^{K} (u_{\pi(i)} - u_{\pi(i-1)}) \times \\
\!\!\!\!\!\! & \!\!\! \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{j=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \right)} \\
\!\!\!\!\!\! \mbox{subject to} & \!\!\! \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}({\mathbf{Q}}_{i}) \leq P_{\max} \\
\!\!\!\!\!\! & \!\!\! {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \succeq 0, \,\, i=1,\ldots,K,
\end{array}$$ where $u_{\pi(0)} \triangleq 0$, $\pi$ is a permutation of the set $\{1,\ldots,K\}$ such that $u_{\pi(1)} \leq \ldots \leq u_{\pi(K)}$. $\pi(i), i=1,\ldots,K$, represents the $i^{th}$ position in permutation $\pi$.
Let $\Phi(\mathcal{S}) = \log \det ({\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{i\in \mathcal{S}} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(i)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(i)}
{\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(i)})$, where $\mathcal{S}$ is a non-empty subset of $\{1,\ldots,K\}$. From Theorem 14.3.5 in [@Cover91:Info_Thry], we know that the maximum weighted sum rate problem can be written as $$\begin{array}{rl}
\mbox{Maximize} & \sum_{i=1}^{K} u_{\pi(i)} R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} \\
\mbox{subject to} & \sum_{i \in \mathcal{S}} R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} \leq \Phi(\mathcal{S}), \,\,
\forall \mathcal{S} \subseteq \{1,\ldots,K\}.
\end{array}$$ Thus, it is not difficult to see that, when $\mathcal{S} = \{\pi(i)\}$, $R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}}
\leq \Phi(\{\pi(i)\}) = \log{\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(i)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(i)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(i)} \right)}$. Since $u_{\pi(1)} \leq \ldots \leq u_{\pi(K)}$, from Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) condition, we must have that the constraint $R_{\pi(K)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} \leq \Phi(\{ \pi(K) \})$ must be tight at optimality. That is, $$\label{eqn_R_K}
R_{\pi(K)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} = \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)} \right)}.$$ Likewise, when $\mathcal{S} = \{\pi(K-1),\pi(K)\}$, we have $$\begin{array}{l}
\hspace{-.2in} R_{\pi(K-1)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} + R_{\pi(K)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} \leq \log \det \left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)} \right. \\
\hspace{+1in} \left.+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K-1)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K-1)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K-1)} \right).
\end{array}$$ So, from (\[eqn\_R\_K\]), we have $$\label{eqn_thm3_2}
\begin{array}{l}
\hspace{-.0in} R_{\pi(K-1)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} \leq \log \det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)} \right. \\
\hspace{+0.8in} \left. + {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K-1)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K-1)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K-1)} \right) - \\
\hspace{+0.8in} \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(K)} \right)}.
\end{array}$$ Since $u_{\pi(K-1)}$ is the second largest weight, again from KKT condition, we must have that (\[eqn\_thm3\_2\]) must be tight at optimality. This process continues for all $K$ users. Subsequently, we have that $$\label{eqn_thm3_3}
\begin{array}{l}
\hspace{-.1in} R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} = \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{j=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag}
{\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \right)} \\
\hspace{.4in} - \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{j=i+1}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \right)},
\end{array}$$ for $i=1,\ldots,K-1$. Summing up all $u_{\pi(i)} R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}}$ and after rearranging the terms, it is readily verifiable that $$\label{eqn_thm3_4}
\begin{array}{l}
\hspace{-.1in} \sum_{i=1}^{K} u_{\pi(i)} R_{\pi(i)}^{\mathrm{MAC}} = \sum_{i=1}^{K} (u_{\pi(i)} - u_{\pi(i-1)}) \times \nonumber \\
\hspace{1in} \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{j=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \right)}.
\end{array}$$ It then follows that the MWSR problem of the dual MIMO-MAC is equivalent to maximizing (\[eqn\_thm3\_4\]) with the sum power constraint, i.e., the optimization problem in (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]).
An important observation from (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]) is that, since $\log{\det\left( \cdot \right)}$ is a concave function for positive semidefinite matrices [@Cover91:Info_Thry], (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]) is a convex optimization problem with respect to the uplink input covariance matrices ${\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(1)},\ldots,{\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(K)}$. However, although the standard interior point convex optimization method can be used to solve (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]), it is considerably more complex than a method that exploits the special structure of (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]).
Conjugate Gradient Projection Method {#sec:framework}
====================================
In this paper, we modified the conjugate gradient projection method (CGP) in [@Liu07:MIMO_BC_CGP] to solve (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]). CGP utilizes the important and powerful concept of Hessian conjugacy to deflect the gradient direction appropriately so as to achieve the superlinear convergence rate [@Bazaraa_Sherali_Shetty_93:NLP]. The framework of CGP for solving (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]) is shown in Algorithm \[alg\_mgp\].
\
Choose the initial conditions ${\mathbf{Q}}^{(0)} = [ {\mathbf{Q}}_{1}^{(0)}, {\mathbf{Q}}_{2}^{(0)}, \ldots, {\mathbf{Q}}_{K}^{(0)}]^{T}$. Let\
$k=0$.\
\
1. Calculate the conjugate gradients ${\mathbf{G}}_{i}^{(k)}$, $i= 1,2, \ldots, K$.\
2. Choose an appropriate step size $s_{k}$. Let ${\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{'(k)} = {\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k)} + s_{k}
{\mathbf{G}}_{i}^{(k)}$,\
for $i=1,2,\ldots,K$.\
3. Let $\bar{{\mathbf{Q}}}^{(k)}$ be the projection of ${\mathbf{Q}}^{'(k)}$ onto ${\Omega_{+}(P)}$, where ${\Omega_{+}(P)}\triangleq $\
$\{ {\mathbf{Q}}_{i}, \,\, i=1,\ldots,K | {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \succeq 0, \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}\{ {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \} \leq P \}$.\
4. Choose appropriate step size $\alpha_{k}$. Let ${\mathbf{Q}}_{l}^{(k+1)} = {\mathbf{Q}}_{l}^{(k)} +
\alpha_{k}(\bar{{\mathbf{Q}}}_{i}^{(k)} - $\
${\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k)})$, $i=1,2,\ldots,K$.\
5. $k=k+1$. If the maximum absolute value of the elements in ${\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k)} - $\
${\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k-1)}< \epsilon$, for $i=1,2,\ldots,L$, then stop; else go to step 1.
Due to the complexity of the objective function in (\[eqn\_mac\_equiv\]), we adopt the inexact line search method called “Armijo’s Rule” to avoid excessive objective function evaluations, while still enjoying provable convergence [@Bazaraa_Sherali_Shetty_93:NLP]. The basic idea of Armijo’s Rule is that at each step of the line search, we sacrifice accuracy for efficiency as long as we have sufficient improvement. According to Armijo’s Rule, in the $k^{th}$ iteration, we choose $\sigma_{k}=1$ and $\alpha_{k} = \beta^{m_{k}}$ (the same as in [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc]), where $m_{k}$ is the first non-negative integer $m$ that satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn_Armijo}
\!\!\!\!\!\! && F({\mathbf{Q}}^{(k+1)}) - F({\mathbf{Q}}^{(k)})\geq \sigma \beta^{m} \langle
{\mathbf{G}}^{(k)}, \bar{{\mathbf{Q}}}^{(k)} - {\mathbf{Q}}^{(k)} \rangle \nonumber\\
\!\!\!\!\!\! && = \sigma \beta^{m} \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}\left[ {\mathbf{G}}_{i}^{\dag(k)}
\left(\bar{{\mathbf{Q}}}_{i}^{(k)} - {\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k)}\right) \right],\end{aligned}$$ where $0 < \beta < 1$ and $0 < \sigma < 1$ are fixed scalars.
Next, we will consider two major components in the CGP framework: 1) how to compute the conjugate gradient direction ${\mathbf{G}}_{i}$, and 2) how to project ${\mathbf{Q}}^{'(k)}$ onto the set ${\Omega_{+}(P)}\triangleq \{
{\mathbf{Q}}_{i}, \,\, i=1,\ldots,K | {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \succeq 0, \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}\{ {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \} \leq P \}$.
Computing the Conjugate Gradients
---------------------------------
The gradient $\bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)} \triangleq \nabla_{{\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}}
F({\mathbf{Q}})$ depends on the partial derivative of $F({\mathbf{Q}})$ with respect to ${\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}$. By using the formula $\frac{\partial \ln {\det\left( {\mathbf{A}}+{\mathbf{B}}{\mathbf{X}}{\mathbf{C}}\right)}}{\partial {\mathbf{X}}} = \left[ {\mathbf{C}}({\mathbf{A}}+{\mathbf{B}}{\mathbf{X}}{\mathbf{C}})^{-1}{\mathbf{B}}\right]^{T}$ [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc; @Magnus_Neudecker99:Mtrx_Diff_Calc], we can compute the partial derivative of the $i^{th}$ term in the summation of $F({\mathbf{Q}})$ with respect to ${\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}$, $j \geq i$, as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn_partial}
&& \hspace{-.25in}\frac{\partial} {\partial {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}} \Bigg( (u_{\pi(i)} - u_{\pi(i-1)}) \times
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{.3in} \left. \log {\det\left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{k=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(k)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)} \right)} \right) \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{-.25in} = \left(u_{\pi(i)} - u_{\pi(i-1)}\right) \times \nonumber\\ && \hspace{-.3in}
\left[ {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{k=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(k)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}
\right)^{-1} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag} \right]^{T} \hspace{-.1in}.\end{aligned}$$ To compute the gradient of $F({\mathbf{Q}})$ with respect to ${\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}$, we notice that only the first $j$ terms in $F({\mathbf{Q}})$ involve ${\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(j)}$. From the definition $\nabla_{z} f(z) = 2(\partial
f(z)/\partial z)^{*}$ [@Haykin96:Adpt_Fltr], we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn_gradient}
&& \hspace{-.25in} \bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)} = 2{\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)} \Bigg[ \sum_{i=1}^{j}\left(
u_{\pi(i)} - u_{\pi(i-1)} \right) \times \nonumber\\
&& \hspace{-.2in} \left. \left( {\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{k=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(k)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}
\right)^{-1} \right] {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(j)}^{\dag}.\end{aligned}$$
It is worth to point out that we can exploit the special structure in (\[eqn\_gradient\]) to significantly reduce the computation complexity in the implementation of the algorithm. Note that the most difficult part in computing $\bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)}$ is the summation of the terms in the form of ${\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(k)}{\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}$. Without careful consideration, one may end up computing such additions $j(2K+1-j)/2$ times for $\bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)}$. However, noting that most of the terms in the summation are still the same when $j$ varies, we can maintain a running sum for ${\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{k=i}^{K} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{\pi(k)} {\mathbf{H}}_{\pi(k)}$, start out from $j=K$, and reduce $j$ by one sequentially. As a result, only one new term is added to the running sum in each iteration, which means we only need to do the addition once in each iteration.
The conjugate gradient direction in the $m^{th}$ iteration can be computed as ${\mathbf{G}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m)} =
\bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m)} + \rho_{m} {\mathbf{G}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m-1)}$. We adopt the Fletcher and Reeves’ choice of deflection [@Bazaraa_Sherali_Shetty_93:NLP], which can be computed as $$\label{eqn_conjuate}
\rho_{m} = \frac{\| \bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m)} \|^{2}}{\| \bar{{\mathbf{G}}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m-1)} \|^{2}}.$$ The purpose of deflecting the gradient using (\[eqn\_conjuate\]) is to find ${\mathbf{G}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m)}$, which is the Hessian-conjugate of ${\mathbf{G}}_{\pi(j)}^{(m-1)}$. By doing so, we can eliminate the “zigzagging” phenomenon encountered in the conventional gradient projection method, and achieve the superlinear convergence rate [@Bazaraa_Sherali_Shetty_93:NLP] without actually storing a large Hessian approximation matrix as in quasi-Newton methods.
Projection onto ${\Omega_{+}(P)}$
---------------------------------
Noting from (\[eqn\_gradient\]) that ${\mathbf{G}}_{i}$ is Hermitian, we have that ${\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{'(k)} = {\mathbf{Q}}_{i}^{(k)}+s_{k} {\mathbf{G}}_{i}^{(k)}$ is Hermitian as well. Then, the projection problem becomes how to simultaneously project a set of $K$ Hermitian matrices onto the set ${\Omega_{+}(P)}$, which contains a constraint on sum power for all users. This is different to [@Ye03:MIMO_SH_AdHoc], where the projection was performed on individual power constraint. In order to do this, we construct a block diagonal matrix ${\mathbf{D}}= {\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ {\mathbf{Q}}_{1} \ldots {\mathbf{Q}}_{K} \right\}$}} \in
\mathbb{C}^{(K\cdot n_{r})\times(K\cdot n_{r})}$. It is easy to recognize that ${\mathbf{Q}}_{i} \in
{\Omega_{+}(P)}$, $i=1,\ldots,K$, only if ${\mathrm{Tr}}({\mathbf{D}}) = \sum_{i=1}^{K} {\mathrm{Tr}}\left({\mathbf{Q}}_{i}\right) \leq P$ and ${\mathbf{D}}\succeq 0$. In this paper, we use Frobenius norm, denoted by $\|\cdot\|_{F}$, as the matrix distance metric. The distance between two matrices ${\mathbf{A}}$ and ${\mathbf{B}}$ is defined as $\| {\mathbf{A}}- {\mathbf{B}}\|_{F} =
\left( {\mathrm{Tr}}\left[ ({\mathbf{A}}-{\mathbf{B}})^{\dag} ({\mathbf{A}}-{\mathbf{B}}) \right] \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}$. Thus, given a block diagonal matrix ${\mathbf{D}}$, we wish to find a matrix $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} \in {\Omega_{+}(P)}$ such that $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$ minimizes $\| \tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} - {\mathbf{D}}\|_{F}$. For more convenient algebraic manipulations, we instead study the following equivalent optimization problem: $$\label{eqn_proj_primal_equiv}
\begin{array}{rl}
\mbox{Minimize} & \frac{1}{2} \| \tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} - {\mathbf{D}}\|_{F}^{2} \\
\mbox{subject to} & {\mathrm{Tr}}(\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}) \leq P, \,\, \tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} \succeq 0. \\
\end{array}$$ In (\[eqn\_proj\_primal\_equiv\]), the objective function is convex in $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$, the constraint $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} \succeq 0$ represents the convex cone of positive semidefinite matrices, and the constraint ${\mathrm{Tr}}(\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}) \leq P$ is a linear constraint. Thus, the problem is a convex minimization problem and we can exactly solve this problem by solving its Lagrangian dual problem. Associating Hermitian matrix ${\mathbf{X}}$ to the constraint $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} \succeq 0$ and $\mu$ to the constraint ${\mathrm{Tr}}(\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}) \leq P$, we can write the Lagrangian as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn_prj_lagrangian}
g({\mathbf{X}}, \mu) &=& \min_{\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}} \left\{ (1/2) \| \tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} - {\mathbf{D}}\|_{F}^{2} -
{\mathrm{Tr}}({\mathbf{X}}^{\dag} \tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}) \right.\nonumber\\
&& \quad \quad \,\,+ \left. \mu \left({\mathrm{Tr}}(\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}})-P \right) \right\}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $g({\mathbf{X}}, \mu)$ is an unconstrained quadratic minimization problem, we can compute the minimizer of (\[eqn\_prj\_lagrangian\]) by simply setting the derivative of (\[eqn\_prj\_lagrangian\]) (with respect to $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$) to zero, i.e., $(\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} - {\mathbf{D}}) - {\mathbf{X}}^{\dag} + \mu {\mathbf{I}}= 0$. Noting that ${\mathbf{X}}^{\dag} = {\mathbf{X}}$, we have $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} = {\mathbf{D}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}$. Substituting $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$ back into (\[eqn\_prj\_lagrangian\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
&& \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!g({\mathbf{X}},\mu) = \frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{X}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}\right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} - \mu P + {\mathrm{Tr}}\left[ \left(\mu{\mathbf{I}}- {\mathbf{X}}\right) \left({\mathbf{D}}+ {\mathbf{X}}-\mu{\mathbf{I}}\right) \right] \nonumber\\
&& \quad \,\, = -\frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}\right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} - \mu P + \frac{1}{2} \| {\mathbf{D}}\|_{F}^{2}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, the Lagrangian dual problem can be written as $$\label{eqn_prj_dual}
\begin{array}{rl}
\mbox{Maximize} & -\frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}\right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} - \mu P + \frac{1}{2} \| {\mathbf{D}}\|_{F}^{2} \\
\mbox{subject to} & {\mathbf{X}}\succeq 0, \mu \geq 0.
\end{array}$$ After solving (\[eqn\_prj\_dual\]), we can have the optimal solution to (\[eqn\_proj\_primal\_equiv\]) as: $$\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}^{*} = {\mathbf{D}}- \mu^{*} {\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}^{*},$$ where $\mu^{*}$ and ${\mathbf{X}}^{*}$ are the optimal dual solutions to Lagrangian dual problem in (\[eqn\_prj\_dual\]). Although the Lagrangian dual problem in (\[eqn\_prj\_dual\]) has a similar structure as that in the primal problem in (\[eqn\_proj\_primal\_equiv\]) (having a positive semidefinitive matrix constraint), we find that the positive semidefinite matrix constraint can indeed be easily handled. To see this, we first introduce Moreau Decomposition Theorem from convex analysis.
\[thm\_moreau\](Moreau Decomposition [@Hiriart-Urruty_Lemarechal01:Cnvx_Anl]) Let $\mathcal{K}$ be a closed convex cone. For ${\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{x}}_{1},{\mathbf{x}}_{2} \in \mathbb{C}^{p}$, the two properties below are equivalent:
1. ${\mathbf{x}}= {\mathbf{x}}_{1} + {\mathbf{x}}_{2}$ with ${\mathbf{x}}_{1} \in \mathcal{K}$, ${\mathbf{x}}_{2} \in \mathcal{K}^{o}$ and $\langle {\mathbf{x}}_{1},{\mathbf{x}}_{2} \rangle =
0$,
2. ${\mathbf{x}}_{1} = p_{\mathcal{K}}({\mathbf{x}})$ and ${\mathbf{x}}_{2} = p_{\mathcal{K}^{o}}(x)$,
where $\mathcal{K}^{o} \triangleq \{ {\mathbf{s}}\in \mathbb{C}^{p}: \langle {\mathbf{s}}, {\mathbf{y}}\rangle \leq 0, \,
\forall \, {\mathbf{y}}\in \mathcal{K} \}$ is called the polar cone of cone $\mathcal{K}$, $p_{\mathcal{K}}(\cdot)$ represents the projection onto cone $\mathcal{K}$.
In fact, the projection onto a cone $\mathcal{K}$ is analogous to the projection onto a subspace. The only difference is that the orthogonal subspace is replaced by the polar cone.
Now we consider how to project a Hermitian matrix ${\mathbf{A}}\in \mathbb{C}^{n \times n}$ onto the positive and negative semidefinite cones. First, we can perform eigenvalue decomposition on ${\mathbf{A}}$ yielding ${\mathbf{A}}= \hat{{\mathbf{U}}} {\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ \lambda_{i}, \,\, i=1,\ldots,n \right\}$}} \hat{{\mathbf{U}}}^{\dag}$, where $\hat{{\mathbf{U}}}$ is the unitary matrix formed by the eigenvectors corresponding to the eigenvalues $\lambda_{i}$, $i=1,\ldots,n$. Then, we have the positive semidefinite and negative semidefinite projections of ${\mathbf{A}}$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqn_prj_psd} &{\mathbf{A}}_{+} = \hat{{\mathbf{U}}} {\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ \max\{ \lambda_{i},0\}, i=1,2,\ldots,n \right\}$}} \hat{{\mathbf{U}}}^{\dag},& \\
\label{eqn_prj_nsd} &{\mathbf{A}}_{-} = \hat{{\mathbf{U}}} {\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ \min\{ \lambda_{i},0\}, i=1,2,\ldots,n \right\}$}}
\hat{{\mathbf{U}}}^{\dag}.&\end{aligned}$$ The proof of (\[eqn\_prj\_psd\]) and (\[eqn\_prj\_nsd\]) is a straightforward application of Theorem \[thm\_moreau\] by noting that ${\mathbf{A}}_{+} \succeq 0$, ${\mathbf{A}}_{-} \preceq 0$, $\langle {\mathbf{A}}_{+},
{\mathbf{A}}_{-} \rangle = 0$, ${\mathbf{A}}_{+} + {\mathbf{A}}_{-} = {\mathbf{A}}$, and the positive semidefinite cone and negative semidefinite cone are polar cones to each other.
We now consider the term ${\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}$, which is the only term involving ${\mathbf{X}}$ in the dual objective function. We can rewrite it as ${\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}- (-{\mathbf{X}})$, where we note that $-{\mathbf{X}}\preceq 0$. Finding a negative semidefinite matrix $-{\mathbf{X}}$ such that $\| {\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}- (-{\mathbf{X}}) \|_{F}$ is minimized is equivalent to finding the projection of ${\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}$ onto the negative semidefinite cone. From the previous discussion, we immediately have $$\label{eqn_prj_negX}
-{\mathbf{X}}= \left({\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}\right)_{-}.$$ Since ${\mathbf{D}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}}= ({\mathbf{D}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}})_{+} + ({\mathbf{D}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}})_{-}$, substituting (\[eqn\_prj\_negX\]) back to the Lagrangian dual objective function, we have $$\min_{{\mathbf{X}}} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}+ {\mathbf{X}}\right\rVert$}}_{F} = \left({\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+}.$$ Thus, the matrix variable ${\mathbf{X}}$ in the Lagrangian dual problem can be removed and the Lagrangian dual problem can be rewritten as $$\label{eqn_prj_dual_sim}
\begin{array}{rl}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \mbox{Maximize} & \!\!\! \psi(\mu) \triangleq -\frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert \left({\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} \right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} - \mu P + \frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{D}}\right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} \\
\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \mbox{subject to} & \!\!\! \mu \geq 0.
\end{array}$$ Suppose that after performing eigenvalue decomposition on ${\mathbf{D}}$, we have ${\mathbf{D}}= {\mathbf{U}}{\mathbf{\Lambda}}{\mathbf{U}}^{\dag}$, where ${\mathbf{\Lambda}}$ is the diagonal matrix formed by the eigenvalues of ${\mathbf{D}}$, ${\mathbf{U}}$ is the unitary matrix formed by the corresponding eigenvectors. Since ${\mathbf{U}}$ is unitary, we have $\left({\mathbf{D}}-
\mu{\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} = {\mathbf{U}}\left({\mathbf{\Lambda}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} {\mathbf{U}}^{\dag}$. It then follows that $${\mbox{$\left\lVert \left({\mathbf{D}}- \mu{\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} \right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} = {\mbox{$\left\lVert \left({\mathbf{\Lambda}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} \right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2}.$$ We denote the eigenvalues in ${\mathbf{\Lambda}}$ by $\lambda_{i}$, $i=1,2,\ldots,K\cdot n_{r}$. Suppose that we sort them in non-increasing order such that ${\mathbf{\Lambda}}= {\mbox{Diag}\mbox{$\left\{ \lambda_{1} \,\, \lambda_{2}
\ldots \,\, \lambda_{K\cdot n_{r}} \right\}$}}$, where $\lambda_{1} \geq \ldots \geq \lambda_{K\cdot n_{r}}$. It then follows that $$\label{eqn_norm}
{\mbox{$\left\lVert \left({\mathbf{\Lambda}}- \mu {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} \right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2} = \sum_{j=1}^{K \cdot n_{r}} \left( \max
\left\{0, \lambda_{j} - \mu \right\} \right)^{2}.$$ From (\[eqn\_norm\]), we can rewrite $\psi(\mu)$ as $$\label{eqn_psi}
\psi(\mu) = - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j=1}^{K \cdot n_{r}} \left( \max \left\{0, \lambda_{j} - \mu
\right\} \right)^{2} - \mu P + \frac{1}{2} {\mbox{$\left\lVert {\mathbf{D}}\right\rVert$}}_{F}^{2}.$$ It is evident from (\[eqn\_psi\]) that $\psi(\mu)$ is continuous and (piece-wise) concave in $\mu$. Generally, piece-wise concave maximization problems can be solved by using the subgradient method. However, due to the heuristic nature of its step size selection strategy, subgradient algorithm usually does not perform well. In fact, by exploiting the special structure, (\[eqn\_prj\_dual\_sim\]) can be efficiently solved. We can search the optimal value of $\mu$ as follows. Let $\hat{I}$ index the pieces of $\psi(\mu)$, $\hat{I}=0,1,\ldots,K\cdot n_{r}$. Initially we set $\hat{I}=0$ and increase $\hat{I}$ subsequently. Also, we introduce $\lambda_{0} =
\infty$ and $\lambda_{K\cdot n_{r}+1} = -\infty$. We let the endpoint objective value $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{0} \right) = 0$, $\phi^{*} = \psi_{\hat{I}} \left( \lambda_{0}
\right)$, and $\mu^{*} = \lambda_{0}$. If $\hat{I} > K \cdot n_{r}$, the search stops. For a particular index $\hat{I}$, by setting $$\frac{\partial}{\partial \mu} \psi_{\hat{I}}(\nu) \triangleq \frac{\partial}{\partial \mu} \left(
-\frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{i}-\mu \right)^{2} - \mu P \right) = 0,$$ we have $$\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{\hat{I}} \lambda_{i} - P }{\hat{I}}.$$ Now we consider the following two cases:
1. If $\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*} \in \left[\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}, \lambda_{\hat{I}}\right] \cap
\mathbb{R}_{+}$, where $\mathbb{R}_{+}$ denotes the set of non-negative real numbers, then we have found the optimal solution for $\mu$ because $\psi(\mu)$ is concave in $\mu$. Thus, the point having zero-value first derivative, if exists, must be the unique global maximum solution. Hence, we can let $\mu^{*}=\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*}$ and the search is done.
2. If $\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*} \notin \left[\lambda_{\hat{I}+1},\lambda_{\hat{I}}\right] \cap \mathbb{R}_{+}$, we must have that the local maximum in the interval $\left[\lambda_{\hat{I}+1},
\lambda_{\hat{I}}\right] \cap \mathbb{R}_{+}$ is achieved at one of the two endpoints. Note that the objective value $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left( \lambda_{\hat{I}} \right)$ has been computed in the previous iteration because from the continuity of the objective function, we have $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left( \lambda_{\hat{I}} \right) = \psi_{\hat{I}-1}\left( \lambda_{\hat{I}}
\right)$. Thus, we only need to compute the other endpoint objective value $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}\right)$. If $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}\right) < \psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{\hat{I}}\right) =
\phi^{*}$, then we know $\mu^{*}$ is the optimal solution; else let $\mu^{*} =
\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}$, $\phi^{*} = \psi_{\hat{I}}\left( \lambda_{\hat{I}+1} \right)$, $\hat{I} =
\hat{I} + 1$ and continue.
Since there are $K \cdot n_{r}+1$ intervals in total, the search process takes at most $K \cdot
n_{r}+1$ steps to find the optimal solution $\mu^{*}$. Hence, this search is of polynomial-time complexity $O(n_{r}K)$.
After finding $\mu^{*}$, we can compute $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}^{*}$ as $$\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}^{*} = \left( {\mathbf{D}}- \mu^{*} {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} = {\mathbf{U}}\left( {\mathbf{\Lambda}}- \mu^{*} {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+}
{\mathbf{U}}^{\dag}.$$ That is, the projection $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$ can be computed by adjusting the eigenvalues of ${\mathbf{D}}$ using $\mu^{*}$ and keeping the eigenvectors unchanged. The projection of ${\mathbf{D}}$ onto ${\Omega_{+}(P)}$ is summarized in Algorithm \[alg\_rlt\_prj\].
[\
1. Construct a block diagonal matrix ${\mathbf{D}}$. Perform eigenvalue decompo-\
sition ${\mathbf{D}}= {\mathbf{U}}\mathbf{\Lambda} {\mathbf{U}}^{\dag}$, sort the eigenvalues in non-increasing order.\
2. Introduce $\lambda_{0} = \infty$ and $\lambda_{K \cdot n_{t}+1} = -\infty$. Let $\hat{I}=0$. Let the\
endpoint objective value $\psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{0}\right) = 0$, $\phi^{*}
= \psi_{\hat{I}}\left(\lambda_{0}\right)$, and $\mu^{*} = \lambda_{0}$.\
1. If $\hat{I} > K \cdot n_{r}$, go to the final step; else let $\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*} = (\sum_{j=1}^{\hat{I}} \lambda_{j} - P )/\hat{I}$.\
2. If [$\mu_{\hat{I}}^{*} \in [\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}, \lambda_{\hat{I}} ] \cap
\mathbb{R}_{+}$]{}, then let $\mu^{*} = \mu_{\hat{I}}^{*}$ and go to the final step.\
3. Compute $\psi_{\hat{I}}(\lambda_{\hat{I}+1})$. If $\psi_{\hat{I}}(\lambda_{\hat{I}+1}) < \phi^{*}$, then go to the final step;\
else let $\mu^{*} = \lambda_{\hat{I}+1}$, $\phi^{*} = \psi_{\hat{I}}(\lambda_{\hat{I}+1})$, $\hat{I} = \hat{I} + 1$ and continue.\
Compute $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}}$ as $\tilde{{\mathbf{D}}} = {\mathbf{U}}\left( {\mathbf{\Lambda}}- \mu^{*} {\mathbf{I}}\right)_{+} {\mathbf{U}}^{\dag}$. ]{}
Complexity Analysis {#sec:complexity}
===================
In this section, we analyze the complexity of our proposed CGP algorithm. Similar to IWFs [@Jindal04:MIMO_BC_IWF], SD [@Viswanathan03:MIMO_BC_SD], and DD [@Yu_CISS03], CGP has the desirable “linear complexity property”. We list the complexity per iteration for each component of CGP in Table \[tab\_complexity\].
In CGP, it can be seen that the most time-consuming part (increasing with respect to $K$) is the addition of the terms in the form of ${\mathbf{H}}_{i}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} {\mathbf{H}}_{i}$ when computing gradients. Since the term $({\mathbf{I}}+ \sum_{k=i}^{K}{\mathbf{H}}_{i}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} {\mathbf{H}}_{i})$ can be computed by the running sum, we only need to compute this sum once in each iteration. Thus, the number of such additions per iteration for CGP is $K$. It is also obvious that the projection in each iteration of CGP has the complexity of $O(n_{r}K)$. The complexity of the Armijo’s rule inexact line search has the complexity of $O(mK)$ (in terms of the additions of ${\mathbf{H}}_{i}^{\dag} {\mathbf{Q}}_{i} {\mathbf{H}}_{i}$ terms), where $m$ is the number of trials in Armijo’s Rule. Therefore, the overall complexity per iteration for CGP is $O((m+1+n_{r})K)$. According to our computational experience, the value of $m$ usually lies in between two and four. This shows that CGP has the linear complexity in $K$.
Also, as evidenced in the next section, the numbers of iterations required for convergence in CGP is very insensitive to the increase of the number of users. Moreover, CGP has a modest memory requirement: It only requires the solution information from the previous step, as opposed to the IWFs, which requires previous $K-1$ steps.
Numerical Results {#sec:results}
=================
We first use an example of a MIMO-BC system consisting of 10 users with $n_{t}=n_{r}=4$ to show the convergence behavior of our proposed algorithm. The weights of the 10 users are $[1, 1.5, 0.8, 0.9,
1.4, 1.2, 0.7, 1.1, 1.03, 1.3]$, respectively. The convergence process is plotted in Fig. \[fig\_example3\]. It can be seen that CGP takes approximately 30 iterations to reach near the optimal.
![Convergence behavior of a 10-user MIMO-BC with $n_{t}=n_{r}=4$.[]{data-label="fig_example3"}](fig_example3.eps){width="2.8in"}
To compare the efficiency of CGP with that of IWFs, we give an example of an equal-weight large MIMO-BC system consisting of 100 users with $n_{t}=n_{r}=4$ in here. The convergence processes are plotted in Fig. \[fig\_example6\]. It is observed from Fig. \[fig\_example6\] that CGP takes only 29 iterations to converge and it outperforms both IWFs. IWF1’s convergence speed significantly drops after the quick improvement in the early stage. It is also seen in this example that IWF2’s performance is inferior to IWF1, and this observation is in accordance with the results in [@Jindal04:MIMO_BC_IWF]. Both IWF1 and IWF2 fail to converge within 100 iterations. The scalability problem of both IWFs is not surprising because in both IWFs, the most recently updated covariance matrices only account for a fraction of $1/K$ in the effective channels’ computation, which means it does not effectively make use of the most recent solution. In all of our numerical examples with different number of users, CGP always converges within 30 iterations.
![Comparison in a 100-user MIMO-BC channel with $n_{t}=n_{r}=4$.[]{data-label="fig_example6"}](fig_example6.eps){width="2.8in"}
Conclusion {#sec:conclusions}
==========
In this paper, we studied the maximum weighted sum rate (MWSR) problem of MIMO-BC. Specifically, we derived the MWSR problem of the dual MIMO-MAC with a sum power constraint and developed an efficient algorithm based on conjugate gradient projection (CGP) to solve the MWSR problem. Also, we theoretically and numerically analyzed its complexity and convergence behavior. Our contributions in this paper are three-fold: First, this paper is the first work that considers the MWSR problem of MIMO-BC; Second, we simplified the MWSR problem in the dual MIMO-MAC and showed that enumerating all different decoding orders is unnecessary; Third, we developed an efficient and well-scalable algorithm based on conjugate gradient projection (CGP). The attractive features of CGP and encouraging results in this paper showed that CGP is an excellent method for solving the MWSR problem of large MIMO-BC systems.
[10]{} \[1\][\#1]{} url@samestyle \[2\][\#2]{} \[2\][[l@\#1=l@\#1\#2]{}]{}
T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, *Elements of Information Theory*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emNew York-Chichester-Brisbane-Toronto-Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1991.
H. Weingarten, Y. Steinberg, and S. Shamai (Shitz), “The capacity region of the [G]{}aussian multiple-input multiple-output broadcast channel,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Inf. Theory*, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 3936–3964, Sep. 2006.
S. Vishwanath, N. Jindal, and A. Goldsmith, “Duality, achievable rates, and sum-rate capacity of [MIMO]{} broadcast channels,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Inf. Theory*, vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 2658–2668, Oct. 2003.
P. Viswanath and D. N. C. Tse, “Sum capacity of the vector [G]{}aussian broadcast channel and uplink-downlink duality,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Inf. Theory*, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 1912–1921, Aug. 2003.
W. Yu, “Uplink-downlink duality via minimax duality,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Inf. Theory*, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 361–374, Feb. 2006.
J. Liu and Y. T. Hou, “Cross-layer optimization of [MIMO]{}-based mesh networks with gaussian vector broadcast channels,” *Technical Report, Deptment of ECE, Virginia Tech*, Mar. 2007. \[Online\]. Available: <http://filebox.vt.edu/users/kevinlau/publications/>
T. Lan and W. Yu, “Input optimization for multi-antenna broadcast channels and per-antenna power constraints,” in *Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM*, Dallas, TX, U.S.A., Nov. 2004, pp. 420–424.
H. Viswanathan, S. Venkatesan, and H. Huang, “Downlink capacity evaluation of cellular networks with known-interference cancellation,” *[IEEE]{} J. Sel. Areas Commun.*, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 802–811, Jun. 2003.
W. Yu, “A dual decomposition approach to the sum power [G]{}aussian vector multiple-access channel sum capacity problem,” in *Proc. Conf. Information Sciences and Systems (CISS)*, Baltimore, MD, U.S.A., 2003.
N. Jindal, W. Rhee, S. Vishwanath, S. A. Jafar, and A. Goldsmith, “Sum power iterative water-filling for multi-antenna [G]{}aussian broadcast channels,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Inf. Theory*, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1570–1580, Apr. 2005.
J. Liu, Y. T. Hou, and H. D. Sherali, “Conjugate gradient projection approach for multi-antenna gaussian broadcast channels,” in *Proc. IEEE ISIT*, Nice, France, Jun. 2007, to appear.
S. Ye and R. S. Blum, “Optimized signaling for [MIMO]{} interference systems with feedback,” *[IEEE]{} Trans. Signal Process.*, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 2839–2848, Nov. 2003.
M. S. Bazaraa, H. D. Sherali, and C. M. Shetty, *Nonlinear Programming: Theory and Algorithms*, 3rd ed.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emNew York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2006.
J. R. Magnus and H. Neudecker, *Matrix Differential Calculus with Applications in Statistics and Economics*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emNew York: Wiley, 1999.
S. Haykin, *Adaptive Filter Theory*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996.
J.-B. Hiriart-Urruty and C. Lemaréchal, *Fundamentals of Convex Analysis*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emBerlin: Springer-Verlag, 2001.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Let $G$ and $H$ be two simple graphs. A bijection $\phi:V(G)\rightarrow V(H)$ is called an [*isomorphism*]{} between $G$ and $H$ if $(\phi\hspace{0.5mm} v_i)(\phi\hspace{0.5mm} v_j)\in E(H)$ $\Leftrightarrow$ $v_i v_j\in E(G)$ for any two vertices $v_i$ and $v_j$ of $G$. In the case that $G = H$, we say $\phi$ an automorphism of $G$ and denote the group consisting of all automorphisms of $G$ by $\mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} G$. As well-known, the problem of determining whether or not two given graphs are isomorphic is called [*Graph Isomorphism Problem*]{} (GI). One of key steps in resolving GI is to work out the partition $\Pi^*_G$ of $V(G)$ composed of orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. By means of geometric features of $\Pi^*_G$ and combinatorial constructions such as the multipartite graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$, where $t_1,\ldots,t_s$ are vertices of $G$ constituting an orbit of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ and $\Pi^*_{t_i}$ ($i=1,\ldots,s$) is the partition comprised of orbits of the stabilizer $( \mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} G )_{t_i}$, we can reduce the problem of determining $\Pi_G^*$ to that of working out a series of partitions of $V(G)$ each of which consists of orbits of a stabilizer that fixes a sequence of vertices of $G$, and thus the determination of the partition $\Pi^*_v$ is a critical transition.
On the other hand, we have for a given subspace $U \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ a permutation group $\mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} U$ which is defined as $\{ \sigma \in S_n : \sigma \hspace{0.5mm} U = U \}$. As a matter of fact, $\mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} G = \cap_{\lambda \in \mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.3mm} \mathbf{A}(G) } \mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} V_{\lambda}$, where $V_{\lambda}$ is the eigenspace of the adjacency matrix $\mathbf{A}(G)$ corresponding to $\lambda$, and moreover we can obtain a good approximation $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; v ]$ to $\Pi_v^*$ by analyzing a decomposition of $V_{\lambda}$ resulted from the division of $V_{\lambda}$ by subspaces $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )^{\perp} : v \in V(G) \}$, where ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$ denotes the orthogonal projection of the vector $\pmb{e}_v$ onto $V_{\lambda}$ and ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )^{\perp}$ stands for the orthogonal complement of the subspace spanned by ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$ in $V_{\lambda}$. In fact, there is a close relation among subspaces spanned by cells of the equitable partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; v ]$ of $G$, which enables us to determine $\Pi_v^*$ more efficiently. In virtue of that, we devise a deterministic algorithm solving GI in time $n^{ O( \log n ) }$, which is equal to $2^{ O\left( \log^2 n \right) }$.
author:
- |
Wenxue Du\
[*School of Mathematical Science, Anhui University, Hefei, 230601, China*]{}\
[E-mail: [email protected] ]{}
title: '**On Graph Isomorphism Problem** '
---
2010 [*Mathematics Subject Classification*]{}. Primary 05C25, 05C50, 05C60; Secondary 05C85.
Introduction
============
Let $G$ and $H$ be two simple graphs. A bijective map $\phi$ from $V(G)$ to $V(H)$ is called an [*isomorphism*]{} between $G$ and $H$ if $(\phi\hspace{0.5mm} v_i)(\phi\hspace{0.5mm} v_j) \in E(H)$ $\Leftrightarrow$ $v_i v_j\in E(G)$ for any two vertices $v_i$ and $v_j$ of $G$. In the case that there is such an isomorphism between $G$ and $H$, we say that $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic, which is denoted by $G \cong H$. The problem of determining whether or not two given graphs are isomorphic is called [*Graph Isomorphism Problem*]{} (GI).
One of striking facts about GI is the following established by Whitney in 1930s.
\[Thm-WhitneyIsomorphism\] Two connected graphs are isomorphic if and only if their line graphs are isomorphic, with a single exception: $K_3$ and $K_{1,3}$, which are not isomorphic but both have $K_3$ as their line graph.
Clearly, the relation above offers a reduction of GI from general graphs to a special class of graphs — line graphs, which accounts only for a small fraction of all graphs. This fact suggests that GI may not be very hard. In fact, GI is well solved from practical point of view and there are a number of efficient algorithms available [@McP]. Even from worst-case point of view, GI may not be as hard as NP-complete problems. As a matter of fact GI is not NP-complete unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses to its second level [@BHZ; @Schonig]. On the other hand, however, we have no efficient algorithm so far for general graphs in worst-case analysis, while for restricted graph classes there are efficient algorithms, for instance, for graphs with bounded degree [@Luks] and for graphs with bounded eigenvalue multiplicity [@BaGrMu]. L. Babai [@Babai] recently declared an algorithm resolving GI for any graph of order $n$ within time $\exp\big\{ (\log n)^{O(1)} \big\}$ in worst-case analysis. In the present paper, we develop a machinery for GI from geometric point of view, which enables us devise a deterministic algorithm solving GI for any graph of order $n$ within time $2^{ O\left( \log^2 n \right) }$ in worst-case analysis.
In the case that two graphs $G$ and $H$ involved are the same, an isomorphism is called an [*automorphism*]{} of $G$. Clearly, all automorphisms of $G$ form a group under composition of maps, which is denoted by ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. Suppose the vertex set $V(G)$ is $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ abbreviated to $[n]$. Then a bijective map $\phi$ on $V(G)$ is a permutation of $[n]$, and thus the automorphism group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ is a permutation group of $[n]$.
There is a natural action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ on the vertex set $[n]$: $I v = v$, where $I$ is the identity of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$, and $\gamma (\sigma v) = (\gamma \sigma) v$ for any two permutations $\gamma$ and $\sigma$ in ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. Accordingly, we can obtain a subset $\{ \sigma v : \sigma \in {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} \}$ of $[n]$, which is called an [*orbit*]{} of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. Obviously, the orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ constitute a partition of $[n]$, which is denoted by $\Pi_G^*$, and each orbit is called a cell of $\Pi_G^*$. One can readily see that for any subgroup $\mathfrak{S}$ of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ we have a partition of $[n]$ consisting of orbits of $\mathfrak{S}$.
Suppose $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic and $\phi$ is an isomorphism between $G$ and $H$. It is easy to see that $\phi$ induces a bijection between cells of $\Pi_G^*$ and of $\Pi_H^*$. Apparently, if ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ is trivial, [*i.e.,*]{} there is only one permutation, the identity, in ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$, then the bijection from $\Pi_G^*$ to $\Pi_H^*$ is actually equal to $\phi$. So let us consider more interesting cases and assume ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ possesses at least one non-trivial orbit.
We take a vertex $u_1$ from a non-trivial orbit of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. Then there is exactly one vertex $v_1$ of $H$ corresponding to $u_1$ through $\phi$, and accordingly $\phi$ induces a bijection between cells of $\Pi_{u_1}^*$ and of $\Pi_{v_1}^*$, where $\Pi_{u_1}^*$ and $\Pi_{v_1}^*$ are two partitions of $V(G)$ and $V(H)$, respectively, consisting of orbits of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1}$ and of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} H} )_{v_1}$, and $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1}$ stands for the subgroup of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ which is defined as $\{ \gamma \in {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} : \gamma \hspace{0.5mm} u_1 = u_1 \}$ and called the [*stabilizer of $u_1$ in ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$.*]{} Moreover, if $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1}$ is non-trivial, we could choose another vertex $u_2$ from a non-trivial orbit of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1}$. Then we can get a vertex $v_2 = \phi\hspace{0.5mm} u_2$ of $H$ so that there is a bijection between $\Pi_{u_1,u_2}^*$ and $\Pi_{v_1,v_2}^*$ induced also by $\phi$, where $\Pi_{u_1,u_2}^*$ and $\Pi_{v_1,v_2}^*$ are two partitions of $V(G)$ and $V(H)$, respectively, consisting of orbits of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1,u_2}$ and of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} H} )_{v_1,v_2}$, and $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1,u_2}$ called the [*stabilizer of the sequence $u_1,u_2$ in ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$*]{} is defined as $\{ \gamma \in {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} : \gamma \hspace{0.5mm} u_i = u_i, i = 1,2 \}$. Clearly, we can continue this process until the stabilizer of the sequence $u_1,\ldots,u_s$ is trivial, [*i.e.,*]{} $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} )_{u_1,\ldots,u_s} = \{ I \}$.
Conversely, if we have those two groups of partitions $\Pi_{G}^*,\Pi_{u_1}^*,\ldots,\Pi_{u_1,\ldots,u_s}^*$ and $\Pi_{H}^*,\Pi_{v_1}^*,\ldots,\Pi_{v_1,\ldots,v_s}^*$ and know the corresponding relations between cells of partitions in each pair $(\Pi^*_G,\Pi^*_H)$, $(\Pi^*_{u_1},\Pi^*_{v_1})$, $\cdots$, $(\Pi^*_{u_1,\ldots,u_s},\Pi^*_{v_1,\ldots,v_s})$, then we can easily decide whether $G$ is isomorphic to $H$ or not and in the case of being isomorphic work out an isomorphism from $G$ to $H$.
In the next part, we shall explore some geometric features of $\Pi_G^*$ that show us how to reduce the problem of determining $\Pi_G^*$ to that of working out a series of partitions of $[n]$ each of which consists of orbits of a stabilizer that fixes a sequence of vertices of $G$, and thus the determination of the partition $\Pi^*_v$ is a critical transition.
The [*adjacency matrix*]{} of $G$, denoted by $\mathbf{A}(G)$, is a $n\times n$ (0,1)-matrix where each entry $a_{ij}$ of the matrix is equal to 1 if and only if the two vertices $v_i$ and $v_j$ are adjacent in $G$. In the second part, we will reveal some of geometric features of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ by means of the decomposition $\oplus V_{\lambda} = \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, where $V_{\lambda}$ is the eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $\lambda$. In virtue of that, we could build a partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$, which is a good approximation to $\Pi^*_{v}$.
Geometric Features of $\Pi_{G}^*$
---------------------------------
Let $\Pi$ be a partition of $[n]$ with cells $C_1,\ldots,C_t$, which is said to be [*equitable*]{} if for any vertex $v$ in $C_i$, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $C_j$ is a constant $b_{ij}$ $(1\leq i,j \leq t)$, [*i.e.,*]{} the number of neighbors in every cell is independent of the vertex $v$. Clearly, if $\mathfrak{S}$ is a subgroup of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ then the partition of $[n]$ consisting of orbits of $\mathfrak{S}$ is an equitable one. On the other hand, we can construct a direct graph $G / \Pi$ from $G$ and its equitable partition $\Pi$, which is called the [*quotient graph*]{} of $G$ over $\Pi$. The vertex set of $G / \Pi$ is composed of cells of $\Pi$ and there are $b_{ij}$ arcs $(1\leq i,j \leq t)$ from the $i$th vertex to the $j$th vertex of $V(G / \Pi)$.
For each cell $C_i$ ($i=1,\ldots,t$) of the partition $\Pi$, one can build a vector $\pmb{R}_{C_i}$, or abbreviated to $\pmb{R}_i$, to indicate $C_i$, that is called the [*characteristic vector*]{} of $C_i$, such that the $k$th coordinate ($1\leq k\leq n$) of the vector is 1 if $k$ belongs to $C_i$ otherwise it is 0. By means of characteristic vectors, we can define the [*characteristic matrix*]{} $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi}$ of $\Pi$ as $(\pmb{R}_1 \pmb{R}_2 \cdots \pmb{R}_t)$. It is not difficult to verify that a partition $\Pi$ of $[n]$ is equitable if and only if the column space of $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi}$ is ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$-invariant (see [@GodRoy] for details).
As well-known, if the partition $\Pi$ involved is equitable, there is a close relation between eigenvalues and eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A}(G)$ and that of $\mathbf{A}(G / \Pi)$. To be precise, ${\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G / \Pi )} } \subseteq {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$, and if $\pmb{x}_{\lambda}$ is an eigenvector of $\mathbf{A}(G / \Pi)$, corresponding to the eigenvalue $\lambda$, then $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi} \pmb{x}_{\lambda}$ is an eigenvector of $\mathbf{A}(G)$, corresponding to $\lambda$ also, where $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi}$ is the characteristic matrix of $\Pi$. Accordingly, we say that the eigenvector $\pmb{x}_{\lambda}$ of $\mathbf{A}(G / \Pi)$ [*“lifts”*]{} to the eigenvector $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi} \pmb{x}_{\lambda}$ of $\mathbf{A}(G)$. Moreover all eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A}(G)$ could be divided into two classes: those that are constant on every cell of $\Pi$ and those that sum to zero on each cell of $\Pi$. As one can readily see, the first class consists of vectors lifted from eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A}(G / \Pi)$. In other words, if $\Pi = \{ C_1,\ldots,C_t \}$ is an equitable partition and $x$ and $y$ are two vertices of $G$ belonging to the same cell of $\Pi$, then $$\label{Def-EquitablePartition}
\langle \pmb{e}_x,{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_\lambda \big]}(\pmb{R}_j) \rangle = \langle \pmb{e}_y,{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_\lambda \big]}(\pmb{R}_j) \rangle, ~\forall~\lambda\in\mathrm{spec}~\mathbf{A}(G) \mbox{\it ~and } j\in [t],$$ where $\pmb{R}_j$ is the characteristic vector of $C_j$ and the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_\lambda \big]}(\pmb{R}_j)$ is the orthogonal projection of $\pmb{R}_j$ onto the eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$. As we shall see below, the relation above is also sufficient for being equitable.
\[Lemma-EquitablePartProj\] Let $\Pi = \{ C_1,\ldots,C_t \}$ be a partition of $V(G)$. Then $\Pi$ is equitable if and only if for any two vertices $x$ and $y$ belonging to the same cell of $\Pi$, the relation (\[Def-EquitablePartition\]) holds.
We have discussed the necessity of our assertion, so let us show the sufficiency now. Obviously, the vectors $\pmb{R}_1,\ldots,\pmb{R}_t$ comprise an orthogonal basis of $U_\Pi$, which is the column space of $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi}$. To prove $U_\Pi$ is $\mathbf{A}(G)$-invariant, it suffices to show that $\mathbf{A}(G) \pmb{R}_k$ ($1\leq k \leq t$) can be written as a linear combination of $\pmb{R}_1,\ldots,\pmb{R}_t$.
In fact, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{A}(G) \pmb{R}_k
& = \mathbf{A}(G) \left( \sum_{\lambda \hspace{0.2mm} \in \hspace{0.2mm} \mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.2mm} \mathbf{A}(G)} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_k ) \right) \\
& = \sum_{\lambda} \mathbf{A}(G){\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_k ) \\
& = \sum_{\lambda} \lambda\cdot{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_k ).\end{aligned}$$ In accordance with our assumption, one can readily see that ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_k )$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $\pmb{R}_1,\ldots,\pmb{R}_t$, so is $\mathbf{A}(G) \pmb{R}_k$.
Clearly Lemma \[Lemma-EquitablePartProj\] shows us that if $\Pi$ is an equitable partition and $C$ is a cell of $\Pi$, then the projection ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_C )$ is in the subspace $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi }$, where $V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi }$ is the eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G / \Pi )}$ corresponding to $\lambda$, and thus $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_C )
& = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi } \big]}( \pmb{R}_C ) \\
& = \sum_{c\in C} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi } \big]}( \pmb{e}_c ) \\
& = |C| \cdot {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi } \big]}( \pmb{e}_c ).\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, $\pmb{R}_C = \sum_{ \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} } } {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_C )$. Therefore, $$\label{Equ-OrbitsAutG-Equitable}
\frac{1}{ |C| } \cdot \pmb{R}_C =
\sum_{ \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} } } {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi } \big]}( \pmb{e}_c ), ~~~~ \forall c \in C.$$ This relation reveals that in order to determine the partition $\Pi_G^*$, we only need to work out those subspaces $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi_G^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_G^* }$ for each $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$.
Before showing how to obtain $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi_G^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_G^* }$ without knowing the partition $\Pi_G^*$, we first introduce two kinds of subspaces $V_{\lambda} \langle u \rangle$ and $V_{1}^{\gamma}$ relevant to subgroups of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. For convenience, we use $\mathfrak{G}$ in what follows to denote the permutation group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. $$\label{Def-SubspacePointStabilizer}
V_{\lambda} \langle u \rangle :=
\{ \pmb{v} \in V_{\lambda} \mid \xi \hspace{0.5mm} \pmb{v} = \pmb{v}, ~ \forall \hspace{0.6mm} \xi\in\mathfrak{G}_u \}, ~~ u\in [n].$$ $$\label{Def-SubspaceEigenvalue1}
V_{1}^{\gamma} :=
\{ \pmb{v} \in \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n \mid \gamma \hspace{0.5mm} \pmb{v} = \pmb{v} \}, ~~ \gamma \in \mathfrak{G}.$$ Apparently the partition $\Pi_u^*$ composed of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_u$ is equitable and $V_{\lambda} \langle u \rangle = \mathbf{R}_{\Pi_u^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_u^* }$.
One can readily see that there are for any vertex $v$ of $G$ two possibilities: $$\label{Equ-ActionGonV}
\mbox{either } \sigma v = v \mbox{ or } \sigma v \neq v, ~ \forall\hspace{0.6mm} \sigma \in \mathfrak{G}.$$ It is interesting that there might be some subsets of $[n]$ possessing that relation (\[Equ-ActionGonV\]). Let $B$ be a non-empty subset contained in some orbit $T$ of $\mathfrak{G}$, which is called a [*block*]{} for $\mathfrak{G}$ if $$\mbox{ either }\sigma B = B \mbox{ or } \sigma B \cap B = \emptyset, ~ \forall\hspace{0.6mm} \sigma \in \mathfrak{G}.$$ Evidently, any element $t$ of $T$ and the orbit $T$ itself are blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$. If the group $\mathfrak{G}$ has only two such kinds of blocks in $T$ we say the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on $T$ is [*primitive*]{}, otherwise [*imprimitive.*]{} On the other hand, the family of subsets $\{ \gamma B : \gamma \in \mathfrak{G} \}$ forms a partition of $T$, which is called the [*system of blocks containing $B$*]{} and denoted by $\mathscr{B}$. The action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on the system $\mathscr{B}$ is said to be [*regular*]{} if for any $\gamma \in \mathfrak{G}$, the stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_B$ fixes $\gamma B$.
Let $B_1,\ldots,B_m$ be a sequence of blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$ such that $B_1 \subsetneq B_2 \subsetneq \cdots \subsetneq B_m \subsetneq B_{m+1} = T$, $B_1$ is a minimal block and $B_i$ is maximal in $B_{i+1}$, [*i.e.,*]{} there is no block $K$ for $\mathfrak{G}$ so that $B_i \subsetneq K \subsetneq B_{i+1}$, $i=1,\ldots,m$. That kind of sequence is said to be a [*block family*]{} of $\mathfrak{G}$. Suppose $\mathscr{B}_i$ is the block system of $\mathfrak{G}$ containing $B_{i}$. We call those systems involved a [*block system family of* ]{} $\mathfrak{G}$, which is denoted by $\mathscr{B}_1 \gneq \mathscr{B}_2 \gneq \cdots \gneq \mathscr{B}_m$. Suppose further that $\mathscr{B}_{i_1},\ldots,\mathscr{B}_{i_r}$ are those systems in the family such that the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on $\mathscr{B}_{i_j}$ ($j = 1,\ldots,r$) is regular and $\gamma_{1},\gamma_{2},\ldots,\gamma_{r}$ are a group of permutations in $\mathfrak{G}$ such that $\gamma_{j} B_{i_j} \neq B_{i_j}$ and $\gamma_{j} B_{i_{j+1}} = B_{i_{j+1}}$.
\[Thm-Equation-OrbitsOfAutG\] $$\mathbf{R}_{\Pi^*_G} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G }
=
\left( \bigcap_{t\in T} \mathbf{R}_{\Pi_t^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_t^* } \right)
\bigcap
\left( \bigcap_{j=1}^r V_1^{ \gamma_j} \right)_{\textstyle .}$$
Accordingly, in order to determine the partition $\Pi^*_G$, we only need to have one partition $\Pi^*_t$ and a group of permutations $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_{_{\footnotesize l(T)}}$ in $\mathfrak{G}$, where $t$ is an element of a non-trivial $\mathfrak{G}$ orbit $T$, which is composed of $t_1=t,t_2,\ldots,t_{_{\footnotesize l(T)}}$, and $\gamma_i\hspace{0.4mm} t = t_i$, $i=1,\ldots,l(T)$. Similarly, in order to determine $\Pi^*_t$, we only need to know one partition $\Pi^*_{t,u}$, which is composed of orbits of the stabilizer $\left( \mathfrak{G}_t \right)_u$, abbreviated to $\mathfrak{G}_{t,u}$, and a group of permutations $\delta_1,\ldots,\delta_{l(R)}$ in $\mathfrak{G}_t$ such that $u$ belongs to some non-trivial orbit $R$ of $\mathfrak{G}_t$, which consists of elements $u_1=u,u_2,\ldots,u_{l(R)}$, and $\delta_i\hspace{0.4mm} u = u_i$, $i=1,\ldots,l(R)$. Apparently, we can repeat this process until the partition consisting of orbits of the last stabilizer, which fixes a sequence of vertices of $G$, is made up of trivial cells only, [*i.e.,*]{} the final partition is equal to $\{\{v\} : v \in [n] \}$.
We call a sequence of vertices $u_1,\ldots,u_s$ a fastening sequence of $\mathfrak{G}$ if $u_1$ belongs to a non-trivial orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$, $u_i$ belongs to some non-trivial orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_{u_1,\ldots,u_{i-1}}$ ($i=2,\ldots,s$) and $\mathfrak{G}_{u_1,\ldots,u_{s}} = \{ 1 \}$, where $\mathfrak{G}_{u_1,\ldots,u_{i-1}} = \left\{ \gamma \in \mathfrak{G} : \gamma \hspace{0.5mm} u_k = u_k, k = 1,\ldots,i-1 \right\}$. Let $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_{s}$ and $y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_{s}$ be two fastening sequences of $\mathfrak{G}$. A moment’s reflection would show that in order to determine a permutation in $\mathfrak{G}$ mapping $x_1$ to $y_1$, we only need to work out two group of partitions $\Pi^*_{x_1},\Pi^*_{x_1,x_2},\ldots,\Pi^*_{x_1,\ldots,x_{s}}$ and $\Pi^*_{y_1},\Pi^*_{y_1,y_2},\ldots,\Pi^*_{y_1,\ldots,y_{s}}$ and to know the corresponding relation between cells of partitions in each pair $( \Pi^*_{x_1,\ldots,x_k},\Pi^*_{y_1,\ldots,y_k} )$, $k=1,\ldots,s$.
In the 3rd section, we will show how to work out those partitions and determine the corresponding relation between cells of partitions in each pair. For convenience, we use the term “[*information about $\mathfrak{G}$*]{}” to describe the information about the partition $\Pi_G^*$ and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of $\mathfrak{G}$.
The Partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ — an Approximation to $\Pi^*_v$
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, all permutations of $[n]$ form a group under composition of maps, which is called the [*symmetric group of degree*]{} $n$ and denoted by ${\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} [n]}$, or by $S_n$ for short. Each permutation $\sigma$ in $S_n$ can act on a vector $\pmb{u}=(u_1,\ldots,u_n)^t$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ in a natural way: $$\label{Def-PermutationOperator} \sigma \hspace{0.5mm} \pmb{u}=(u_{\sigma^{-1}1},u_{\sigma^{-1}2},\ldots,u_{\sigma^{-1} n})^t,$$ where $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ is the $n$-dimensional vector space over the real field $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}$. Accordingly, any permutation $\sigma$ in $S_n$ can be regarded, through the action on vectors, as a linear operator on $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. We call a (0,1)-square matrix a [*permutation matrix*]{} if in each row and column there is exactly one entry that is equal to 1. It is easy to check that the matrix $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}$ of the operator $\sigma$ with respect to the standard basis $\pmb{e}_1,\ldots,\pmb{e}_n$ is a permutation matrix, where each $\pmb{e}_i$ $(i=1,\ldots,n)$ has exactly one non-trivial entry on $i$th coordinate that is equal to 1, and all other entries of $\pmb{e}_i$ are equal to 0.
Recall that the vertex set $V(G)$ is $[n]$, so a bijective map $\phi$ from $V(G)$ to itself is a permutation of $[n]$. It is easy to check that $$\label{Equation00}
\phi\mbox{ is an automorphism of }G\mbox{ if and only if }\mathbf{P}_{\phi}^{-1}{\mathbf{A}( G )}\mathbf{P}_{\phi}={\mathbf{A}( G )},$$ which presents an algebraic way of characterizing automorphisms of $G$. There is in virtue of eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ another way to characterize automorphisms of $G$.
\[Lem-AutomorphismAndOperator\] Let $G$ be a graph with the vertex set $[n]$ and let $\sigma$ be a permutation in $S_n$. Then $\sigma$ is an automorphism of $G$ if and only if every eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ is $\sigma$-invariant.
Recall that the $n$-dimensional vector space $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ is endowed with the [*inner product*]{} $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ such that $\langle\pmb{u},\pmb{v}\rangle=\pmb{v}^t\pmb{u}=\sum_{i=1}^n u_i\cdot v_i$ for any vectors $\pmb{u}=(u_1,\ldots,u_n)^t$ and $\pmb{v}=(v_1,\ldots,v_n)^t$ in $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. Since the matrix $\mathbf{A}(G)$ is symmetric, there is an orthonormal basis of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ consisting of eigenvectors of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ according to the real spectral theorem (see [@Axler] for details).
We begin with the necessity of the assertion. In accordance with the relation (\[Equation00\]), $\sigma$ is an automorphism of $G$ if and only if $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}^t\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}=\mathbf{A}$, so for any eigenvector $\pmb{v}$ of $\mathbf{A}$ corresponding to some eigenvalue $\lambda$, $$\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}^t\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{v}=\mathbf{A}\pmb{v}=\lambda\pmb{v}.$$ Consequently, $\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{v}=\lambda\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{v}$, which means $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{v}$ is also an eigenvector of $\mathbf{A}$ corresponding to $\lambda$, and thus every eigenspace of $\mathbf{A}$ is $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}$-invariant.
Conversely, let us select an orthonormal basis $\pmb{x}_1,\ldots,\pmb{x}_n$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, consisting of eigenvectors of $\mathbf{A}$ such that $\mathbf{A}\pmb{x}_i = \lambda_i\pmb{x}_i$, $i=1,\ldots,n$. Since every eigenspace of $\mathbf{A}$ is $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}$-invariant, for every $\pmb{x}_i$ we have $$\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{x}_i
= \lambda_i\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{x}_i
= \mathbf{P}_{\sigma} \lambda_i\pmb{x}_i
=\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\mathbf{A}\pmb{x}_i.$$ Consequently, for an arbitrary vector $\pmb{v}=\sum_{i=1}^na_i\pmb{x}_i$ in $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, $$\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\mathbf{A}\pmb{v}=\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\mathbf{A}\sum_{i=1}^na_i\pmb{x}_i
=\sum_{i=1}^na_i\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\mathbf{A}\pmb{x}_i=
\sum_{i=1}^na_i\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{x}_i
=\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\sum_{i=1}^na_i\pmb{x}_i
=\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\pmb{v}.$$ As a result, $\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}\mathbf{A}=\mathbf{A}\mathbf{P}_{\sigma}$, and thus the permutation $\sigma$ is an automorphism of $G$.
In accordance with Lemma \[Lem-AutomorphismAndOperator\], we can describe automorphisms of $G$ and so the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ in terms of eigenspaces of $\mathbf{A}(G)$. Let $U$ be a non-trivial subspace in $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. Set $${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} U} = \{ \sigma \in S_n : \sigma U = U \}.$$ Then $$\label{Equ-AutG-EigSpace}
{\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} = \bigcap_{\lambda \hspace{0.5mm} \in \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}} {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}}.$$ For convenience, we denote the right hand side of the equation above by ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus V_{\lambda}}$. The relation (\[Equ-AutG-EigSpace\]) shows us that each eigenspace uncovers some information useful in characterizing the ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ action on $[n]$. As we have seen, the family of partitions $\{ \Pi^*_v : v \in [n] \}$ is critical in determining the partition $\Pi_G^*$, so let us see how to gather information about the partition $\Pi^*_v(\lambda)$ of $[n]$, which is composed of orbits of $({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}})_v$, where $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$.
Recall that a linear operator $\mathcal{T}$ on $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ is said to be an [*isometry*]{} if $\| \mathcal{T} \pmb{v} \| = \| \pmb{v} \|$ for any vector $\pmb{v}$ in $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. It is easy to check that a permutation on $[n]$ is an isometry on $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$.
\[ProjOperatorCommutative\] Let $\mathcal{T}$ be an isometry on $\mathbb{R}^n $, and let $U$ be a subspace of $\mathbb{R}^n $. Then the following statements are equivalent.
1. $U$ is $\mathcal{T}$-invariant.
2. $\mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]} ={\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}$, where ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}$ is the orthogonal projection onto the subspace $U$.
3. There exists a basis $\pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_n$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ so that $\mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}(\pmb{b}_i) ={\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}(\pmb{b}_i)$, $i=1,\ldots,n$.
We first verify that [*i)*]{}$\Rightarrow$[*ii)*]{}. Let $\pmb{v}$ be a vector of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. Then there exist uniquely $\pmb{u}\in U$ and $\pmb{u}'\in U^{\bot}$ so that $\pmb{v}=\pmb{u}+\pmb{u}'$. Consequently, $\mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}(\pmb{v})=\mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}(\pmb{u}+\pmb{u}')=\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u})={\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}(\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u})+\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u}'))={\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}(\pmb{v})$ since $\mathcal{T}$ is an isometry and $U$ is an $\mathcal{T}$-invariant subspace.
Clearly, the 2nd statement can imply the 3rd one. So now we turn to the last part and show that the 3rd statement implies the 1st one.
Let us first recall a fact that $$\mathcal{T}U=U \mbox{ if and only if }\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u}) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u}), ~\forall \pmb{u}\in U.$$ Since $\pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_n $ is a basis of $\mathbb{R}^n$, for any vector $\pmb{u}\in U$, $\pmb{u}=\sum_{i=1}^n u_i\pmb{b}_i$ where $u_i\in\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}$ and $i=1,\ldots,n$. In accordance with the 3rd statement, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}(\pmb{u})
&= \sum_{i=1}^n u_i\cdot{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\circ\mathcal{T}(\pmb{b}_i)
= \sum_{i=1}^n u_i\cdot\mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}(\pmb{b}_i) \\
&= \mathcal{T}\circ{\mathrm{proj}\big[ U \big]}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n u_i\pmb{b}_i\right)
= \mathcal{T}\left(\pmb{u}\right). \end{aligned}$$
In accordance with Lemma \[ProjOperatorCommutative\], $({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}})_v = \{ \sigma \in {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}} : \sigma \hspace{0.5mm} {\scriptstyle \circ} \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v) \}$. Hence, one can easily obtain a partition of $[n]$ relevant to $\Pi^*_v(\lambda)$, which is induced by coordinates of the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$, [*i.e.,*]{} two vertices belong to one cell of the partition if the coordinates corresponding to them are the same. As a matter of fact, we can work out a refined partition more close to $\Pi^*_v(\lambda)$ in virtue of a geometric feature of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}}$ — region.
Let $X$ be a subspace of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. As we shall see below, a region of $X$ can be defined in two ways — outside or inside. Let us first define region outside. Suppose $\pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_m$ is a group of vectors in $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ such that ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_m \}} = \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ and $\| \pmb{b}_i \| > 0$ ($i=1,\ldots,m$) where ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}}$ stands for the subspace spanned by $\pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_m$. Clearly, for each member $\pmb{b}_i$ in the group, there is one unique subspace of dimension $n-1$, which is the orthogonal complement, denoted by $\pmb{b}_i^{ \perp }$, of the vector $\pmb{b}_i$ and called the [*divider of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ associated with $\pmb{b}_i$*]{}. Then the whole space $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ is divided into 3 parts by $\pmb{b}_i^{ \perp }$:
1. those vectors each of which has a positive inner product with $\pmb{b}_i$, so we denote the part by $\pmb{b}_i^+$;
2. those vectors each of which has a negative inner product with $\pmb{b}_i$, so we denote the part by $\pmb{b}_i^-$;
3. those vectors each of which is orthogonal to $\pmb{b}_i$, so we denote the part by $\pmb{b}_i^{ \perp }$.
By using all dividers $\pmb{b}_i^{\perp},\ldots,\pmb{b}_m^{\perp}$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, the whole space can be divided into many parts of two classes: those each of which is comprised of vectors not orthogonal to any vector in the group $\{ \pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}$, and those each of which is contained in some divider. In order to investigate those parts contained in a divider $\pmb{b}_i^{ \perp }$, we focus on dividers of the subspace $\pmb{b}_i^{ \perp }$ associated with vectors $\left\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \pmb{b}_i^{ \perp } \big]}( \pmb{b}_k ) : k \in [m]\setminus\{i\} \right\}$. In this way, we divide the whole space $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ into parts such that any two of them have only trivial intersection $\{ \pmb{0} \}$, each part resulted is called a [*region*]{} of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ with respect to $\{ \pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}$.
Because $X$ is a subspace of $\mathbb{R}^n$, it is naturally divided into a number of parts by those dividers $\{ \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} : i \in [m] \}$, each of which is called a [*region*]{} of $X$. More precisely, a region of $X$ is obtained by intersecting $X$ with some region of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. A moment’s reflection shows that any region of $X$ is convex.
Now let us try to carve up $X$ inside, that shows another way of defining region. First, we figure out those orthogonal projections of the group $\pmb{b}_1,\ldots,\pmb{b}_m$ onto $X$, which are denoted by $\pmb{x}_1,\ldots,\pmb{x}_m$. Because ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}} = \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{x}_i : i \in [m] \}} = X$. It is clear that each vector $\pmb{x}_i$ in the group such that $\| \pmb{x}_i \| \neq 0$ possesses uniquely one orthogonal complement in $X$, which is denoted by $\pmb{x}_i^{\perp}$ and called the [*divider of $X$ associated with*]{} $\pmb{x}_i$. Then those dividers $\pmb{x}_1^{\perp},\ldots,\pmb{x}_m^{\perp}$ carve up $X$ into a number of parts, and again each part is called a region of $X$. One can readily see that those two ways of defining region are equivalent.
Although a region contains lots of vectors, we can always use one vector to indicate the region. Let us present several notions relevant step by step. We first consider a region $R$ which is not contained in any divider $\pmb{b}_k^{\perp}$ ($k = 1,\ldots,m$). A non-trivial vector $\pmb{s}_i$ of some divider $\pmb{b}_i^{\perp}$ is said to be a [*straightforward projection*]{} of $R$ if there exists $\pmb{r} \in R$ so that $\pmb{s}_i = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} \big]}( \pmb{r} )$ and $\theta ( \pmb{r} - \pmb{s}_i ) + \pmb{s}_i \in R$, $\forall \theta \in (0,1)$. We call a divider $\pmb{b}_i^{\perp}$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ a [*separator*]{} of $R$ if the subspace $${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{s}_i \in \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} : \pmb{s}_i \mbox{ is a straightforward projection of } R \}} = \pmb{b}_i^{\perp}.$$ The [*incidence set*]{} of $R$, which is denoted by $\mathcal{I}_R$, is defined as follows: $$\mathcal{I}_R = \{ i \in [m] : \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R \}.$$ Furthermore, we define a sign function on the group $\{ \pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}$ related to $R$: $${\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.2mm} [R] (\pmb{b}_i)} = \left\{
\begin{matrix}
1 & \mbox{ if } \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R & \hspace{-2mm} \mbox{ and } R \subseteq \pmb{b}_i^{+}; \\
-1 & \mbox{ if } \pmb{b}_i^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R & \hspace{-2mm} \mbox{ and } R \subseteq \pmb{b}_i^{-}; \\
0 & \hspace{2mm} \mbox{ otherwise. } & ~
\end{matrix}
\right.$$ We are now ready to introduce the [*indicator of $R$*]{}, which is $$\mbox{the vector } \sum_{ x\in\mathcal{I}_R } \frac{{\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.2mm} [R] (\pmb{b}_x)}}{\|\pmb{b}_x\|} \cdot \pmb{b}_x \mbox{ and denoted by } \pmb{i}_R.$$ It is easy to see that the indicator $\pmb{i}_R$ is contained in $R$.
Note that we assumed that the region $R$ considered is not contained in any divider involved, but it could be the case that there are some of dividers, $\pmb{b}^{\perp}_{ k_1 },\ldots,\pmb{b}^{\perp}_{ k_q }$, say, such that $R \subseteq \cap_{i\in [q]} \pmb{b}^{\perp}_{ k_i }$. Accordingly we should focus on the division of the subspace $X = \cap_{i\in [q]} \pmb{b}^{\perp}_{ k_i }$ with respect dividers $\big\{ \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} : j \in [m] \setminus \{ k_1,\ldots,k_q \} \big\},$ where $\pmb{p}_j = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{b}_j )$. Then we could define those four notions relevant in a slightly different way. More precisely, a non-trivial vector $\pmb{s}_j$ of some divider $\pmb{p}_j^{\perp}$ is said to be a straightforward projection of $R$ if there exists $\pmb{r} \in R$ so that $\pmb{s}_j = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} \big]}( \pmb{r} )$ and $\theta ( \pmb{r} - \pmb{s}_j ) + \pmb{s}_j \in R$, $\forall \theta \in (0,1)$. We call a divider $\pmb{p}_j^{\perp}$ of $X$ a separator of $R$ if the subspace $${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{s}_j \in \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} : \pmb{s}_j \mbox{ is a straightforward projection of } R \}} = \pmb{p}_j^{\perp}.$$ The incidence set $\mathcal{I}_R$ of $R$ is defined as $\{ j \in [m] \setminus \{ k_1,\ldots,k_q \} : \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R \}$, and the sign function related to $R$ is defined as follows: $${\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.2mm} [R] (\pmb{p}_j)} = \left\{
\begin{matrix}
1 & \mbox{ if } \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R & \hspace{-2mm} \mbox{ and } R \subseteq \pmb{p}_j^{+}; \\
-1 & \mbox{ if } \pmb{p}_j^{\perp} \mbox{ is a separator of } R & \hspace{-2mm} \mbox{ and } R \subseteq \pmb{p}_j^{-}; \\
0 & \hspace{2mm} \mbox{ otherwise. } & ~
\end{matrix}
\right.$$ Finally the indicator of $R$ is the vector $\pmb{i}_R = \sum_{ x\in\mathcal{I}_R } \big( {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.2mm} [R] (\pmb{p}_x)}/ \| \pmb{p}_x \| \big) \cdot \pmb{p}_x$. It is easy to see that for any region $R$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ with respect to $\{\pmb{b}_i : i \in [m] \}$, the key to identifying $R$ is to determine the incidence set $\mathcal{I}_R$.
In the case that $\dim X = 1$, there are essentially two regions in $X$. Suppose $\pmb{x}$ is a vector in $X$ of length 1. Then the region $R$ containing $\pmb{x}$ degenerates into the set $\{ r\cdot\pmb{x} : r \in \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^+ \}$ and another region is $\{ r\cdot( -\pmb{x} ) : r \in \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^+ \}$, so we can use $\pmb{x}$ and $-\pmb{x}$ to indicate those two regions, and thus we do not need separators or the incidence set of $R$ to distinguish it from another region.
It is the division of $V_{\lambda}$ ($\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) carved by the orthogonal projections of the standard basis (OPSB) $\left\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v) : v \in [n] \right\}$ or by some of them that we are particularly interested in, because one region of $V_{\lambda}$ with respect to the OPSB is an elementary unit illustrating the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}}$ on $[n]$.
Evidently for any member ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$ in the OPSB, there is a region of $V_{\lambda}$ containing the projection. A moment’s reflection would show that the subgroup $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}} )_v$ does not move the region containing ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$, so the incidence set of the region must be an union of some of orbits of $( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda}} )_v$. Consequently, by carving up $V_{\lambda}$ layer by layer with regions containing ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$, we can obtain a partition of $[n]$ each cell of which is composed of the incidence set of the region relevant.
Let us see how to determine the incidence set of a region. Suppose $X$ is a subspace of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ with dimension larger than 2. Clearly, ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) : v \in V(G) \}} = X$. Suppose $\pmb{x}$ is a vector in $X$ such that if $\pmb{e}_v \perp \pmb{x}$ then $\pmb{e}_v \perp X$ ($v \in V(G)$) and $R$ is a region of $X$ with respect to $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) : v \in V(G)$ and ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \neq\pmb{0} \}$, which contains $\pmb{x}$. It is not difficult to see that a vertex $v$ of $G$ belongs to the incidence set $\mathcal{I}_R$ if and only if $\exists \hspace{0.6mm} \pmb{q}_v \in \pmb{p}_v^{\perp}$, where $\pmb{p}_v = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \neq\pmb{0}$, [*s.t.,*]{} $$\label{Equ-IncidenceSetRegion}
{\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v = \left( {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \right) \cdot\pmb{e}_v,$$ [*i.e.,*]{} $$\langle {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v \rangle_i =
\left\{
\begin{matrix}
{\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } & \mbox{if } i = v, \\
0 & \mbox{if } i \neq v,
\end{matrix}
\right.$$ where ${\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}}$ is the sign vector associated with the vector $\pmb{x} = (x_1,\ldots,x_n)^t$, which is defined as $({\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} x_1},\ldots,$ ${\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} x_n})^t$, and $\langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v = x_v$. The key to seeing the relation (\[Equ-IncidenceSetRegion\]) is to note that every region is convex.
\[Lem-IncidenceSetRegion\] Let $X$ is subspace of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ of dimension larger than 2 and let $\pmb{x}$ be a vector of $X$ not orthogonal to any non-trivial projection $\pmb{p}_i = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( \pmb{e}_i )$, $i \in [n]$. Suppose $R$ is a region of $X$ with respect to $\{ \pmb{p}_i : i \in [n]$ and $\pmb{p}_i \neq\pmb{0} \}$, which contains $\pmb{x}$. Then $v$ belongs to $\mathcal{I}_R$ if and only if $\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) = \pmb{s}_v$, where $\pmb{s}_v = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \cdot\pmb{e}_v$.
We first present a simple observation. If $\pmb{u}$ is a vector of $X$, then $$\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}} ) = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}}.$$ Note that ${\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}}$ is actually the indicator of one region $R^0_{\pmb{u}}$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$ carved up by dividers associated with the standard basis. Then $\pmb{u} \in X$ implies that $X \cap R^0_{\pmb{u}} \supsetneq \{ \pmb{0} \}$, and thus ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}} ) \in R^0_{\pmb{u}}$. Hence $\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}( {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}} ) = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{u}}$, for ${\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{z}}' = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{z}}''$ $\forall \pmb{z}',\pmb{z}'' \in R^0$, where $R^0$ is a region of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$.
Suppose $v \in \mathcal{I}_R$. Then $\exists \hspace{0.6mm} \pmb{q}_v \in \pmb{p}_v^{\perp}$ [*s.t.,*]{} ${\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v = {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \cdot\pmb{e}_v$, which implies that ${\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \cdot\pmb{e}_v = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v$, [*i.e.,*]{} $\pmb{s}_v = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v$. Therefore $$\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) =
\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}({\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v) =
{\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{q}}_v = \pmb{s}_v.$$
On the other hand, because $\pmb{s}_v = \pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v)$ and $\pmb{s}_v = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \cdot\pmb{e}_v$, it is sufficient to show that ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) \in \pmb{p}_v^{\perp}$, which then implies that ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v)$ is the vector $\pmb{q}_v$ we want in the relation (\[Equ-IncidenceSetRegion\]).
Note that $\pmb{sgn}\hspace{0.6mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) = {\pmb{sgn} \hspace{0.7mm} \pmb{x}} - {\mathrm{sgn} \hspace{0.4mm} \langle \pmb{x} \rangle_v } \cdot\pmb{e}_v$ $\Rightarrow$ $\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) \rangle_v = 0$ $\Rightarrow$ ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X \big]}(\pmb{s}_v) \in \pmb{p}_v^{\perp}$.
It is easy to see that in the case that the vector $\pmb{x}$ we select is contained in some dividers $\pmb{p}_{k_1}^{\perp},\ldots,\pmb{p}_{k_q}^{\perp}$ of $X$, the region $R$ containing $\pmb{x}$ must be in the subspace $\cap_{j=1}^q \pmb{p}_{k_j}^{\perp}$. Then we can employ Lemma \[Lem-IncidenceSetRegion\] for $\cap_{j=1}^q \pmb{p}_{k_j}^{\perp}$ to find out the incidence set of $R$.
As pointed above, we have a partition $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ of $[n]$ built by grouping vertices of $G$ according to regions in $V_{\lambda}$ each of which contains the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$, [*i.e.,*]{} each cell of $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ is composed of the members in the incidence set of the region that contains ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_v)$. Then each cell of $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ is invariant under the action of $({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G})_v$. There are other relations enjoyed by vertices belonging to the same orbit of $({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G})_v$, which enables us refine the partition $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$.
Let $\pmb{x} = (x_1,\ldots,x_n)^t$ be a vector of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. We call the multiset $\{ x_1,\ldots,x_n \}$ the [*type*]{} of $\pmb{x}$, which is denoted by $\{ \pmb{x} \}$, and two vectors $\pmb{x}$ and $\pmb{y}$ are said to be [*in the same type*]{} if two multisets $\{ \pmb{x} \}$ and $\{ \pmb{y} \}$ are the same. Apparently if two vertices $x$ and $y$ are in the same orbit of $({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G})_v$ then for any eigenvalue $\lambda$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$, $$\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) \} = \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ) \}$$ and $$\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \rangle = \langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \rangle,$$ so we can use these two relations to refine each cell of $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ and then get a better approximation to $\Pi^*_v( \lambda )$.
As well-known, ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ possesses at least 3 eigenspaces except one special case that $G$ is isomorphic to $K_n$, the complete graph of order $n$. Hence we need to integrate the information represented by partitions $\{ \Pi[ V_{\lambda}; v] : \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}} \}$ into one equitable partition $\Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda}; v]$, which is a better approximation to $\Pi^*_v$. We present the detail of how to integrate those partitions in the 1st part of the 3rd section.
On the other hand, by conducting the same operation for each vertex of $G$, we can obtain a family of partitions $\{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda}; v] : v \in [n] \}$. Again we should integrate those partitions into an equitable partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ so that we have an approximation to $\Pi^*_G$ at this stage. As we will see in the 3rd section, we can use in most cases the cells of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ to split eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ so that each subspace singled out is invariant under the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$. In the case that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$ and $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ possesses a big cell $C_m^v$ such that $| C_m^v | > n/2$, there is a close relation among those subspaces spanned by cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda}; v]$.
To be precise, let $C_1^v=\{v\},C_2^v,\ldots,C_m^v$ be the cells of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ such that $|C_2^v| \leq \cdots \leq |C_m^v|$ and $m\geq 3$. Set $Y_{\lambda, v} = V_{\lambda} \ominus \mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $Y_{\lambda, v}$ is the orthogonal complement of $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]}$ in $V_{\lambda}$, where $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] }$ stands for the characteristic matrix of the equitable partition $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ and $V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]}$ is the eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] )}$ corresponding to $\lambda$, and $X_{\lambda,v,m-1} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,v} : \cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^v \}}$, which is spanned by vectors $\left\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,v} \big]}( \pmb{e}_u ) : u \in \cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^v \right\}$.
\[Lem-SeparatingBigCell\] Suppose $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell $[n]$. If $|C_m^v| > n/2$ then one of following two cases occurs.
1. The subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda \hspace{0.5mm} \in \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{spce} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}}X_{\lambda,v,m-1}:C_m^v \right\}}$ is non-trivial.
2. For any vertex $x$ of $[n] \setminus C_m^v$, $C_m^x = C_m^v$ where $C_m^x$ denotes the biggest cell of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; x]$.
As we shall see in the 2nd part of 3rd section, this lemma shows us how to assemble those subspaces spanned by cells of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ and accordingly how to work out $\Pi^*_v$. As a matter of fact, there are two kinds of combinatorial constructions useful in assembling those subspaces spanned by cells of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$, which will be presented in the next two sections. In brief, we devise a deterministic algorithm by means of those properties, which solves Graph Isomorphism Problem for any graph of order $n$ in time $n^{ O( \log n ) }$ that is equal to $2^{ O\left( \log^2 n \right) }$.
Blocks for ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$
============================================
In the section 1.1, we have seen how to reduce the problem of determining $\Pi^*_G$ to that of determining a series of partitions of $[n]$ each of which consists of orbits of a stabilizer fixing a sequence of vertices. The key to achieving that is Theorem 3, so let us first prove the assertion. We begin with a classical result characterizing the relation between blocks and their stabilizers, which explains the reason why blocks are vitally important in finding out a generating set of $\mathfrak{G}$.
\[LemBlock&Stabilizers\] Let $\mathfrak{G}$ be a permutation group acting on $[n]$, let $\mathcal{B}$ be the set of all blocks $B$ for $\mathfrak{G}$ with $b\in B\subseteq T $, where $T$ is an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$, and let $\mathcal{S}$ be the set of all subgroups $\mathfrak{H}$ of $\mathfrak{G}$ with ${\mathfrak{G}_{b}} \leq \mathfrak{H}$. Then there is a bijection $\Psi$ of $\mathcal{B}$ onto $\mathcal{S}$ defined by $\Psi(B) = {\mathfrak{G}_{B}}$, and furthermore the mapping $\Psi$ is order-preserving in the sense that if $B_1$ and $B_2$ are two blocks in $\mathcal{B}$ then $B_1 \subseteq B_2$ if and only if $\Psi(B_1) \leq \Psi(B_2)$.
According to the relation above, one can easily see that stabilizers of blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$ play a significant role in generating the group.
\[KeyThmMaximalSubgroup\] Let $\mathfrak{G}$ be a permutation group acting on $[n]$ and let $B$ be a block for $\mathfrak{G}$ which is contained in some orbit $T$ of $\mathfrak{G}$. Then $B$ is a maximal block if and only if ${\mathfrak{G}_{B}}$ is a maximal subgroup of $\mathfrak{G}$.
Apparently, the lemma above implies that the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on its orbit $T$ is primitive if and only if each stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_t$ is a maximal subgroup of $\mathfrak{G}$, where $t$ is one member of $T$. Moreover, if $T = \{t_1=t,t_2,\ldots,t_{_{s}}\}$ is a non-trivial orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $s\geq 2$, then $\mathfrak{G} = \langle \mathfrak{G}_t,\gamma_2,\ldots,\gamma_{s} \rangle$, where $\gamma_i \in \mathfrak{G}$ and $\gamma_i t = t_i$, $i=2,\ldots,s$. Similarly, in order to generate the stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_t$, we first choose one of its non-trivial orbit, and then find the stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_{t,u}$ of some element $u$ in the orbit and permutations in $\mathfrak{G}_t$ mapping $u$ to the rest of elements in the orbit. Clearly, this reduction can be proceeded repeatedly until the stabilizer resulted contains the identity only, and therefore we need at most $(n-1) + (n-2) + \cdots + 2 + 1 = n(n-1)/2$ permutations to generate $\mathfrak{G}$.
Now let us prove the relation that $$\mathbf{R}_{\Pi^*_G} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G }
=
\left( \bigcap_{t\in T} \mathbf{R}_{\Pi_t^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_t^* } \right)
\bigcap
\left( \bigcap_{j=1}^r V_1^{ \gamma_j} \right).$$
As we have pointed out in the section 1.1, $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi_t^*} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi_t^* } = V_{\lambda} \langle t \rangle$. Moreover it is easy to see that $$\mathbf{R}_{\Pi^*_G} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G } \subseteq
\left( \bigcap_{t\in T} V_{\lambda} \langle t \rangle \right)
\bigcap
\left( \bigcap_{j=1}^r V_1^{ \gamma_j} \right).$$
As to the opposite direction, let us take a vector $\pmb{x}$ from $\left( \cap_{t\in T} V_{\lambda} \langle t \rangle \right) \bigcap \left( \cap_{j=1}^r V_1^{ \gamma_j} \right).$ Note that $\pmb{x} \in \cap_{t\in T} V_{\lambda} \langle t \rangle$ $\Rightarrow$ $\mathfrak{G}_{\sigma t} \pmb{x} = \pmb{x}$, $\forall \sigma\in \mathfrak{G}$, and $\pmb{x} \in \cap_{j=1}^r V_1^{ \gamma_j}$ $\Rightarrow$ $\gamma_j \hspace{0.5mm} \pmb{x} = \pmb{x}$, $\forall j\in [r]$. As a result, $$\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_k},\gamma_1,\cdots,\gamma_r \rangle \pmb{x} = \pmb{x}.$$ On the other hand, it is plain to see that $\mathfrak{G} = \langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_k},\gamma_1,\cdots,\gamma_r \rangle$, so $\mathfrak{G} \pmb{x} = \pmb{x}$ and thus $\pmb{x} \in \mathbf{R}_{\Pi^*_G} V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G }$.
Recall that our ultimate goal is to decide whether or not two given graphs $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic and in the case of being isomorphic to output one isomorphism from $G$ to $H$. It is easy to see if we have the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ and ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} H}$, [*i.e.,*]{} the information about partitions $\Pi^*_G,\Pi^*_{u_1},\Pi^*_{u_1,u_2},\cdots,\Pi^*_{u_1,\ldots,u_s}$ and $\Pi^*_H,\Pi^*_{v_1},\Pi^*_{v_1,v_2},\cdots,\Pi^*_{v_1,\ldots,v_s}$, where $u_1,\ldots,u_s$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_s$ are two fastening sequences of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G}$ and ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} H}$ respectively, and the corresponding relations between cells of partitions in each pair $(\Pi^*_G,\Pi^*_H)$, $(\Pi^*_{u_1},\Pi^*_{v_1})$, $(\Pi^*_{u_1,u_2},\Pi^*_{v_1,v_2})$ and so forth, then we can efficiently achieve our goal. In the next section we shall present the algorithm $\mathscr{A}$ that enables us to reveal the information by means of $\oplus V_{\lambda}^G$ and $\oplus V_{\lambda}^H$.
As one might expect, if $\mathfrak{G}$ acts on $T$ imprimitively, the structure of $\mathfrak{G}$ action on $T$ is more colorful, which is illustrated by blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$. Moreover, it turns out that minimal blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$ are crucial for splitting eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ and for assembling subspaces spanned by cells of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$.
Now let us see how to build blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$ in virtue of partitions composed of orbits of stabilizers each of which fixes exactly one vertex of $G$. Pick two vertices $v'$ and $v''$ from $V(G)$. We can construct a bipartite graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ by means of two partitions $\Pi^*_{v'}$ and $\Pi^*_{v''}$: the vertex set consists of cells of $\Pi^*_{v'}$ and of $\Pi^*_{v''}$ and two vertices in the graph are adjacent if the intersection of two cells relevant is not empty. Evidently, the graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ is bipartite and two parts of the vertex set are made respectively up of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_{v'}$ and of $\mathfrak{G}_{v''}$. Note that one component of ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ naturally corresponds to a subset of $[n]$, so we can use a component to indicate the subset relevant.
There are essentially two kinds of blocks for a permutation group, and a non-trivial component $C[v']$ in ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ containing the vertex $v'$ shows us one of them.
\[LemFindBlocks-1\] Let $C[x]$ be a component in ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ containing the element $x$. Then $C[x] = \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle x$, and moreover the component $C[v']$ in ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ is a block for $\mathfrak{G}$.
Suppose $y$ is in the subset $\langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle x$. Then $\exists$ $\sigma_1,\ldots,\sigma_m \in \mathfrak{G}_{v'}$ and $\gamma_1,\ldots,\gamma_m\in\mathfrak{G}_{v''}$ [*s.t.,*]{} $y = (\Pi_{i} \hspace{0.6mm} \sigma_i\gamma_i) x$. According to the definition to ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$, it is easy to see that $y \in C[x]$, and thus $\langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle x \subseteq C[x]$.
By using the same argument, one can readily see that $C[x] \subseteq \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle x$.
In accordance with the first claim, $C[v'] = \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle v'$. To show $C[v']$ is a block, it is sufficient to prove that if $\sigma$ is a permutation in $\mathfrak{G}$ such that $\sigma \big(\langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle v'\big) \cap \big(\langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle v'\big) \neq \emptyset$, then $\sigma \big(\langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle v'\big) = \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle v'$.
Suppose there are $\xi,\zeta \in \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle$, [*s.t.,*]{} $\sigma\xi \hspace{0.6mm} v' = \zeta v'$. Then $\zeta^{-1} \sigma \xi \hspace{0.6mm} v' = v'$, so $\zeta^{-1} \sigma \xi \in \mathfrak{G}_{v'}$. Thus $\sigma \in \zeta\mathfrak{G}_{v'}\xi^{-1} \subseteq \langle \mathfrak{G}_{v'}, \mathfrak{G}_{v''} \rangle$.
Although the component $C[v']$ in ${\left[\Pi^*_{v'},\Pi^*_{v''}\right]}$ must be a block for $\mathfrak{G}$, it is possible that $C[v']$ contains only one vertex in $V$. For instance, suppose $\mathfrak{G}$ is the automorphism group of a cube (see the diagram below), then $C[1]$ in ${\big[\Pi^*_{1},\Pi^*_{8}\big]}$ contains only one vertex 1 and $C[8]$ only 8.
{width="3.4cm"}
In order to deal with that case, we introduce a binary relation among vertices in $T$: $x \sim y$ if $\Pi_x^*= \Pi_y^*$. Obviously, it is an equivalence relation on $T$, so it could induce a partition of $T$, which is denoted by $\widetilde{\Pi}[T]$.
\[LemFindBlocks-3\] All cells of $\widetilde{\Pi}[T]$ constitute a block system of $\mathfrak{G}$.
Suppose $C_s$ is a cell of $\widetilde{\Pi}[T]$ containing the vertex $s$. We pick arbitrarily one vertex $y$ in $T \setminus C_s$. Let $\sigma$ be a permutation in $\mathfrak{G}$ such that $\sigma s = y$. Then $\sigma C_s \neq C_s$. To show $C_s$ is a block for $\mathfrak{G}$, it is sufficient to prove that $\sigma C_s \cap C_s = \emptyset$.
Note that $y\notin C_s$, which implies $\Pi^*_s \neq \Pi^*_y$. Consequently, the cell containing $s$ in $\Pi_y^*$ cannot be singleton, otherwise $\mathfrak{G}_y s = s$ $\Rightarrow$ $\mathfrak{G}_y \leq \mathfrak{G}_s$. Then $\mathfrak{G}_y = \mathfrak{G}_s $ and thus $\Pi_y^*=\Pi_s^*$, which contradicts the assumption that $y\notin C_s$. As a result, any member in $C_s$ cannot be singleton in $\Pi_y^*$. On the other hand, $\mathfrak{G}_y (\sigma x) = \left( \sigma \mathfrak{G}_s \sigma^{-1} \right) (\sigma x) = \sigma x$ for any $x \in C_s$, [*i.e.,*]{} $\sigma x$ is a singleton in $\Pi_y^*$. Therefore $C_s \cap \sigma C_s = \emptyset$.
It is clear that for any $\gamma \in \mathfrak{G}$, $\gamma C_s$ also belongs to $\widetilde{\Pi}[T]$ and $T = \cup_{ \gamma \in \mathfrak{G} } \gamma C_s$, so $\widetilde{\Pi}[T]$ is a block system.
\[ThmNeceAndSuffForPrimitiveness\] Let $\mathfrak{G}$ be a permutation group of $[n]$ and let $T$ be an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$. Then the $\mathfrak{G}$ action on $T$ is primitive if and only if one of two cases below occurs
1. ${\left[\Pi^*_{t'},\Pi^*_{t''}\right]}$ is connected, $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} t',t'' \in T$;
2. ${\left[\Pi^*_{t'},\Pi^*_{t''}\right]}$ is a perfect matching consisting of $|T|$ edges, $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} t',t'' \in T$, and $|T|$ is a prime number. In fact, $\mathfrak{G}$ is a circulant group of prime order in this case.
Let us begin with the sufficiency of our assertion. In the case i), if there exists a non-trivial block $B \subseteq T$ for $\mathfrak{G}$, then the bipartite graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{b'},\Pi^*_{b''}\right]}$ cannot be connected for any vertices $b'$ and $b''$ in $B$. In fact, the component $C[b']$ in ${\left[\Pi^*_{b'},\Pi^*_{b''}\right]}$, due to Lemma \[LemFindBlocks-1\], consisting of vertices in $\left\langle \mathfrak{G}_{b'},\mathfrak{G}_{b''} \right\rangle b'$, is contained in $\mathfrak{G}_B b' = B$. This is in contradiction with the assumption that ${\left[\Pi^*_{b'},\Pi^*_{b''}\right]}$ is connected.
Obviously, the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on $T$ is primitive in the case ii).
As to the necessity, one first note that there are only two possibilities for each stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_t$: $\mathfrak{G}_t \supsetneq \{ 1 \}$ or $\mathfrak{G}_t = \{ 1 \}$. Because $\mathfrak{G}$ is primitive, the subgroup $\mathfrak{G}_t$ is maximal due to Lemma \[KeyThmMaximalSubgroup\]. Hence for any permutation $\xi \in \mathfrak{G} \setminus \{1\}$, $\langle \xi \rangle = \langle \xi,\mathfrak{G}_t \rangle = \mathfrak{G}$ in the second case, which implies that $\mathfrak{G}$ is a circulant group of prime order.
According to Lemma \[LemFindBlocks-3\], $\forall\hspace{0.5mm} t',t'' \in T$, $\mathfrak{G}_{t'} \neq \mathfrak{G}_{t''}$, provided that $\mathfrak{G}_t \supsetneq \{ 1 \}$. On the other hand, the primitiveness of $\mathfrak{G}$ implies that $\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t'},\mathfrak{G}_{t''} \rangle = \mathfrak{G}$. By means of Lemma \[LemFindBlocks-1\], $C[t'] = \langle \mathfrak{G}_{t'}, \mathfrak{G}_{t''} \rangle t' = \mathfrak{G} t' = T$, so the graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t'},\Pi^*_{t''}\right]}$ is connected.
Suppose an $\mathfrak{G}$-orbit $T$ is composed of $s$ vertices $t_1,\ldots,t_s$. We can use those partitions associated with members of $T$ to construct a multipartite graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$ with $s$ parts, which is similar to the bipartite graph ${\big[\Pi^*_{t_i},\Pi^*_{t_j}\big]}$. The vertex set of the graph is the set of cells in $\cup_{i=1}^s \Pi^*_{t_i}$ and two vertices are adjacent if the two cells relevant have a non-empty intersection. Obviously, each component of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$ corresponds to a subset of $[n]$, so we can regard a component of the graph as a subset of $[n]$. Furthermore, it is not difficult to see any two members of $[n]$ belonging to distinct orbits of $\mathfrak{G}$ cannot be contained in the same component of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$. Thus we always focus one orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$ in characterizing structures of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$.
\[Lem-BlocksInMultipartConstruction\] Any component of the graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$, which is contained in $T$, is a block for $\mathfrak{G}$, and the partition of $T$ induced by components of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$ is a block system of $\mathfrak{G}$.
First of all, one can use the arguments in proving Lemma \[LemFindBlocks-1\] to prove the first assertion. To be precise, it is easy to see that the component $C[t]$ of the multipartite graph containing the vertex $t \in T$ is the same as the subset ${\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t$, and ${\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t$ is a block for $\mathfrak{G}$. Consequently, $\sigma {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t$ is also a block for $\mathfrak{G}$ for any permutation $\sigma$ in $\mathfrak{G}$.
Moreover one can readily see that $\sigma \hspace{0.4mm} C[t]$ is contained in a component of the graph. Clearly, the vertex $\sigma t$ belongs to $\sigma \hspace{0.4mm} C[t]$. Hence $$\sigma {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t \subseteq {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} \sigma t,$$ and thus ${\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t \subseteq \sigma^{-1} {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} \sigma t.$ Note that $T = \{ \sigma t : \sigma \in \mathfrak{G} \}$, so for any $\gamma \in \mathfrak{G}$ we have $$\gamma {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} (\sigma t) \subseteq
{\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} \gamma (\sigma t),$$ and thus $\sigma^{-1}{\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle}\sigma t \subseteq {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t.$ As a result, $$\label{Equ-ComponentsBlocks}
\sigma^{-1}{\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle}\sigma t = {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t,$$ and therefore ${\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle}\sigma t = \sigma {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t$, which means for any component $C$ of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$, one can find a permutation $\sigma$ in $\mathfrak{G}$ so that $C = \sigma \hspace{0.5mm} C[t]$. Hence the set of components of the graph restricted on $T$ forms one block system of $\mathfrak{G}$.
\[Thm-OrbitsOfAutG\] The graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$ restricted on $T$ is disconnected if and only if $T$ possesses a block system $\mathscr{B}$ of $\mathfrak{G}$ such that the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on $\mathscr{B}$ is regular.
First of all, it is easy to see that the sufficiency of the assertion holds according to the definition to the graph ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$.
Let $C$ be a subset of $T$ corresponding to some component of ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$. Then $\{ \sigma C : \sigma \in \mathfrak{G} \}$ is a block system of $\mathfrak{G}$ due to Lemma \[Lem-BlocksInMultipartConstruction\]. Thus to hold the desire, we only need to show the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ on $\{ \sigma C : \sigma \in \mathfrak{G} \}$ is regular, which is equivalent to that $\sigma^{-1} \mathfrak{G}_C \sigma \hspace{0.6mm} C = C$, $\forall \sigma\in\mathfrak{G}$.
Suppose $t$ belongs to $C$. Then $C = {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t$, and thus ${\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle}$ is the stabilizer of $C$. In accordance with the relation (\[Equ-ComponentsBlocks\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma^{-1} \mathfrak{G}_C \sigma \hspace{0.6mm} C
& = \sigma^{-1} \mathfrak{G}_C \sigma \left( {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t \right) \\
& = \sigma^{-1} \mathfrak{G}_C \sigma \left( \sigma^{-1} {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} \sigma t \right) \\
& = \sigma^{-1}{\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle}\sigma t \\
& = {\langle \mathfrak{G}_{t_1},\cdots,\mathfrak{G}_{t_s} \rangle} t \\
&= C.\end{aligned}$$
According to the result above, the orbit $T$ of $\mathfrak{G}$ is contained in ${\left[\Pi^*_{t_1},\cdots,\Pi^*_{t_s}\right]}$ as one component unless there exists a block system $\mathscr{B}$ in $T$ on which the action of $\mathfrak{G}$ is regular.
The Algorithm
=============
In 1982, L. Babai, D.Yu. Grigoryev and D.M. Mount presented two polynomial algorithms in the article [@BaGrMu], each of which solves Graph Isomorphism Problem for graphs with bounded eigenvalue multiplicity.[^1] Naturally in the case that some of eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ are of dimension tending to infinity as $n \rightarrow \infty$, we should split those large eigenspaces into subspaces with dimension as small as possible. As shown in the section 1.2, the cells of each partition $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ ($\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$) can be used to split the eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$.
In the 1st part of this section, we will show how to integrate partitions $\{ \Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ] : \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} } \}$ into one partition $\Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda};v ]$ that is more effective in splitting eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$. Moreover, we can actually integrate information contained in partitions $\{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ] : v \in [n] \}$ so that two partitions $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ]$ resulted could reveal some global information about the structure of $\mathfrak{G}$ action on $[n]$. By means of that we assemble in the 2nd part those subspaces singled out for uncovering symmetries in $G$. In brief, by inputting the decomposition $\oplus V_{\lambda}$ of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, our algorithm $\mathscr{A}$ outputs the information about $\mathfrak{G}$, [*i.e,.*]{} the partition $\Pi_G^*$ and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of $\mathfrak{G}$.
Splitting Eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$
--------------------------------------------
$\blacktriangle$ $ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ — an approximation to $\Pi^*_v$
1. Let $\pmb{x} = (x_1,\ldots,x_n)^t$ be a vector of $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$. Recall that the type of the vector $\pmb{x}$ is the multiset $\{ x_1,\ldots,x_n \}$, which is denoted by $\{ \pmb{x} \}$. Apparently if two vertices $x$ and $y$ are in the same orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_v$ then for any eigenvalue $\lambda$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$, $$\label{Equ-TypeFeature}
\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) \} = \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ) \}$$ and $$\label{Equ-InnerProductFeature}
\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \rangle = \langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \rangle.$$ As we have seen in the introduction, there is another geometric tool also useful in determining the partition $\Pi^*_v$ — region, so we employ all of them to work out an approximation to $\Pi^*_v$. Obviously there are two cases relevant to be dealt with.
1. In the case that there are some of vectors in the OPSB onto $V_{\lambda}$ that are orthogonal to ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$, set $\mathcal{I}_0 = \{ x \in [n] : {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) \perp {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \}$. Next, we examine types of those projections corresponding to vertices in $\mathcal{I}_0$, and then we group members of $\mathcal{I}_0$ so that two vertices $x$ and $y$ belong to the same cell if $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) \} = \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ) \}$. Each cell of the partition of $\mathcal{I}_0$ resulted is said to be a [*thin cell with reference to $V_{\lambda}$*]{}. Evidently, each cell resulted is $\mathfrak{G}_v$-invariant.
2. Let ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}: [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \right\}}$ be the subspace spanned by vectors $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ) : w \in [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \}$. Clearly, ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}: [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \right\}}$ can be divided into regions with respect to $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ) : w \in [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \}$. We now partition the subset $[n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0$ by means of the region of ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}: [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \right\}}$ which contains the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$:
1. Find out the incidence set of the region $R$ containing ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$ by means of Lemma \[Lem-IncidenceSetRegion\].
2. Group vertices in $\mathcal{I}_R$ according to their types and angles relevant, [*i.e.,*]{} two vertices $x$ and $y$ belong to the same group if they enjoy the relations (\[Equ-TypeFeature\]) and (\[Equ-InnerProductFeature\]).
Again, it is obvious that each cell resulted is $\mathfrak{G}_v$-invariant. Delete the subset $\mathcal{I}_R$ from $[n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0$ and partition the rest of vertices by means of the region of ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}: [n] \setminus ( \mathcal{I}_0 \cup \mathcal{I}_R ) \right\}}$, which is carved up by $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w )^{\perp} : w \in [n] \setminus ( \mathcal{I}_0 \cup \mathcal{I}_R ) \}$ and contains the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$. Repeat the procedure above so that we finally obtain a partition of $[n]\setminus \mathcal{I}_0$.
The partition of $[n]$ obtained in above way is denoted by $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$.
Let $V_{\lambda,[n]\setminus \mathcal{I}_0}$ denote ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}: [n] \setminus \mathcal{I}_0 \right\}}$. It is plain to verify that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda,[n]\setminus \mathcal{I}_0}:\mathcal{I}_{R} \right\}} = V_{\lambda,[n]\setminus \mathcal{I}_0}$, where $R$ is the region of $V_{\lambda,[n]\setminus \mathcal{I}_0}$ containing ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$. This fact is quite useful in splitting big cells as we shall see in the next part.
2. Note that a partition $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ is related to the eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$, so we can use all those partitions to obtain a global one $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ] := \cap_{\lambda} \Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$. Let $\Pi_1$ and $\Pi_2$ be two partitions of $[n]$. Then $$\Pi_1 \cap \Pi_2 = \{ C_{1i} \cap C_{2j} : C_{1i} \in \Pi_1 \mbox{ and } C_{2j} \in \Pi_2 \}.$$
3. Let $C$ be a cell of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ which is not a singleton, and set $V_{\lambda,C} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:C \right\}}$ that is the subspace spanned by $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) : x \in C \}$. Recall that $V_{\lambda} \langle v \rangle = \{ \pmb{u} \in V_{\lambda} : \xi \hspace{0.5mm} \pmb{u} = \pmb{u}, ~ \forall \xi\in\mathfrak{G}_v \}$. A moment’s reflection would show that if $C$ is an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_v$ then $$\label{Equ-OrbitPointStabilizerAutG}
\sum_{ x \in C} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda} \langle v \rangle \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) = \pmb{0},$$ where $V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda} \langle v \rangle$ stands for the orthogonal complement of $V_{\lambda,C} \cap V_{\lambda} \langle v \rangle$ in $V_{\lambda,C}$. Accordingly, we can give a further check on $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$. Note also that $\Pi_v^*$ consisting of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_v$ is an equitable partition, so we first refine $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ by virtue of Lemma \[Lemma-EquitablePartProj\] so that the partition resulted is equitable, which is denoted still by $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$. Next we refine each cell of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ further with a relation similar to (\[Equ-OrbitPointStabilizerAutG\]).
1. If $C$ is thin when embedded in the subspace $V_{\lambda,C}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $\displaystyle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v ) \in \bigcap_{x\in C} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x )^{\perp}$, then it is said to be [*balanced*]{} if the sum vector $$\sum_{ x \in C}
{\mathrm{proj}\big[
V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}
\big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) = \pmb{0},$$ where $V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}$ stands for the subspace $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]} V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]}$ and $V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}$ denotes the orthogonal complement of $V_{\lambda,C} \cap V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}$ in $V_{\lambda,C}$.
2. In the case that $C$ is not thin when embedded in $V_{\lambda,C}$, it is said to be [*balanced*]{} if for any two vertices $u$ and $w$ belonging to $C$, $$\left\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_u ),\pmb{i}_{R_{\lambda}[C]} \right\rangle
= \left\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ),\pmb{i}_{R_{\lambda}[C]} \right\rangle$$ and the sum vector $$\sum_{ x \in C}
{\mathrm{proj}\big[
V_{\lambda,C} \ominus
\big(
V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{i}_{R_{\lambda}[C]} \}}
\big)
\big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) = \pmb{0},$$ where $R_{\lambda}[C]$ is the region of $V_{\lambda,C}$ with respect to $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) : x \in C \}$ such that the incidence set $\mathcal{I}_{ R_{\lambda}[C] }$ is $C$ and $\pmb{i}_{R_{\lambda}[C]}$ is the indicator of $R_{\lambda}[C]$.
In the case that a thin cell $C$, when embedded in $V_{\lambda,C}$, is not balanced, we refine $C$ further through a series of regions relevant to $V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}$ with respect to $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \ominus V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) : x \in C \}$, each of which contains the sum vector above. The process of doing so is the same as we group vertices of $G$ through a series of regions relevant to $V_{\lambda}$ containing ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$, [*i.e.,*]{} the process of working out $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$.
In general case, if a cell $C$ is not balanced when embedded in $V_{\lambda,C}$, then we first refine $C$ according to inner products $\{ \langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,C} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ),\pmb{i}_{R_{\lambda}[C]} \rangle : x \in C \}$ and then to the sum vector involved through the process that is the same as what we did in dealing with a thin cell.
Apparently, it is possible that after having carried out the operation iii), some of cells of the resulted partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ violate the relations (\[Equ-TypeFeature\]) and (\[Equ-InnerProductFeature\]), where ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$ is replaced with the sum vector relevant, or $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ is not equitable now. Then we go back and carry out the operations i), ii) and iii) again. Repeat this procedure so that the resulted partition cannot be refined further through those three operations, and then we call the partition output a [*balanced partition*]{} of $[n]$ and denoted it still by $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$.
Let $S$ be a subset of $[n]$. Set $V_{\lambda,S} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:S \right\}}$, where $\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$ . We say $S$ forms a [*complete configuration*]{} if $\forall \lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$ and $\forall s \in S$, $$\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,S} \big]}( \pmb{e}_s ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,S} \big]}( \pmb{e}_x ) \rangle =
\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,S} \big]}( \pmb{e}_s ),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,S} \big]}( \pmb{e}_y ) \rangle,$$ for any two members $x$ and $y$ in $S\setminus\{s\}$. One can readily see that if $S$ is a complete configuration then the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda,S} \mid S \right)}}$ on $S$ is the same as the action of ${\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} S }$ on $S$, where ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda,S} \mid S \right)}}$ stands for the permutation group of $S$ that preserves each $V_{\lambda,S}$ invariant. For instance, if $[n]$ itself forms a complete configuration then every partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ ($v\in [n]$) possesses only two cells $\{v\}$ and $[n]\setminus\{v\}$, and thus ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} G} \cong {\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} [n]}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $G$ is the complete graph of order $n$.
[$\blacktriangle$ $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$]{} — whether or not belonging to the same orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$
As one can easily see, we actually use $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ at this stage to approximate $\Pi^*_v$, so we can use the family $\left\{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ] : v \in [n] \right\}$ to build a partition of $[n]$ close to $\Pi_G^*$ that is composed of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}$.
Clearly, if two vertices $u$ and $v$ are in the same orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$ then there is an automorphism $\sigma$ such that $\sigma \Pi_u^* = \Pi_v^*$, [*i.e.,*]{} there is a bijection between cells of $\Pi_u^*$ and of $\Pi_v^*$. On the other hand, it is not difficult to verify that the way of splitting $[n]$ and working out $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};u ]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ induces a corresponding relation between cells of two partitions, which is denoted by $\phi_{uv}$. Accordingly we define a binary relation among vertices of $G$: $u \leftrightarrow v$ if $\forall\hspace{0.4mm} C_i,C_j \in \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};u ]$, and $\forall \hspace{0.4mm} \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$, $$\label{Equ-OrbitsApproximation}
{\left( \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_i} ) \} \mid C_j \right)} = {\left( \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{\phi_{uv} C_i} ) \} \mid \phi_{uv} C_j \right)},$$ where ${\left( \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_i} ) \} \mid C_j \right)}$ stands for the subset of $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_i} ) \}$ consisting of coordinates of the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_i} )$ corresponding to the subset $C_j$. Clearly, the relation ‘$\leftrightarrow$’ is an equivalence one, so we have a partition of $[n]$, which is denoted by $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$. One can readily see that each cell of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ is a union of some of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}$.
Note that the partition $\Pi_G^*$ is equitable, so we refine the partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ by means of Lemma \[Lemma-EquitablePartProj\] so that it is equitable, and the partition resulted is denoted by $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$. An equitable partition is said to be [*uniform*]{} if the relation (\[Equ-OrbitsApproximation\]) holds for any two vertices belonging to the same cell of the partition. Hence $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ is an uniform partition. Again it is easy to check that each cell of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ is an union of some of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}$.
[$\blacktriangle$ $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ]$]{} — whether or not belonging to the same minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$
Recall that Theorem \[ThmNeceAndSuffForPrimitiveness\] provides an efficient way of finding out minimal blocks for $\mathfrak{G}$ by means of orbits of stabilizers each of which fixes exactly one vertex of $G$, so we could employ this tool to refine the partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$.
1. Select arbitrarily one vertex $x$ from some cell $S$ of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$, and verify whether or not for any vertex $y \in S \setminus \{ x \}$, the bipartite graph $\big[ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ],\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ] \big]$, when restricted to $S$, is connected or comprised of a perfect matching. If it is not the case for some vertex $y$ in $S$, we can refine $S$ in the following two ways:
1. In the case that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] = \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ]$, we can use the subset $\mathtt{B}$ that is composed of singletons of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ contained in $S$ to split $S$.
2. In the case that the vertex $x$ belongs to some non-trivial component of the bipartite graph $\big[ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ],\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ] \big]$, we examine all such components for every $y\in S$ and use one of those components $\mathtt{B}$ of minimum order to split $S$.
It is obvious that if both of two cases occur, we should select the subset $\mathtt{B}$ of minimum order to split $S$.
2. Notice that $\mathtt{B}$ is used at this stage to approximate a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$, so we can use some feature enjoyed by minimal blocks to give a further check on $\mathtt{B}$. Set $${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)} = \{ C \in \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] : C \subseteq \mathtt{B} \}.$$ Recall that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ is an approximation to $\Pi^*_x$, so according to Lemma \[LemFindBlocks-1\] and \[LemFindBlocks-3\], there are two cases:
1. The partition ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$ is composed of a number of singletons, [*i.e.,*]{} each cell of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$ contains exactly one member. Note that we know the corresponding relation between cells of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$ and of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$, $\forall y \in \mathtt{B} \setminus \{ x \}$, due to the process of outputting those two partitions $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ]$. Thus we can easily figure out a group of permutations of $\mathtt{B}$, which is denoted by $\mathfrak{P}$. It is plain to see that each permutation in $\mathfrak{P}$ can actually be regarded as an operator on the subspace $\oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}}$, where ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}}$ is spanned by vectors $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_u) : u \in \mathtt{B} \}$, for it naturally acts on vectors $\left\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_u) : u \in \mathtt{B} \right\}$ in the way defined as (\[Def-PermutationOperator\]). Hence by checking whether or not each subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}}$ ($\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) is invariant under the action of $\mathfrak{P}$, we can easily determine the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda}\hspace{0.5mm} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}} \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}}$ and the structure of its action, where ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda}\hspace{0.5mm} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}} \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}}$ stands for the permutation group of $\mathtt{B}$ that preserves every subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}}$ invariant, $\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$.
On the other hand, if $B$ is a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$, then the action of $\mathfrak{G}_{B}$ on $B$ is primitive. Accordingly, if the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda}\hspace{0.5mm} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}} \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}}$ on $\mathtt{B}$ is not primitive, we select one of minimal blocks for ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda}\hspace{0.5mm} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}} \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}}$ and denote it by $\mathtt{B}$.
2. For any vertex $y$ in $\mathtt{B} \setminus\{ x \}$, the bipartite graph $\big[ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ],\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ] \big]$, when restricted on $\mathtt{B}$, is connected. In order to decide whether or not $\mathtt{B}$ is a good approximation in this case, we construct a directed graph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ and check if it enjoys a simple feature.
First of all, let us present one fundamental property that should be enjoyed by the graph we shall construct. It is clear that if $x$ and $y$ belong to the same orbit of $\mathfrak{G}$, there is a corresponding relation between cells of $\Pi_x^*$ and of $\Pi_y^*$. In fact, suppose $T_x$ is an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_x$ and $\sigma$ is a permutation in $\mathfrak{G}$ so that $\sigma x = y$. Then $\sigma T_x$ belongs to $\Pi_y^*$, and if $\gamma x = y$ ($\gamma \in \mathfrak{G}$) then $\gamma T_x = \sigma T_x$. Obviously, that map from $\Pi_x^*$ to $\Pi_y^*$ is a one to one correspondence which we use to construct a direct graph associated with a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$.
Let $K$ be a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$ and $b$ a member of $K$. Apparently $K = \{ \sigma b : \sigma \in \mathfrak{G}_K \}$. Let $T_b$ be an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_b$ which is contained in $K$. The [*block graph*]{} $\mathrm{BG}(K)$ with the pair $(K,\{ \sigma T_b : \sigma \in \mathfrak{G}_K \})$ possesses the vertex set $K$, and there is an arc from $\alpha b$ to $\beta b$, [*i.e.,*]{} $\alpha b \rightarrow \beta b$, if $\beta b$ is in $\alpha\hspace{0.4mm} T_b$, where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ belong to $\mathfrak{G}_K$. Suppose $w \in T_b$ such that $\beta b = \alpha w$. Note that for any permutation $\gamma \in \mathfrak{G}_K$, $$\beta \hspace{0.4mm} b = \alpha \hspace{0.4mm} w \Leftrightarrow \gamma (\beta b) = \gamma(\alpha \hspace{0.4mm} w)
\Leftrightarrow \gamma \beta b \in \gamma\alpha\hspace{0.4mm} T_b,
\mbox{ so } \gamma\alpha\hspace{0.4mm} b \rightarrow \gamma\beta b
\mbox{ by definition. }$$ Hence $\gamma$ is an automorphism of the direct graph $\mathrm{BG}(K)$. Consequently if $\sigma \in \mathfrak{G}_K$ [*s.t.,*]{} $\sigma b \in T_b$ then $b \rightarrow \sigma b \rightarrow \sigma^2 b \rightarrow \sigma^3 b \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow b$, which implies that there is a strong component in $\mathrm{BG}(K)$. Moreover, it is easy to check that any strong component of $\mathrm{BG}(K)$ is a block for $\mathfrak{G}$. In fact, suppose $P$ is a strong component of the graph and $\gamma$ a permutation in $\mathfrak{G}_K$. Then $\gamma P$ is also a strong component, and thus $\gamma P \cap P \neq \emptyset$ $\Rightarrow$ $\gamma P = P$. As a result $\mathrm{BG}(K)$ is strong connected since $K$ is a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$.
We are now ready to build the direct graph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$, called [*pseudo-block graph*]{}, which is similar to $\mathrm{BG}(K)$. Suppose $E(x)$ is a cell of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$. The graph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ has the vertex set $\mathtt{B}$, and its arc set is determined by $\{ \phi_{xy} E(x) : y \in \mathtt{B} \}$, where $\phi_{xy}$ stands for the corresponding relation between cells of two partitions $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ]$ induced by the procedure of outputting those two partitions. More precisely there is an arc from $u$ to $v$, [*i.e.,*]{} $u \rightarrow v$, if $v$ is in $\phi_{xu}\hspace{0.4mm} E(x)$.
Note that $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ can be constructed with any cell $E(x)$ of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$, which is not equal to $\{x\}$, so we select one of them with minimum order to build the graph. Since $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ is an approximation to $\Pi^*_x$, the direct graph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ would be strong connected. If it is not the case, we split $\mathtt{B}$ into pieces corresponding to strong connected components of $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ and select one of components of minimal order as $\mathtt{B}$.
Recall that if a subset $S$ of $[n]$ forms a complete configuration then the action of the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda,S} \mid S \right)}}$ on $S$ is the same as the action of ${\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} S }$ on $S$. Hence, it is not necessary to construct $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ for revealing the structure of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} {\left( \oplus_{\lambda} { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda}:\mathtt{B} \right\}} \mid \mathtt{B} \right)} }$ action if $\mathtt{B}$ forms a complete configuration, and therefore $$\mbox{ the cell } E(x) \mbox{ we select to build } \mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B}) \mbox{ must be of order less than }|\mathtt{B}|/2.$$
3. Clearly if $B$ is a non-trivial block for $\mathfrak{G}$, then the partition $\Pi^*_{B}$ consisting of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_{B}$ is equitable, for the stabilizer $\mathfrak{G}_{B}$ of $B$ is a subgroup of $\mathfrak{G}$. Set $Y_{\lambda,\Pi_G^*} = V_{\lambda} \ominus \mathbf{R}_{ \Pi^*_G } V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G }$, [*i.e.,*]{} $Y_{\lambda,\Pi_G^*}$ is the orthogonal complement of $\mathbf{R}_{ \Pi^*_G } V_{\lambda}^{ G / \Pi^*_G }$ in $V_{\lambda}$ ($\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$). Since $\Pi^*_{B}$ is a proper refinement of $\Pi^*_G$ that is also an equitable partition, the characteristic vector $\pmb{R}_{B}$ of $B$ has a non-trivial projection onto the subspace $Y_{\lambda,\Pi_G^*}$ for some $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )} }$, [*i.e.,*]{} $${\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi_G^*} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{B} ) \neq \pmb{0}.$$ We can use this feature and process of outputting the partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ to refine $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ properly, provided that $\mathtt{B} \subsetneq S$ where $S$ is the cell of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ we select at the first step.
Recall that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ is an equitable partition, so we first list those eigenspaces $V_{\lambda}$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ such that $$\pmb{p}_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}} :=
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} \big]}
( \pmb{R}_{\mathtt{B}} ) \neq \pmb{0},$$ where $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} = V_{\lambda} \ominus \mathbf{R}_{ \bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] } V_{\lambda}^{ G / \bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] }$. For each such subspace $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$, one can use those three tests for obtaining $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};v ]$ to construct a partition $\Pi[ V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ]$ with the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_v )$ replaced by $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}}$. Then we use those three operations for working out $ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ to build a balanced partition that is denoted by $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ]$.
In summary, $$\label{Computation-I}
\oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda} \longrightarrow \left\{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ] : v \in V(G) \right\} \longrightarrow \bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] ~ \& ~ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ].$$
Now let us see how to use those partitions we have erected to decompose eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$. We first decompose each $V_{\lambda}$ ($\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) by the uniform partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$: $$V_{\lambda} =
\mathbf{R}_{\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} V_{\lambda}^{G/\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} \oplus
Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}.$$ Apparently, $\mathbf{R}_{\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} V_{\lambda}^{G/\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$ is an $\mathfrak{G}$-invariant subspace, so is $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$. As a result, in order to uncover the structure of the $\mathfrak{G}$ action on $V_{\lambda}$, we need to decompose the subspace $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$ further. Suppose $S_1,\ldots,S_t$ are cells of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ such that $|S_1| \leq \cdots \leq |S_t|$. Let $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ ($i = 1,\ldots,t$) be the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}:S_i \right\}}$ that is spanned by vectors $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_i}) : x_i \in S_i \}$. Obviously, each cell $S_i$ is invariant under the action of $\mathfrak{G}$, so is the subspace $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ according to Lemma \[ProjOperatorCommutative\]. Consequently, $\mathfrak{G} = \cap_{i=1}^t \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$, where ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$ stands for the permutation group of $[n]$ such that each subspace $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ ($\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) is invariant under the action of those permutations contained in the group. In accordance with our definition of the subspace $X_{\lambda,S_i}$, ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$ is determined by its action on $S_i$. Hence, we can deal with subspaces $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_1},\cdots,\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_t}$ one by one. In fact, there is a simple relation among those subspaces that can simplify our work.
\[Lem-SeparatingPseudoOrbit\] Let $\Pi$ be an equitable partition and $C_1$ and $C_2$ two cells of $\Pi$ none of that is a singleton. Suppose $Y_{\lambda,\Pi} = V_{\lambda} \ominus \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $Y_{\lambda,\Pi}$ is the orthogonal complement of $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi}$ in $V_{\lambda}$. Then for any two vertices $u_2,v_2$ belonging to $C_2$, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi}:C_1 \right\}} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_2}) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi}:C_1 \right\}} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{v_2})$ if and only if ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_1 \} } \perp {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_2 \} }$, where the subspace ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_i \} }$ ($i=1,2$) is spanned by vectors $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}( \pmb{e}_{x_i} ) : x_i \in C_i \}$.
First of all, one should note that because $\Pi$ is equitable, our assumption that $|C_i| \geq 2$ ($i=1,2$) implies that ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_i \} }$ is not trivial for some eigenvalue $\lambda$, [*i.e.,*]{} ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_i \} } \neq \pmb{0}$.
It is easy to see the sufficiency is true, since if ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_1 \} } \perp {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} : C_2 \} }$ then ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\Pi}:C_1 \right\}} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{y_2}) = \pmb{0}$, $\forall y_2 \in C_2$.
As to the necessity, the key fact is that for any vertex $x_1 \in C_1$, $\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}),\pmb{R}_{C_2} \rangle = 0$, for ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}) \perp \mathbf{R}_{\Pi} V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi}$. Notice that our assumption is equivalent to that for any two members $u_2$ and $v_2$ of $C_2$, $$\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}),\pmb{e}_{u_2} \rangle =
\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}),\pmb{e}_{v_2} \rangle,$$ so we have $$\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}),|C_2| \cdot \pmb{e}_{u_2} \rangle =
\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}), \sum_{z_2 \in C_2} \pmb{e}_{z_2} \rangle =
\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}), \pmb{R}_{C_2} \rangle = 0.$$ Consequently, $\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Y_{\lambda,\Pi} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_1}),\pmb{e}_{y_2} \rangle = 0$, $\forall y_2 \in C_2$.
In accordance with Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingPseudoOrbit\], if there is an eigenvalue $\lambda$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ so that $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ is not orthogonal to $X_{\lambda,S_j}$ $(i < j)$, $S_j$ must be split into as least two parts due to projections $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X_{\lambda,S_i} \big]}( \pmb{e}_{x_j} ) : x_j \in S_j \}$, so we can first work out the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$ and then use the information to find symmetries represented in $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_j}$. The detail of that process will be presented in the next part. As a matter of fact, we may also employ $S_j$ to split $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ in this case, for the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,S_i}:S_j \right\}}$ is $\mathfrak{G}$-invariant according to Lemma \[ProjOperatorCommutative\]. Hence if ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,S_i}:S_j \right\}} \subsetneq X_{\lambda,S_i}$, then we can decompose $X_{\lambda,S_i}$ into two subspaces ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,S_i}:S_j \right\}}$ and its orthogonal complement in $X_{\lambda,S_i}$, which makes our work of determining ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$ more efficiently.
In the case that $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_j}$, we can first deal with those two subspaces separately and then incorporate the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_i}}$ and ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_j}}$ to obtain ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,S_i} \oplus X_{\lambda,S_j} \big)}$. More precisely, suppose $S_{i_1},\ldots,S_{i_l}$ are cells of the partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ such that $i_k$ ($k = 1,\ldots,l$) is the minimum integer in $\{1,\ldots,t\}$ [*s.t.,*]{} $X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}} \perp \big( \oplus^{k-1}_{j=0} X_{\lambda,S_{i_j}} \big)$, where $X_{\lambda,S_{i_0}} = X_{\lambda,S_{1}}$. Let us make a further assumption that if there is a cell $S_j$ in $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] \setminus \{ S_{i_0},\ldots,S_{i_l} \}$ such that $X_{\lambda,S_j}$ is not orthogonal to some subspace $X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}}$ ($0\leq k \leq l$) then ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}}:S_j \right\}} = X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}}$, otherwise we can decompose the subspace $X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}}$ in the way explained in the last paragraph. As a result, $$\label{SubspaceDecomposition-I}
Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]} =
\oplus_{k=0}^l X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}} \oplus Z_{\lambda,S_1},$$ where the subspace $Z_{\lambda,S_1}$ is the orthogonal complement of $\oplus_{k=0}^l X_{\lambda,S_{i_k}}$ in $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$. It is plain to see that we can decompose $Z_{\lambda,S_1}$ by means of subspaces not orthogonal to some of subspaces $X_{\lambda,S_{i_0}},\ldots,X_{\lambda,S_{i_l}}$ in a way similar to that of decomposing $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$. By repeating this process, we can ultimately obtain an orthogonal decomposition for $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$.
As to those subspaces contained in the first part, there are two possibilities:
1. $\forall S_{p'}\in\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$, ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}}:S_{p'} \right\}} \neq \pmb{0} \Rightarrow X_{\lambda,S_{p'}} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}}$, or\
$\forall S_{q'}\in\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$, ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}}:S_{q'} \right\}} \neq \pmb{0} \Rightarrow X_{\lambda,S_{q'}} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}}$,\
where $p,q \in [l]$ and $p \neq q$.
In this case ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}}}$ has no impact on ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}}}$ and vice verse, so we can deal with those two subspaces $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}}$ and $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}}$ separately.
2. $\exists \hspace{0.6mm} S_j \in\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$, ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}}:S_{j} \right\}} \neq \pmb{0}$ and ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}}:S_{j} \right\}} \neq \pmb{0}$, where $p,q \in [l]$ and $p \neq q$.
In order to determine the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}} \oplus X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}} \big)}$ in this case, we need to compare the effect of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_p}} }$ action on $S_j$ with that of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_{i_q}} }$ action on $S_j$. As we have seen in the 2nd section, to do so we only need to compare a series of partitions consisting of orbits of stabilizers, each of which fixes a sequence of members of $S_j$, so that can be down efficiently.
Now let us see how to cope with the subspace $X_{\lambda,S_1}$. Due to our discussion above, we assume that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,S_1}:S_j \right\}} = X_{\lambda,S_1}$ or $\pmb{0}$, $\forall j > 1$, so we cannot decompose $X_{\lambda,S_1}$ further by means of $S_j$. Recall that the equitable partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ ($x\in S_1$) is built for refining $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ in the case that $\mathtt{B} \subsetneq S_1$, so we can use the partition to decompose $X_{\lambda,S_1}$: $$X_{\lambda,S_1} =
\left( X_{\lambda,S_1} \cap
\mathbf{R}_{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]} \right)
\oplus Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}},$$ where $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}$ is the orthogonal complement of the first subspace in $X_{\lambda,S_1}$. It is easy to see that $X_{\lambda,S_1} \cap \mathbf{R}_{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]} $ is an $\mathfrak{G}_{\mathtt{B}}$-invariant subspace, so is $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}$. Consequently, in order to uncover the structure of the $\mathfrak{G}_{\mathtt{B}}$ action on $X_{\lambda,S_1}$, we need to decompose the subspace $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}$ further.
Since $\mathtt{B}$ may represent a block for $\mathfrak{G}$, there could be a block system of $\mathfrak{G}$ containing $\mathtt{B}$ as one member. More precisely, one can obtain, by carrying out first two operations of outputting $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ on the rest of members of $S_1$, not only one subset $\mathtt{B}$ but a group of subsets $\mathtt{B}_1 = \mathtt{B},\mathtt{B}_2,\ldots,\mathtt{B}_q$ of $S_1$. Furthermore, there is a partition $\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Box }{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ of $\{ \mathtt{B}_i : i = 1,\ldots,q \}$ induced by ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ] \mid S_1 \right)}$ that is the partition of $S_1$ consisting of cells $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ each of which is contained in $S_1$. Let $\mathtt{L}_1=\mathtt{B}_1,\mathtt{L}_2,\ldots,\mathtt{L}_c$ be cells of $\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Box }{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ such that $|\mathtt{L}_1| \leq \cdots \leq |\mathtt{L}_c|$. Then we can use those cells to split the subspace $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}$.
Let $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{L}_i}$ ($i = 1,\ldots,c$) denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}:\mathtt{L}_i \right\}}$. Clearly each cell $\mathtt{L}_i$ is invariant under the action of $\mathfrak{G}_{\mathtt{B}}$, so is the subspace $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{L}_i}$ according to Lemma \[ProjOperatorCommutative\], $i=1,\ldots,c$. On the other hand, each $\mathtt{L}_i$ may contain some of cells of ${\left( \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ] \mid S_1 \right)}$, so we may split $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{L}_i}$ further by means of those cells relevant. Note that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ is an equitable partition, so the lemma \[Lem-SeparatingPseudoOrbit\] works well for cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$. As a result, we can finally decompose the subspace $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\Pi_{\mathtt{B}}}$ in a way similar to (\[SubspaceDecomposition-I\]).
We now turn to the subspace $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}$. Let $z$ be a vertex of $\mathtt{B}$. Then $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}$ can be decomposed into a number of smaller subspaces by means of the equitable partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; z ]$: $$X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}} =
\left( X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}} \cap
\mathbf{R}_{ \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; z ] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; z ]} \right)
\oplus Y_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}.$$ Again we need to split the subspace $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}$ further for revealing the structure of the action of $\mathfrak{G}_z$.
Let ${\left( \Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; z] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$ be the partition of $\mathtt{B}$ consisting of cells $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; z]$ each of which is contained in $\mathtt{B}$. Suppose ${\left( \Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; z] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)} = \big\{ C_1^{z}=\{z\},C_2^{z},\ldots,C_l^{z} \big\}$ and $|C_2^{z}| \leq \cdots \leq |C_l^{z}|$. Let $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i}$ denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}:C^{z}_i \right\}}$, $i=2,\ldots,l$. Then we can employ operations for obtaining $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; v ]$ to work out a balanced partition $\Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ; y ]$ for every $y\in \mathtt{B}$. One may notice the difference between $\oplus_{\lambda} V_{\lambda}$ and $\oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i}$: any two eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ are orthogonal but it could be the case that $\exists \hspace{0.6mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i}$ and $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_j}$ ($i<j$) [*s.t.,*]{} $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} \cap X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_j} \supsetneq \pmb{0}$. So the 2nd sum is not even a direct one. A moment’s reflection would show, however, that we can decompose $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}$ by means of $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_2},\cdots,X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_l}$ in a way that is the same as what we did for $Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]}$ in (\[SubspaceDecomposition-I\]), and obtain an orthogonal decomposition for $Y_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}$. For simplicity, we do not introduce a new symbol here for that decomposition.
After that, we can work out an uniform partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ]$ for $\mathtt{B}$ in a way similar to building $\bar{\Pi}[\oplus V_{\lambda}]$ from $\{ \Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; ] : v \in [n] \}$. Moreover, we can also work out a balanced partition $\Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ; \mathtt{B}_y ]$ as an approximation to some block for ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i}}$.
In brief, we can obtain the following by means of the operations outputting (\[Computation-I\]): $$\begin{aligned}
\oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} & \rightarrow
\left\{ \Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i};x_i ] : x_i \in C_i^{z} \right\} ~~ (i=1,\ldots,l) \\
& \rightarrow \bar{\Pi}[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ] ~ \& ~
\Pi[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ; \mathtt{B}_y ].\end{aligned}$$ Apparently, $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus_{\lambda,i} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_i} ]$ is a refinement of ${\left( \Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; z] \mid \mathtt{B} \right)}$. If the latter is refined properly by the first one, then we can decompose those subspaces $X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_2},\cdots,X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B},C^{z}_l}$ further for some of eigenvalues of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$.
Assembling Subspaces
---------------------
Recall that $S_1,\ldots,S_t$ are cells of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ such that $|S_1|\leq\cdots\leq |S_t|$, so if $t \geq 2$ then $|S_1| \leq n/2$, and thus each subspace $X_{\lambda,S_1}$ ($\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) is of dimension not more than $n/2$. Accordingly we can first determine the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_1}}$ and then use the information to deal with the rest of cells. As a result, $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$ in the worst case.
Notice that $\mathtt{B}$ passes the first two tests in the process of building the partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$, each of which is a necessary condition for being a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$, so if $\mathtt{B} \subsetneq [n]$ then $|\mathtt{B}| \leq n/2$. Hence again we can first determine the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,S_1,\mathtt{B}}}$ and then use the information to deal with other cells $\mathtt{S}_2,\ldots,\mathtt{S}_c$ of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$. $$\mbox{Therefore in the worst case, }\mathtt{B} = [n].$$
Despite the fact that our effort to split eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ by using cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ fails in the case that $\mathtt{B} = [n]$, we know according to the 2nd test for building $\mathtt{B}$ that each partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ ($v\in [n]$) contains exactly one singleton — $\{ v \}$, and the direct graph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B}) = (\mathtt{B},\{ \phi_{xy} E(x) : y \in \mathtt{B} \})$ is strong connected. It is the 2nd relation that offers us a powerful apparatus for dealing with the case that there is a big cell $C^v_m$ in $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$ such that $|C^v_m| > n / 2$.
As a matter of fact, there is in the case $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$ another important property we can use to deal with the big cell of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};v ]$, which has been stated in the section 1.2. Recall that $C_1^v=\{v\},C_2^v,\ldots,C_m^v$ are the cells of the partition $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ such that $|C_2^v| \leq \cdots \leq |C_m^v|$ and $m\geq 3$. Accordingly we can single out two subspaces of $V_{\lambda}$: $$Y_{\lambda, v} = V_{\lambda} \ominus \mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]} \mbox{ and } X_{\lambda,v,m-1} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,v} : \cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^v \}},$$ where $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$.
[**Lemma 7.**]{}
*Suppose $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell $[n]$. If $|C_m^v| > n/2$ then one of following two cases occurs.*
1. The subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda \hspace{0.5mm} \in \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{spce} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}}X_{\lambda,v,m-1}:C_m^v \right\}}$ is non-trivial.
2. For any vertex $x$ of $[n] \setminus C_m^v$, $C_m^x = C_m^v$ where $C_m^x$ denotes the biggest cell of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; x]$.
Obviously the vertex $v$ is contained in a singleton $\{v\}$ as a cell of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$, so if $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ possesses only two cells then $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] = \{ \{v\}, [n]\setminus \{v\} \}$. As a result, if $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell and $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$ contains only two cells then the graph $G$ is actually isomorphic to $K_n$, the complete graph of order $n$. On the other hand, it is easy to verify that if $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell then $G$ is a regular graph.
We assume that ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{\oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,v,m-1} : C_m^v \}} = \pmb{0}$. Let $Z_{\lambda,v,m}$ denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,v}: C_m^v \right\}}$. Then $X_{\lambda,v,m-1} \perp Z_{\lambda,v,m}$. Note that $$V_{\lambda} =
V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus
X_{\lambda,v,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,v,m},$$ where $V_{\lambda,\Pi_v}$ stands for the subspace $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]}$, so those three subspaces are orthogonal to each other. Consequently, for any $w\in C_m^v$, $$\label{Relation-A}
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ) =
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ) + {\mathrm{proj}\big[ Z_{\lambda,v,m} \big]}( \pmb{e}_w ),$$ and thus ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus X_{\lambda,v,m-1} \big]}( \pmb{e}_{w} ) = \frac{1}{|C_m^v|} \cdot {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^v} )$, where $\pmb{R}_{C_m^v}$ is the characteristic vector of the subset $C_m^v$.
Let $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,u}$ denote the projection ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{e}_u )$, $u \in [n]$. It is easy to check that for any vertex $x \in [n]\setminus C_m^v$, $$\label{Property-A}
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w'} \right\rangle =
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w''} \right\rangle, ~~ \forall w',w''\in C_m^v.$$
let $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,C_m^v}$ denote ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^v} )$. We first consider a simple case.
\[Case-BB\] ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{\pmb{p}_{\lambda,v}\}} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{\pmb{p}_{\lambda,C_m^v}\}}$.
Suppose $V_{\lambda}$ is an eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ such that $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,v} \neq \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x}$, where $x$ is taken from $[n]\setminus\big( \{v\}\cup C_m^v \big)$. Then for any $w\in C_m^v$, $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle \neq \left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle$. Combining the relation (\[Property-A\]) with the condition that $|C_m^v| > n/2$, one can readily see that there is no such a big cell $C_m^x$ of size $|C_m^v|$ in $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda}; x ]$ so that for any $z\in C_m^x$, $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,z} \right\rangle = \left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle$, which contradicts the assumption that the uniform partition $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell $[n]$. As a result, ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ X_{\lambda,v,m-1} : C_m^v \}} \neq \pmb{0}$ in this case.
\[Case-AA\] ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{\pmb{p}_{\lambda,v}\}} \neq {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{\pmb{p}_{\lambda,C_m^v}\}}$.
Let $w$ be a vertex of $C_m^v$ and $x$ a vertex of $[n]\setminus\big( \{v\} \cup C_m^v \big)$. Then $$\label{Property-B}
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle = \left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle.$$ Moreover, if $\lambda$ is not the biggest eigenvalue of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ then $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle < 0$.
Let $C^v_H$ be the subset of $[n]$ such that $\forall q \in C^v_H$ and $w \in C^v_m$, $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,q} \right\rangle =
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle$. Consequently, $C^v_m \subseteq C^v_H$ and thus $|C^v_H |>n/2$. In accordance with the condition that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ contains only one cell $[n]$, there is also a big subset $C_H^x$ associated with $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,x}$ of size $|C_H^v|$ such that $\forall q \in C^v_H$ and $r \in C^x_H$, $$\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,q} \right\rangle =
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,r} \right\rangle.$$ Then $C_m^v$ must be contained in $C_H^x$ due to the requirement that $|C_m^v| > n/2$ and relation (\[Property-A\]). Hence the equation (\[Property-B\]) follows. Therefore, $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,C_m^v} \right\rangle =
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,C_m^v} \right\rangle =
\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},|C_m^v| \cdot \pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle$.
Since $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ is an equitable partition and contains only one cell, if $\lambda$ is not the biggest eigenvalue of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ then $$\sum_{i=1}^m {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_i^v} ) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{1} ) = \pmb{0},$$ where $\pmb{1} = (1,1,\ldots,1)$. Consequently, $\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle < 0$.
[**Case 2.1.**]{} $V_{\lambda}$ is an eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ such that $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,x} = \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v}$ for any $x \in [n]\setminus C_m^v$.
Since $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ possesses only one cell and $C_m^v$ is a cell of $\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; v]$, there exists a cell $C^x$ of $\Pi[ V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ so that $C_m^v \subseteq C^x$.
[**Case 2.2.**]{} $V_{\lambda}$ is an eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ such that $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,y} \neq \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v}$ for some $y \in [n] \setminus \big( \{v\} \cup C_m^v \big)$, and $\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \rangle = 0$ for any $w \in C_m^v$.
According to the relation (\[Property-B\]), $C_m^v$ is contained in the thin cell of $\Pi[ V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ for any $x\in [n] \setminus C_m^v$.
[**Case 2.3.**]{} $V_{\lambda}$ is an eigenspace of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ such that $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,y} \neq \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v}$ for some $y \in [n] \setminus \big( \{v\} \cup C_m^v \big)$, and $\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \rangle \neq 0$ for any $w \in C_m^v$.
Obviously ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{1} )$ must be $\pmb{0}$ in this case. Let $x$ be a vertex in $[n]\setminus C_m^v$. Set $$A^{\lambda}_x = \big\{ u \in [n] : \langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,u},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,x} \rangle \neq 0 \big\}
\mbox{ and }
V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \left\{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,u} : u \in A^{\lambda}_x \right\}}.$$ Apparently $C^v_m \subseteq A^{\lambda}_x$ and thus the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^v} )$, which is equal to $\sum_{w\in C^v_m} \pmb{p}_{\lambda,w}$, belongs to $V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x}$. As a result, $V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} \supsetneq {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,r} : r \in A^{\lambda}_x \setminus C_m^v \}}$.
In fact, if it is not the case, [*i.e.,*]{} $V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,r} : r \in A^{\lambda}_x \setminus C_m^v \}}$, then $V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} \subseteq V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus X_{\lambda,v,m-1}$, for the latter subspace is spanned by vectors $\{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,y} : y \in [n]\setminus C^v_m \}$.
On the other hand, since $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ possesses only one cell, any two members $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,s}$ and $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,t}$ ($s,t\in [n]$) of the OPSB onto $V_{\lambda}$ would be in the same type, [*i.e.,*]{} $\{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,s} \} = \{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,t} \}$. Thus $\|\pmb{p}_{\lambda,s}\| = \|\pmb{p}_{\lambda,t}\|$. Note that for any $w\in C_m^v$, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus X_{\lambda,v,m-1} \big]}( \pmb{e}_{w} ) = \frac{1}{|C_m^v|} \cdot {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^v} )$ and $|C_m^v| > n/2$, so ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} \big]}( \pmb{1} ) \neq \pmb{0}$, which is a contradiction. Therefore, ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \pmb{p}_{\lambda,r} : r \in A^{\lambda}_x \setminus C_m^v \}} \subsetneq V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x}$.
Suppose $R_x$ is the first region of $V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x}$ obtained in outputting $\Pi[ V_{\lambda} ; x ]$, which contains $\pmb{p}_{\lambda,x}$ and is carved up by dividers $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x} \big]}( \pmb{e}_u )^{\perp} : u \in A^{\lambda}_x \}$. One can readily check that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x}:\mathcal{I}_{R_x} \right\}} = V_{\lambda,A^{\lambda}_x}$ where $\mathcal{I}_{R_x}$ is the incidence set of $R_x$. Consequently, $\mathcal{I}_{R_x} \cap C_m^v \neq \emptyset$. Clearly $C_m^v \subseteq \mathcal{I}_{R_v}$, since $C_m^v \in \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; v ]$. As we have seen, for any $w\in C_m^v$ and $x\in [n]\setminus C_m^v$, $$\left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,v},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle = \left\langle \pmb{p}_{\lambda,x},\pmb{p}_{\lambda,w} \right\rangle \mbox{ and }
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,\Pi_v} \oplus X_{\lambda,v,m-1} \big]}( \pmb{e}_{w} ) = \frac{1}{|C_m^v|} \cdot {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^v} ),$$ so $C_m^v \subseteq \mathcal{I}_{R_x}$.
It is routine to check that those three operations used in building $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ cannot split the subset $C_m^v$, so $C_m^v$ is a cell of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$. As a result, for any $x \in [n]\setminus C_m^v$, $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ contains $C_m^v$ as a cell.
As one can readily see, Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingBigCell\] holds in more general case. Let $\bar{\Pi}$ be an uniform partition of $[n]$ and $S$ some non-singleton cell of $\bar{\Pi}$ we need to split. Since $\bar{\Pi}$ is an equitable partition, the eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$ can be decomposed as $\mathbf{R}_{\bar{\Pi}} V_{\lambda}^{G/\bar{\Pi}} \oplus Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}}$, where those two subspaces involved are orthogonal to one another. Set $X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi}} :S \right\}}$. Let $x$ be a vertex in $S$ and let $\Pi[ \oplus X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S} ; x ]$ be the balanced partition obtained by those three operations that are used to output $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; v ]$ but now carried out on $\oplus_{\lambda \in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S}$.
Let $\Pi_x$ denote the partition $\Pi[ \oplus X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S} ; x ]$ and ${\left( \Pi_x \mid S \right)}$ the family of subsets consisting of those cells of $\Pi_x$ each of which is contained in $S$. Suppose $C_1^x=\{x\},C_2^x,\ldots,C_m^x$ are cells of ${\left( \Pi_x \mid S \right)}$ such that $|C_2^x| \leq \cdots \leq |C_m^x|$ and $m\geq 3$. Because $\Pi_x$ is an equitable partition, $$X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S} =
\left( X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S} \cap \mathbf{R}_{\Pi_x} V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi_x} \right)
\oplus Y_{\lambda,x},$$ where $Y_{\lambda,x}$ is the orthogonal complement of the first subspace in $X_{\lambda,\bar{\Pi},S}$. Again we use $X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ to denote the subspace ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,x} : \cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^x \}}$, where $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$.
\[Lem-SeparatingBigCell-GeneralForm\] If $|C_m^x| > |S|/2$ then one of following two cases occurs.
1. The subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda \hspace{0.5mm} \in \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{spce} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}}X_{\lambda,x,m-1}:C_m^x \right\}}$ is non-trivial.
2. For any vertex $y$ of $S \setminus C_m^x$, $C_m^y = C_m^x$ where $C_m^y$ denotes the biggest cell of ${\left( \Pi_y \mid S \right)}$.
It is routine to verify that the assertion above can be proved by the argument used in proving Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingBigCell\].
Since $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ is an equitable partition, each eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$ can be decomposed into $V_{\lambda,\Pi_x} \oplus Y_{\lambda,x}$, where $V_{\lambda,\Pi_x}$ stands for the subspace $\mathbf{R}_{\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; x] } V_{\lambda}^{G/\Pi[\oplus V_{\lambda} ; x]}$ and $Y_{\lambda,x}$ is the orthogonal complement of $V_{\lambda,\Pi_x}$ in $V_{\lambda}$. Our aim here is to assemble in the case that $\mathtt{B} = [n]$ those subspaces we have singled out for revealing symmetries represented in $Y_{\lambda,x}$. Recall that $C^x_1 = \{ x \},C^x_2,\ldots,C^x_m$ are cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ such that $m\geq 3$ and $|C^x_2| \leq \cdots \leq |C^x_m|$. Clearly, there are two cases: $$|C^x_m| \leq n/2 ~ \mbox{ or } ~ |C^x_m| > n/2.$$ We first consider the 2nd case and then use the machinery developed for that case to deal with the 1st one.
There are due to Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingBigCell\] two possibilities.
- $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} y \in [n]\setminus C^x_m$, $C^y_m = C^x_m$.
First of all, we use the relation above to define a binary relation among vertices of $G$: two vertices $u$ and $v$ are said to be related if $C_m^u = C_m^v$. Evidently, it is an equivalence relation, so there is a partition $P_B$ of $[n]$ associated with the relation. Let $E_1^B,\ldots,E_q^B$ be cells of $P_B$. Clearly if $u_i \in E_i^B$ then $E_i^B = \cup_{j=1}^{m-1} C_j^{u_i}$, and thus $|E_i^B| = n - |C_m^{u_i}|$ ($i=1,\ldots,q$), which is less than $n/2$.
According to Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingBigCell\], each eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$ has an orthogonal decomposition $V_{\lambda,\Pi_x} \oplus X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,m}$, where $X_{\lambda,x,m-1} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,x} : \cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^x \}}$ and $Z_{\lambda,x,m} = {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ Y_{\lambda,x} : C_m^x \}}$. Consequently, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda,i} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}})$, where $u_i \in E_i^B$ and $V_{\lambda,i} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda} : E_i^B \right\}}$. In accordance with relations (\[Relation-A\]) and (\[Property-B\]), coordinates of the vector ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}})$ only take two values: $$\left\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w}) \right\rangle \mbox{ if } w \in C_m^{u_i},$$ or $$\left\langle {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}),{\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{z}) \right\rangle \mbox{ if } z \in [n] \setminus C_m^{u_i}.$$ As a result, the subspace ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}) : i \in [q] \}}$ is of dimension $q-1$, and therefore the group $\mathrm{Aut}\hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}) : i \in [q] \}}$ is isomorphic to the product group $\Pi_{k=1}^{q} {\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} \big[ \hspace{0.4mm} |E_1^B| \hspace{0.4mm} \big]}$, where $\big[ \hspace{0.4mm} |E_1^B| \hspace{0.4mm} \big] = \left\{ 1,2,\ldots,|E_1^B|\right\}$.
Set $Y_{\lambda,i} = V_{\lambda,i} \ominus {\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}) \}}$, [*i.e.,*]{} $Y_{\lambda,i}$ is the orthogonal complement of the subspace spanned by ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}})$ in $V_{\lambda,i}$. Because $E_j^B \subseteq C_m^{u_i}$ if $i\neq j$, $Y_{\lambda,i} \perp Y_{\lambda,j}$, so the eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$ can be decomposed as follows: $$\left( \oplus_{i=1}^q Y_{\lambda,i} \right) \oplus
{\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{R}_{C_m^{u_i}}) : i = 1,\ldots,q \}}.$$ Accordingly, in order to determine whether or not ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_i})$ and ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{v_i})$ are symmetric in $V_{\lambda}$, where $u_i$ and $v_i$ belong to $E_i^B$, we only need to determine whether or not there is a permutation $\gamma$ of $E_i^B$ so that $\gamma \hspace{0.4mm} Y_{\lambda,i} = Y_{\lambda,i}$ and $\gamma \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_i}) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{v_i})$, while in order to determine whether or not ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_i})$ and ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_j})$ ($i \neq j$) are symmetric in $V_{\lambda}$, where $u_i\in E_i^B$ and $u_j\in E_j^B$, we only need to determine whether there is a permutation $\gamma$ of $E_i^B \cup E_j^B$ so that $\gamma \hspace{0.4mm} V_{\lambda} = V_{\lambda}$, $\gamma \hspace{0.4mm} Y_{\lambda,i} = Y_{\lambda,j}$ and $\gamma \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_i}) = {\mathrm{proj}\big[ V_{\lambda} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{u_j})$.
As a result, we need only to focus on relations among members in $E_i^B$ ($i=1,\ldots,q$) in order to work out the information about the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i}}$, [*i.e.,*]{} the information about the partition of $E_i^B$ consisting orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i}}$ action on $E_i^B$ and a series of partitions of $E_i^B$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group.[^2] Moreover, after having obtained those partitions of $E_i^B$ relevant to ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i}}$ and its stabilizers, one can by running the algorithm on $\oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,j}$ ($j\neq i$) easily determine the corresponding relations between cells of those partitions of $E_i^B$ and of $E_j^B$. Finally we can obtain in a reductive way the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus V_{\lambda}}$.
- ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm}X_{\lambda,x,m-1}:C^x_m \right\}}\neq\pmb{0}$.
Recall that $X_{\lambda,x,m-1} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,x}:\cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^x \right\}}$, $\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$, so we can single out one more subspace $Z_{\lambda,x,m}$ of $Y_{\lambda,x}$ which is the orthogonal complement of $X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$. Consequently we have for each eigenspace an orthogonal decomposition $$V_{\lambda} = V_{\lambda,\Pi_x} \oplus
X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,m}.$$ Accordingly ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_m^x} ) = \pmb{0}$, $\forall\hspace{0.5mm} \lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$. Because ${\mathrm{span} \hspace{0.4mm} \{ \oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} : C_m^x \}} \neq \pmb{0}$, there exist a group of vectors $\pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q$ in $\oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ such that $q\geq 2$ and $\forall \hspace{0.5mm} i \in [q]$, $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} w \in C_m^x$ [*s.t.,*]{} ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_w) = \pmb{s}_i$.
Set ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i = \{ w \in C_m^x : {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_w) = \pmb{s}_i \}$. Since each subspace $X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ is $\mathfrak{G}_x$-invariant, if any one of three cases below occurs then $C_m^x$ cannot be an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_x$:
1. $\cup_{i=1}^q \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i \subsetneq C^x_m$;
2. $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$ [*s.t.,*]{} $|{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i| \neq |{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_j|$;
3. $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$ [*s.t.,*]{} $\pmb{s}_i$ and $\pmb{s}_j$ do not belong to the same orbit of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}$.
Hence, if $C_m^x$ is an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_x$, it must be split into at least two equal parts by grouping its members according to projections, [*i.e.,*]{} ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q$, so the order of each part is less than $|C_m^x|/2<n/2$. In what follows, we assume none of three cases listed above occurs. Again, there are two possibilities.
- $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} w',w'' \in C^x_m$, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w'}) \neq {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w''})$.
We begin with defining a digraph $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B}) = \left( \mathtt{B},\left\{ \mathtt{B} \setminus (C_m^y\cup\{y\}) : y \in \mathtt{B} \right\}\right)$ that is a denser version of the digraph $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ which we constructed as the 2nd test for $\mathtt{B}$ being a minimal block for $\mathfrak{G}$ or not. More precisely $\mathtt{B}$ is the vertex set of $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$ and there is an arc from $u'$ to $u''$, [*i.e.,*]{} $u' \rightarrow u''$, if $u'' \in \mathtt{B} \setminus \big( C_m^{u'} \cup \{u'\} \big)$. Obviously, if we construct $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ by virtue of a family of small cells $\{ \phi_{xy} C_i^x : y \in \mathtt{B} \}$ such that $|C_i^x| < |C_m^x|$ then $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ is contained in $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$ as a subgraph, where $\phi_{xy}$ stands for the corresponding relation between cells of two partitions $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};x ]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};y ]$ induced by the procedure of outputting those two partitions. Because $\mathrm{PBG}(\mathtt{B})$ is strong connected, so is $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$.
Let $u$ be a member of $\mathtt{B}$ and set $N_1^+(u) = \mathtt{B} \setminus (C_m^u\cup\{u\})$, which is the set of out-neighbors of the vertex $u$ in $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$. Clearly $|N_1^+(u)| < |\mathtt{B}|/2 \leq n/2$. Moreover, we can define the set of out-neighbors of $u$ at the $k$-th level in an inductive way: $$N_k^+(u) = \{ t \in \mathtt{B} \setminus \left( \cup_{i=1}^{k-1} N_i^+(u) \right) : \exists \hspace{0.6mm} s \in N_{k-1}^+(u) ~ s.t., ~ t \in N_1^+(s) \}, ~~ k = 2,\ldots,d,$$ where $d$ denotes the longest distance from $x$ to other vertices in $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$.
Now let us see how to determine $\Pi_x^*$, the partition of $[n]$ composed of the orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_x$, by virtue of the distance between $x$ and the rest of vertices. Since each subspace $X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ ($\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) is spanned by $\{ {\mathrm{proj}\big[ X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_u) : u \in N_1^+(x) \}$, the dimension of $X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ is less than $|\mathtt{B}|/2 \leq n/2$, so we can determine in a reductive way the orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}$ and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group.
Let $t$ be an out-neighbor of $x$ and set $Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Z_{\lambda,x,m}:N_1^+(t) \right\}}$. We determine the partition of $[n]$ composed of the orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)}}$ and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group. Next we conduct a test for consistency of actions of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)}}$ and of $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_t$ for every $t$ in $N_1^+(x)$.
To be precise, we need to determine the partition of $[n]$, which is composed of the orbits of the group $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)}}\big)\cap\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_t$, and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group. Note that each member of $N_1^+(t)$ has a representative in $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$, so this could be done efficiently. The group resulted is denoted by ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda,t} \left( X_{\lambda,x,m-1}} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)} \right)$.
Let $r$ be a vertex in $N_2^+(x)$ and let $Z_{\lambda,x,r}^{(2)}$ denote the orthogonal complement of the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Z_{\lambda,x,m}:N_1^+(r) \right\}} \cap \big( \oplus_{t \in N_1^+(x)} Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)} \big)$ in ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Z_{\lambda,x,m}:N_1^+(r) \right\}}$. We determine the partition of $[n]$ consisting of the orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,r}^{(2)}}$ and a series of partitions of $[n]$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group. Again we need to conduct a test for consistency of actions of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,r}^{(2)}}$ and of $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_{t,r}$ for every $r$ in $N_2^+(x)$. The group resulted is denoted by ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda,t,r} \left( X_{\lambda,x,m-1}} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,t}^{(1)} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,r}^{(2)} \right)$.
One can readily see that by repeating the process above for each $u \in N_k^+(x)$ ($k=2,3,\ldots,d$), we can finally obtain the information about $\mathfrak{G}_x$.
- $\exists\hspace{0.6mm} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q \in \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}$ such that $2\leq q \leq |C_m^x|/2$ and $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} w \in C^x_m$, $\exists\hspace{0.6mm} i \in [q]$, $${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w}) = \pmb{s}_i.$$
Clearly, we need the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}$ in dealing with the subspace $\oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,m}$, so we first determine that reductively. Furthermore, one can readily see that if $C^x_m$ is one of orbits of $\mathfrak{G}_x$ then those subsets ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q$ comprise a block system of $\mathfrak{G}_x$. Accordingly, in order to obtain the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,m}}$, we need to work out the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i}}$, where $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Z_{\lambda,x,m}: {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i \right\}}$ and $i=1,\ldots,q$.
On the other hand, if the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}$ on $\pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q$ is not the same as the action of ${\mathrm{Sym} \hspace{0.4mm} [q]}$ on $[q]$, then there are at least 3 orbits of $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_{\pmb{s}_i}$, $\forall i\in [q]$, so for some eigenvalue $\lambda$ we can split the subspace $Z_{\lambda,x,m}$ into smaller subspaces in a way like what we did on $V_{\lambda}$ with the cells $S_1,\ldots,S_t$ of $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$. Hence, we assume in what follows that the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}$ on $\{ \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q \}$ is transitive and for each $i \in [q]$ $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_{\pmb{s}_i}$ possesses only two orbits $\{ \pmb{s}_i \}$ and $\{ \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q \}\setminus\{ \pmb{s}_i \}$. As a result there are only two cases.
- $\forall \hspace{0.6mm} i,j \in [q]$, if $i\neq j$ then $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i} \perp Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_j}$.
In this case, each subspace $Z_{\lambda,x,m}$ ($\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$) could be decomposed as an orthogonally direct sum $\oplus_{k = 1}^q Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_k}$, so we can employ the machinery developed for dealing with the case 1) to work out the information about the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,m}}$, [*i.e.,*]{} the information about the partition of $C_m^x$ consisting of orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,m}}$ and a series of partitions of $C_m^x$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group.
- $\forall \hspace{0.6mm} i,j \in [q]$, $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i}$ and $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_j}$ are not orthogonal to one another.
Since we cannot split $Z_{\lambda,x,m}$ by the partition of $C_m^x$ consisting of orbits of the group $\big({\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1}}\big)_{\pmb{s}_i}$, we have to explore those subspaces $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_1},\cdots,Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_q}$ one by one in order to determine the structure of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,m}}$.
Let us pick arbitrarily one subset ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_{k_1}$ from the family $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q \}$ and work out the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}}}$ reductively. Note that $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i}$ and $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_j}$ are not orthogonal, $\forall \hspace{0.6mm} i,j \in [q]$, so we now know the exact way of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}}}$ action on the family $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q \}\setminus\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_{k_1} \}$. Moreover we have a natural relation among members of $C_m^x$: two vertices $w'$ and $w''$ are said to be related if $${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} \big(X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}} \big) \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w'}) =
{\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} \big(X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}} \big) \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w''}).$$ Evidently, it is an equivalence relation, so there is a partition $P_{k_1}$ of $C_m^x$ induced from the relation.
If each cell of $P_{k_1}$ is actually a singleton, we can deal with the rest of subsets $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i : 1\leq i \leq q \mbox{ and } i \neq k_1 \}$ in virtue of the structure of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}}}$. Accordingly, let us assume there are non-trivial cells in $P_{k_1}$. A moment’s reflection would show that one can readily refine $P_{k_1}$ by means of Lemma \[Lemma-EquitablePartProj\], so we make a further assumption that the partition $\left\{ \{v\} : v \in \cup_{i=1}^{m-1} C_i^x \right\} \cup P_{k_1}$ of $[n]$ is an equitable one.
Now, we pick arbitrarily a subset ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_{k_2}$ from $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q \} \setminus \{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_{k_1} \}$ and find the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_2}}}$ reductively. Then we can obtain a refinement $P_{k_2}$ of the partition $P_{k_1}$ by comparing projections of $C_m^x$ onto the subspace $\oplus_{\lambda} \big(X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_1}} \oplus Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_{k_2}} \big)$. Because of the relation that $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_i}$ and $Z_{\lambda,x,\pmb{s}_j}$ are not orthogonal, $\forall \hspace{0.6mm} i,j \in [q]$, we need to expose at most $\min\{q,\lceil \log p \rceil\}$ subsets in the family $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i : i \in [q] \}$ to obtain a partition of $C_m^x$ with all cells singleton. After having exposed $\min\{q,\lceil \log p \rceil\}$ subsets, we deal with the rest of subsets in the family according to the structure of the group determined by subspaces we have investigated, which is the same as what we did in dealing with the case 2.1).
Now let us turn back to the 1st case that $|C_m^x| \leq n/2$. Recall that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ is a balanced partition consisting of cells $C^x_1 = \{ x \},C^x_2,\ldots,C^x_m$ such that $m\geq 3$ and $|C^x_2| \leq \cdots \leq |C^x_m|$, and that each eigenspace $V_{\lambda}$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ possesses an orthogonal decomposition $V_{\lambda,\Pi_x} \oplus Y_{\lambda,x}$. For each $i\in [m]$, we use $X_{\lambda,C^x_i}$ ($\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$ and $i \in [m]$) to denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,x}:C^x_i \right\}}$. Since $\mathtt{B} = [n]$, $C^x_2$ cannot be a singleton. We only show in what follows how to work out the information about the structure of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \oplus X_{\lambda,C^x_3} \big)}$, for we can use the same method to deal with other cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$. Apparently, there are two possibilities.
- ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C^x_3 \right\}}\neq\pmb{0}$.
It is clear that in this case we should use the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$ to reveal symmetries represented in $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_3}$, which is similar to the case 2).
As we have pointed out in Section 3.1, one may use $C^x_3$ to split the subspace $X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$, so we make a further assumption that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C^x_3 \right\}} = X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ for any $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$. On the other hand, it is easy to see that $Y_{\lambda,x}$ and $X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ are both $\mathfrak{G}_x$-invariant, so is the subspace $Y_{\lambda,x} \ominus X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ that is the orthogonal complement of $X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ in $Y_{\lambda,x}$. Let $\hat{X}_{\lambda,C^x_3}$ denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,x} \ominus X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C^x_3 \right\}}$.
Because the partition $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ is equitable, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X_{\lambda,C_2^x} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_3^x} ) = \pmb{0}$ for any $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$. Notice that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C^x_3 \right\}}\neq\pmb{0}$, so there exist a group of vectors $\pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q$ in $\oplus_{\lambda} \hspace{0.5mm} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ such that $q\geq 2$ and $\forall \hspace{0.5mm} i \in [q]$, $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} w \in C_m^x$ [*s.t.,*]{} ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \big]}(\pmb{e}_w) = \pmb{s}_i$.
Set ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i = \{ w \in C_3^x : {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \big]}(\pmb{e}_w) = \pmb{s}_i \}$. Since each subspace $X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ is $\mathfrak{G}_x$-invariant, if any one of three cases below occurs then $C_3^x$ cannot be an orbit of $\mathfrak{G}_x$:
1. $\cup_{i=1}^q \hspace{0.5mm} {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i \subsetneq C^x_3$;
2. $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$ [*s.t.,*]{} $|{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_i| \neq |{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_j|$;
3. $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$ [*s.t.,*]{} $\pmb{s}_i$ and $\pmb{s}_j$ do not belong to the same orbit of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$.
In what follows, we assume none of cases listed above occurs. Clearly there are again two cases.
- $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} x_3,y_3 \in C^x_3$, ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{x_3}) \neq {\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{y_3})$.
Obviously, if the partition of $C^x_2$, composed of orbits of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$, has only singleton cells, then the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \oplus \hat{X}_{\lambda,C^x_3} \big)}$ on $C^x_3$ is also trivial, so we assume that the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$ on $C^x_2$ is transitive, otherwise we consider those orbits one by one. For the same reason we suppose that the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$ on $C^x_3$ is also transitive.
Since ${\mathrm{proj}\big[ X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \big]}( \pmb{R}_{C_3^x} ) = \pmb{0}$, $\forall\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$, the action of $\big( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}} \big)_{u_2}$ on $C_3^x$ possesses at least two orbits, where $u_2$ is a vertex $C_2^x$. We use $T_{u_2}(C_3^x)$ to denote the one of the minimum order, so $|T_{u_2}(C_3^x)| \leq |C_3^x|/2$. Moreover $\bigcup_{u_2 \in C_2^x} T_{u_2}(C_3^x) = C_3^x$, for the action of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}}$ on $C^x_3$ is transitive.
Set $\hat{X}_{\lambda,C_3^x,u_2} = { \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \hat{X}_{\lambda,C_3^x}:T_{u_2}(C_3^x) \right\}}$, where $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$. Then for each $v_2 \in C_2^x$, we work out the information about the group ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \hat{X}_{\lambda,C_3^x,v_2}}$. Next we conduct a test for consistency of actions of ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \hat{X}_{\lambda,C_3^x,v_2}}$ and of $\big( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}} \big)_{v_2}$ for every $v_2$ in $C_2^x$.
To be precise we need to determine the orbits of $\big( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \hat{X}_{\lambda,C_3^x,v_2}} \big) \cap \big( {\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}} \big)_{v_2}$ and a series of partitions of $C_3^x$ associated with a fastening sequence of the group. Note that each member of $T_{v_2}(C_3^x)$ has a representative in $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_2^x}$, so this could be done efficiently. As a result, we could obtain the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \oplus \hat{X}_{\lambda,C^x_3} \big)}$.
- $\exists\hspace{0.6mm} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,\pmb{s}_q \in \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ such that $2\leq q \leq |C_3^x|/2$ and $\forall\hspace{0.6mm} w_3 \in C^x_3$, $\exists\hspace{0.6mm} i \in [q]$, $${\mathrm{proj}\big[ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,x,m-1} \big]}(\pmb{e}_{w_3}) = \pmb{s}_i.$$
One can readily see that we can employ the method for dealing with the case 2.2) and (1.1) to work out the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \oplus \hat{X}_{\lambda,C^x_3} \big)}$.
- $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_3}$.
It is clear that if there exists a cell $C_i^x$ ($i\neq 2$ or 3) of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$ such that ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C_i^x \right\}} \neq \pmb{0}$ and ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_3}:C_i^x \right\}} \neq \pmb{0}$, then we can use that cell to split some of subspaces in the sum $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ or in the sum $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C^x_3}$. Consequently we assume that for each $\lambda\in{\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}}$, ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,C^x_2}:C_i^x \right\}} = X_{\lambda,C^x_2}$ and ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ X_{\lambda,C^x_3}:C_i^x \right\}} = X_{\lambda,C^x_3}$. In this case, we can use the method for dealing with the case (1) to work out ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} \big( X_{\lambda,C^x_2} \oplus X_{\lambda,C^x_3} \big)}$ with $C_3^x$ replaced by $C_i^x$.
As a result, we assume that $\forall C_i^x \in \Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ]$,
$${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_2^x}:C_i^x \right\}} \neq \pmb{0} \Rightarrow \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_i^x} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_3^x},$$ or $${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_3^x}:C_i^x \right\}} \neq \pmb{0} \Rightarrow \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_i^x} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_2^x}.$$ In other words, $C_2^x$ and $C_3^x$ are completely irrelevant under the action of $\mathfrak{G}_x$. Then we can cope with $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_2^x}$ and $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,C_3^x}$ separately.
Now let us turn to the case that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$ but $\mathtt{B} \subsetneq [n]$. Apparently the quotient graph $G/\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ]$ has only one vertex in this case, so $G$ is a regular graph and thus $\lambda \notin {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G/\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] )}}$ if $\lambda$ is not the biggest eigenvalue $\lambda_1$ of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$. Recall that by carrying out first two operations of outputting $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ on the rest of vertices of $G$, one can obtain a group of subsets $\mathtt{B}_1 = \mathtt{B},\mathtt{B}_2,\ldots,\mathtt{B}_q$, which form a partition of $[n]$. We use $V_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_i}$ to denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ V_{\lambda} :\mathtt{B}_i \right\}}$, where $\lambda \in {\mathrm{spec} \hspace{0.4mm} {\mathbf{A}( G )}} \setminus \{\lambda_1\}$ and $i = 1,\ldots,q$. Then there are two possibilities.
- $\forall \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$, if $i \neq j$ then $\oplus_{\lambda \neq \lambda_1} V_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_i} \perp \oplus_{\lambda \neq \lambda_1} V_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_j}$.
It is easy to see that one can use the machinery developed for dealing the case 1) to obtain the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus V_{\lambda}}$.
- $\exists \hspace{0.5mm} i,j \in [q]$, [*s.t.,*]{} $i \neq j$ and ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda \neq \lambda_1} V_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_i}:\mathtt{B}_j \right\}} \neq \pmb{0} $.
In this case, we first determine the partition $\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Box }{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ of $\{ \mathtt{B}_1,\ldots,\mathtt{B}_q \}$ induced by $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$. Suppose $\mathtt{L}_1=\mathtt{B}_1,\mathtt{L}_2,\ldots,\mathtt{L}_c$ are cells of $\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Box }{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ such that $|\mathtt{L}_1| \leq \cdots \leq |\mathtt{L}_c|$, and set $Y_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_1} = V_{\lambda} \ominus V_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_1}$. Then we can use those cells to split the subspace $Y_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_1}$.
Let $X_{\lambda,\mathtt{L}_i}$ ($i = 2,\ldots,c$) denote the subspace ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ Y_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_1}:\mathtt{L}_i \right\}}$. Clearly each cell $\mathtt{L}_i$ ($i=2,\ldots,c$) is invariant under the action of $\mathfrak{G}_{\mathtt{B}}$, so is the subspace $\oplus_{\lambda} X_{\lambda,\mathtt{L}_i}$ according to Lemma \[ProjOperatorCommutative\]. On the other hand, each $\mathtt{L}_i$ may contain some of cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$, so we can split $X_{\lambda,\mathtt{L}_i}$ further by means of those cells relevant. Note that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$ is an equitable partition, so Lemma \[Lem-SeparatingPseudoOrbit\] works well for cells of $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; \mathtt{B} ]$. As a result, we can finally decompose the subspace $Y_{\lambda,\mathtt{B}_1}$ in a way similar to (\[SubspaceDecomposition-I\]), and accordingly we can use the machinery developed for the case that $\mathtt{B} = [n]$ and $| C_m^x | \leq n/2$ to work out the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus V_{\lambda}}$.
It is not difficult to verify that in the case that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ S_1,\ldots,S_t \}$ with $t \geq 2$, one can use the machinery developed for finding the information about $\mathfrak{G}_x$ to obtain the information about $\mathfrak{G}$.
Complexity Analysis
-------------------
As we have seen in the first two parts of this section, the algorithm $\mathscr{A}$ outputs, by inputting the decomposition $\oplus V_{\lambda}$, the information about $\mathfrak{G}$. Let $f(n)$ denote the number of computations involved by carrying out $\mathscr{A}$. Now we analyze the complexity of the algorithm.
First of all, it is routine to check that the number of computations involved for obtaining two partitions $\bar{\Pi}[\oplus V_{\lambda}]$ and $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda};\mathtt{B} ]$ is bounded above by $n^K$ for some integer $K$. Suppose the adjacency matrix ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ possesses $t$ distinct eigenvalues.
We shall prove by induction on $n$ that $f(n) \leq n^{C \log n}$, where $C$ is a constant not less than $\max\{ K,4 \}$. Let us first consider those three cases relevant to the restriction that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$, $\mathtt{B} = [n]$ and $| C_m^x | > n/2$. One can readily verify the assertion for $n$ less than 4. We assume the assertion holds for any positive integer not more than $n-1$.
- Let $p$ stand for the order of each cell $E_i^B$, where $i = 1,\ldots,q$ and $q \geq 2$. Consequently, $n = p \cdot q$ and thus $$f(n) \leq n \cdot \left[ n^K + t \cdot {q \choose 2} f(p) \right]
\leq n^{1+K} + n^2 \cdot q^2 f(p).$$ According to the inductive hypothesis, $f(p) \leq p^{C\log p}$. Hence $$q^2 f(p) \leq q^2 \cdot p^{C\log p}
\leq (q \cdot p)^{C\log p}
\leq n^{C\log (n/2)}
= n^{C\log n}/n^{C}.$$ As a result, $f(n) / n^{C\log n} \leq n^{ (1+K) - 2C } + n^{2-C} \leq 1$.
- Recall that $\Pi[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ; x ] = \left\{ C^x_1 = \{ x \},C^x_2,\ldots,C^x_m \right\}$ and $|C^x_2| \leq \cdots \leq |C^x_m|$, where $m \geq 3$. Set $s = \left|\cup_{i=2}^{m-1} C_i^x \right|$. Then $s < n/2$ since $|C^x_m| > n/2$.
- Let $l_k$ ($k=1,\ldots,d$) denote the order of $N_k^+(x)$, which is the set of out-neighbors of $x$ at the $k$-th level in the graph $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
f(n) \leq &~ n \cdot \left[ n^K + t\cdot \left( f(s) + \sum_{k=1}^d l_k \cdot 2 f(s) \right) \right]\\
\leq &~ n \cdot \left[ n^K + t \cdot \left( 1 + \sum_{k} l_k \right) 2 f(s) \right] \\
\leq &~ n \cdot \left[ n^K + n^2 \cdot 2 f(s) \right]\end{aligned}$$ According to the inductive hypothesis, $f(s) \leq s^{C\log s} \leq (n/2)^{C\log (n/2)}$. Hence $$n^3 \cdot 2f(s) \leq 2 n^3 \cdot (n/2)^{C\log (n/2)}
= n^{C \log n} \cdot \frac{2^{C+1}}{n^{2C-3}}.$$ As a result, $f(n) / n^{C\log n} \leq n^{ (1+K) - 2C } + (2/n)^{C+1} \cdot n^{4-C} \leq 1$.
- It is easy to see that in the case 2.2A), we can use the argument used in dealing with the case 1) to prove the assertion, so let us consider the case 2.2B). Suppose the order of the subset ${\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_{i}$ is equal to $p$, where $1 \leq i \leq q$.
Note that after having exposed $\min\{q,\lceil \log p \rceil\}$ subsets, we have a partition of $C_m^x$ with all cells singleton, so we can construct a direct graph like $\mathrm{DPBG}(\mathtt{B})$ to deal with the rest of subsets in the family $\{ {\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_1,\ldots,{\mathrm{proj} \hspace{0.4mm} ^{-1}} \pmb{s}_q \}$. Again we use $l_k$ ($k=1,\ldots,d$) denote the order of $N_k^+(x)$, which is the set of out-neighbors of $x$ at the $k$-th level in the new graph. Then $$\begin{aligned}
f(n) \leq &~ n \cdot \Bigg[ n^K + t\cdot \bigg( f(s) + \prod_{i=1}^{\min\{q,\lceil \log p \rceil\}} (q-i) \cdot f(p) \\
~ &~ \hspace{1.35cm} + \sum_{k=1}^d l_k \cdot \Big( f(p) + f(s) + \prod_{i=1}^{\min\{q,\lceil \log p \rceil\}} (q-i) \cdot f(p) \Big)\bigg) \Bigg] \\
\leq &~ n \cdot \left[ n^K + t \cdot \Big(1 + \sum_{k} l_k \Big) \cdot \Big( f(s) + f(p) + \prod_{i} (q-i) \cdot f(p) \Big)\right] \\
\leq &~ n \cdot \left[ n^K + n^2 \cdot \Big( f(s) + f(p) + \prod_{i} (q-i) \cdot f(p) \Big) \right]\end{aligned}$$ According to the inductive hypothesis, we have $$n^3 \cdot \big(f(s) + f(p)\big) \leq 2 n^3\cdot (n/2)^{ C\log (n/2) } = n^{C \log n} \cdot \frac{2^{C+1}}{n^{2C-3}}$$ and $$n^3 \prod_{i} (q-i) \cdot f(p) \leq n^3 q^{\lceil \log p \rceil} p^{C \log p} \leq n^3 \big( qp \big)^{C \log p} \leq n^3 n^{C\log (n/2)} \leq n^{C\log n} / n^{C-3}.$$ As a result, $f(n) / n^{C\log n} \leq n^{(1+K)-2C} + (2/n)^{C+1} \cdot n^{4-C} + n^{3-C} \leq 1$.
Accordingly, $f(n) \leq n^{C \log n}$ if $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$, $\mathtt{B} = [n]$ and $| C_m^x | > n/2$, where $C$ is a constant larger than or equal to $K$. By the same argument, one can easily prove that $f(n) \leq n^{C \log n}$ in the case that $\bar{\Pi}[ \oplus V_{\lambda} ] = \{ [n] \}$, $\mathtt{B} = [n]$ and $| C_m^x | \leq n/2$.
[**Acknowledgments**]{}
I would like to express my deep gratitude to Prof. Fu-Ji Zhang, Prof. Xue-Liang Li, Prof. Qiong-Xiang Huang, Prof. Wei Wang, Prof. Sheng-Gui Zhang, Prof. Li-Gong Wang and Prof. Johannes Siemons for their valuable advice which significantly improves the quality of this paper. I also want to thank Prof. Yi-Zheng Fan and Prof. Xiang-Feng Pan for their encouragement and support. Last but not the least, I would like to thank Dr. You Lu, Dr. Yan-Dong Bai, Dr. Bin-Long Li and Dr. Xiao-Gang Liu for helping me verify many parts of this paper.
[99]{}
Sheldon Axler, [*Linear algebra - done right*]{}, Springer-Verlag New York, 1997.
L. Babai, Graph isomorphism in quasipolynomial time, arXiv:1512.03547v2.
L. Babai, D.Yu. Grigoryev and D.M. Mount, Isomorphism of graphs with bounded eigenvalue multiplicity, [*Proc. 14th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing*]{} (ACM, New York): 310-324, 1982.
R. Boppana, J. Hastad, and S. Zachos, Does co-NP have short interactive proofs? Information Processing Letters, 25(2):27–32, 1987.
John D. Dixon and Brian Mortimer, [*Permutation groups*]{} (GTM 163), Springer-Verlag New York, 1996.
Chris Godsil and Gordon Royle, [*Algebraic Graph Theory*]{} (GTM 207), Springer-Verlag New York, 2001.
Gene H. Golub and Charles F. Van Loan, [*Matrix Computations*]{}, Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1996 (3rd edition).
E. Luks, Isomorphism of bounded valence can be tested in polynomial time, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 25:42–65, 1982.
Brendan D. McKay and Adolfo Piperno: Practical Graph Isomoprhism, II. arXiv:1301.1493, 2013.
Victor Y. Pan, Zhao Q, Chen and Ailong Zheng, The complexity of the algebraic eigenproblem, STOC 1999: 507-516.
U. Sch$\mathrm{\ddot{o}}$ning, Graph isomorphism is in the low hierarchy, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 37:312–323, 1988.
[^1]: In order to obtain the decomposition $\oplus V_{\lambda} = \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n$, one needs to calculate eigenvalues and eigenspaces of ${\mathbf{A}( G )}$ first, the complexity of which (within a relative error bound $2^{-b}$) is bounded by $O(n^3 + (n \log^2 n) \log b)$ (see [@PanChenZheng] for details).
[^2]: Note that $\oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i} \perp \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,j}$ if $i \neq j$, [*i.e.,*]{} ${ \mathrm{span} \hspace{0.2mm} \left\{ \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i}:E_j^B \right\}} = \pmb{0}$, so the information about ${\mathrm{Aut} \hspace{0.4mm} \oplus_{\lambda} Y_{\lambda,i}}$ could be fully described with partitions of $E_i^B$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The CUORE experiment, a ton-scale cryogenic bolometer array, recently began operation at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso in Italy. The array represents a significant advancement in this technology, and in this work we apply it for the first time to a high-sensitivity search for a lepton-number–violating process: $^{130}$Te neutrinoless double-beta decay. Examining a total TeO$_2$ exposure of , characterized by an effective energy resolution of FWHM and a background in the region of interest of , we find no evidence for neutrinoless double-beta decay. Including systematic uncertainties, we place a lower limit on the decay half-life of $T^{0\nu}_{1/2}(^{130}\mathrm{Te})>{\CUOREHalflifeLimit}$ (90% C.L.); the median statistical sensitivity of this search is . Combining this result with those of two earlier experiments, Cuoricino and , we find $T^{0\nu}_{1/2}(^{130}\mathrm{Te})>{\AllCombinedHalflifeLimit}$ (90% C.L.), which is the most stringent limit to date on this decay. Interpreting this result as a limit on the effective Majorana neutrino mass, we find $m_{\beta\beta}<({\CombinedMbbLow} - {\CombinedMbbHigh}$) meV, where the range reflects the nuclear matrix element estimates employed.'
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: |
First Results from CUORE:\
A Search for Lepton Number Violation via $0\nu\beta\beta$ Decay of $^{130}$Te
---
The existence of nonzero neutrino masses is well established by precision measurements of neutrino flavor oscillation [@PDG2016]. This discovery has given renewed impetus to long-standing questions as to the Dirac or Majorana nature of the neutrino [@Majorana1937], the role of Majorana neutrinos in cosmological evolution [@FUKUGITA198645], and the absolute neutrino mass. Neutrinoless double-beta ([[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{}) decay is a lepton-number–violating process that can occur only if neutrinos are Majorana fermions [@Racah1937; @Furry1939; @Pontecorvo:1967fh; @BlackboxTheorem]. The discovery of this decay would unambiguously demonstrate that lepton number is not a symmetry of nature and that neutrinos are Majorana particles [@NBBDReview2015].
If it occurs, [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay has a robust experimental signature: a peak in the summed energy spectrum of the final state electrons at the $Q$-value of the decay ($Q_{\beta\beta}$). To maximize sensitivity to this signature, an experiment must have a low background rate near $Q_{\beta\beta}$, good energy resolution, and a large source mass. The Cryogenic Underground Observatory for Rare Events (CUORE) [@CUOREREVIEW] is a new detector that applies the powerful macro-bolometer technique [@Fiorini:1983yj; @Enss:2008ek] at an unprecedented scale to search for [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay of tellurium isotopes. In this work, we focus on [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay of $^{130}$Te to the ground state of $^{130}$Xe. Our sensitivity benefits from the high natural abundance of $^{130}$Te, $(34.167 \pm 0.002)$% [@Fehr:2004jx], and large $Q_{\beta\beta}$ of $(2527.515 \pm 0.013)$ keV [@Redshaw:2009cf; @Scielzo:2009co; @Rahaman:2011wt].
CUORE is composed of 988 $5 \times 5 \times 5$ cm$^{3}$ TeO$_{2}$ crystals [@Arnaboldi:2010fj], each having a mass of 750 g, which we can cool to temperatures as low as 7 mK. When a crystal absorbs energy, we exploit the resulting temperature increase to measure that energy. Each crystal is instrumented with a thermistor [@Haller:1984dr] to record thermal pulses, and a heater [@Alessandrello:1998bf; @Andreotti:2012zz] for thermal gain stabilization.
The crystals are arranged into 19 copper-framed towers, with each tower consisting of 13 floors of 4 crystals. The crystals are held in the tower frame by polytetrafluoroethylene supports. The towers are arranged in a close-packed array and thermally connected to the mixing chamber of a $^{3}$He/$^{4}$He dilution refrigerator[^1], which is precooled by five two-stage ($\sim$40 K and $\sim$4 K) pulse tube cryocoolers [^2] and a Joule-Thomson expansion valve.
To suppress external $\gamma$-ray backgrounds, two lead shields are integrated into the cryogenic volume: a 30-cm thick shield at $\sim$50 mK above the detectors and a 6-cm thick shield at $\sim$4 K around and below the detectors. The lateral and lower shields are made from ancient Roman lead with extremely low levels of radioactivity [@Alessandrello:1998163]. An external lead shield (25 cm thick) surrounded by borated polyethylene and boric acid (20 cm thick) provide additional shielding. More details on the experimental subsystems and shielding can be found in Refs. [@CUORECryostat; @CUORESuspension; @RefFaraday; @1748-0221-13-02-P02026; @1748-0221-13-01-P01010].
A prototype detector equivalent to a single CUORE tower, , operated at Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso from 2013 to 2015 and served to validate the materials and low-background assembly techniques used for CUORE [@Alessandria:2012zp; @CUOREAssemblyPaper; @Alduino:2016vjd; @Arnaboldi:2010fj; @Andreotti:2009zza]. Before the current work, the strongest probe of $\beta\beta$ decay of $^{130}$Te came from [@Alfonso:2015wka; @Alduino:2016zrl; @Alduino2017-CUORE02nu; @JonsThesis].
The data presented here are from two month-long datasets collected from May to June (Dataset 1) and August to September (Dataset 2) of 2017. Between the two datasets, we improved the detector operating conditions; in particular, we implemented an active noise cancellation system on the cryocoolers [@CUORE-PT-PhaseControl] and improved the electrical grounding of the experiment. The detector operating temperature is a compromise between minimizing the heat capacity of the crystals, thus maximizing the thermal gain, and optimizing the signal bandwidth. To select the optimal operating temperature, we performed a temperature scan to study the energy resolution achieved by a representative subset of detectors. An operating temperature of approximately 15 mK was selected for both datasets.
Each dataset is bookended by periods devoted to energy calibration with $^{232}$Th $\gamma$-ray sources [@Cushman:2016cnv]; the closing calibration is performed to verify the stability of the detector response over the dataset. We use the data collected between calibrations, which we refer to as *physics data*, for our $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay search.
The voltage across each thermistor is amplified and filtered [@1748-0221-13-02-P02026; @RefElectronics2; @RefElectronics3; @Arnaboldi:2010zz] and continuously digitized with a sampling rate of 1 kHz [@AGiachero-Thesis; @SDiDomizio-Thesis; @SCopello-Thesis]. A total of 984 of 988 channels are functioning. Thermal event pulses are identified by a software derivative trigger with channel-dependent thresholds ranging from 20 to a few hundred keV; we anticipate reducing these thresholds for future low-energy studies [@DiDomizio:2011cv; @Alduino:2017que]. The rise and fall times of thermal pulses are on the order of and , respectively. We analyze a 10-s window consisting of 3 s before and 7 s after each trigger. The pre-trigger voltage provides a proxy for the bolometer temperature before the event, while we determine the event energy from the pulse amplitude. The average event rate per detector is in calibration data and in physics data. In addition to triggered pulses, every few minutes each heater is injected with a stable voltage pulse ($\sim$1 ppm absolute stability) [@1748-0221-13-02-P02029] to generate tagged reference events with fixed thermal energy. To monitor and characterize noise we also analyze waveforms with no discernible thermal pulses.
To improve the signal-to-noise ratio we use an optimal filter [@Gatti1986], which exploits the distinct frequency characteristics of particle-induced and noise waveforms. The pulse amplitude is determined from the maximum value attained by the filtered waveform. To monitor and correct for possible drifts in the energy-to-amplitude response of the detection chain (e.g., due to small drifts in operating temperature), which could otherwise spoil the energy resolution, we apply thermal gain stabilization (TGS) to each event amplitude. We apply one of two methods: the first uses monoenergetic heater pulses (heater-TGS), and the second uses pulses induced by $\gamma$ rays from the 2615-keV $^{208}$Tl calibration line (calibration-TGS). Both methods were developed and used in [@Alduino:2016zrl]. Heater-TGS is our default algorithm, while we use calibration-TGS for the $\sim$3% of bolometers without functioning heaters and for channels in which calibration-TGS yields a statistically significant improvement in sensitivity compared to heater-TGS. In total, % of our exposure utilizes heater-TGS while the remainder uses calibration-TGS.
To calibrate the detectors, we use six $\gamma$ lines from the $^{232}$Th calibration sources ranging from 239 keV to 2615 keV. We estimate the mean stabilized amplitude of each line and create a calibration function for each bolometer in each dataset (each [*bolometer–dataset*]{}), which maps stabilized pulse amplitudes to physical energies. We find that the calibration functions of each bolometer–dataset are well described by a second-order polynomial with zero constant term throughout the calibrated energy range. After calibrating, to blind the region near $Q_{\beta\beta}$, we take events that reconstruct within 20 keV of the 2615 $^{208}$Tl line in physics data and move a blinded fraction of them down by 87 keV; this procedure produces an artificial peak at $Q_{\beta\beta}$ [@Alduino:2016zrl] and is later reversed once the [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} search analysis is finalized. The calibration and unblinded physics spectra are shown in .
![Reconstructed energy spectra of physics (blue) and calibration (red) data. The calibration spectrum is normalized to the physics data at the 2615-keV line. The sources of the labeled peaks are identified as: (I) $^{212}$Pb, (II) $^{228}$Ac, (3) $e^+e^−$ annihilation, (4/IV) $^{208}$Tl, (5) $^{54}$Mn, (6) $^{60}$Co, (7) $^{40}$K, (8) $^{214}$Bi. Roman numbers indicate the spectral lines used for calibration.[]{data-label="fig:gamma_spectrum"}](gamma_spectrum_roman_calib){width="50.00000%"}
To select [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay candidates in the physics data, we apply the following selection criteria. Firstly, we discard periods of noisy data caused, for example, by activity in the laboratory. This reduces the exposure by . Next, we impose basic pulse quality requirements to each event, requiring a single pulse-like feature in the event window and a stable pre-trigger voltage. We then require the shape of each waveform to be consistent with that of a true signal-like event. We build a signal-like event sample in physics data from events that reconstruct within 10 keV of the $\gamma$ lines from $^{40}$K at 1461 keV and $^{60}$Co at 1173 keV and 1332 keV. We characterize event waveforms with six pulse-shape parameters and represent each event with a point in this 6-dimensional space. We calculate the Mahalanobis distance $D_{M}$ [@Mahalanobis:1936tj] for each event from the mean position of the signal sample. We choose the upper limit on $D_{M}$ that maximizes the discovery sensitivity [@Cowan2011]. Throughout this optimization, data from the region of interest for [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay (ROI) are not used. In calculating the figure of merit for a given $D_{M}$ cutoff, we estimate the signal selection efficiency from $^{40}$K events near 1461 keV and the background selection efficiency from events with energy between $2700-3900$ keV. Events in this latter energy range are dominated by partially contained alpha particles and are representative of the dominant background in the ROI. Once the optimal $D_{M}$ cutoff is chosen, we evaluate the efficiency of the pulse shape selection using events belonging to the $^{208}$Tl 2615-keV line.
To reduce backgrounds from decays depositing energy in multiple crystals (e.g., $\alpha$ particles on crystal surfaces or multiple Compton scatters of $\gamma$ rays), we reject events that occur within 10 ms of an event in a different bolometer (anti-coincidence selection). The width of the coincidence window is chosen after correcting for differences in detector rise times and trigger configurations that can affect the timestamp assigned to an event. The inter-bolometer timestamp differences are determined using physically coincident multi-detector events, such as pair-production events occurring in calibration data. The energy threshold for coincident events in the current analysis is set to 150 keV. The anti-coincidence selection efficiency has two components: the probability for a [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay to be fully contained in a single crystal and the probability to not accidentally coincide with another event. We estimate the former from simulation [@Agostinelli:2003fg; @Alduino:2017ods] and the latter we determine using the 1461-keV $\gamma$ ray from $^{40}$K electron capture, which is a single-event decay that is not expected to produce physical coincidences.
We evaluate the trigger efficiency as the fraction of tagged heater pulses that produce an event trigger. The heater pulse amplitude is scanned to study the energy dependence of the trigger efficiency. We also exploit heater events to measure the basic pulse quality selection efficiency mentioned above and the energy reconstruction efficiency (i.e., the probability that a monoenergetic pulse reconstructs correctly). The combined trigger, basic pulse quality, and reconstruction efficiency, denoted by [*base efficiency*]{}, is averaged over all channels with functioning heaters and applied to all channels. In cases where a step in the event reconstruction procedure fails for a channel, we remove that channel from the subsequent analysis. The selection efficiencies are summarized in .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[l c c]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
&Dataset 1 &Dataset 2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Selection Efficiency (%)** & &\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base & &\
Pulse shape ($D_{M}$)& &\
Anti-coincidence (accidental) & &\
Anti-coincidence ($\beta\beta$ containment) &\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total (excl. $\beta\beta$ containment) & &\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Performance Parameters** & &\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Channels used & 876 & 935\
TeO$_2$ exposure ([kg$\cdot$yr]{}) & &\
Effective resolution (keV) & &\
Background ($10^{-2}$ c/(keV$\cdot$kg$\cdot$yr)) & &\
We establish the detector response to a monoenergetic event near $Q_{\beta\beta}$ using the high-statistics $^{208}$Tl 2615-keV $\gamma$ line from calibration data. The CUORE detectors exhibit a slightly non-Gaussian line shape, as was observed in [@Alduino:2016zrl] and Cuoricino [@Bryant:2010ua; @Carrettoni:2011df]. The origin of this structure is under investigation; however, we model it empirically with a primary Gaussian component centered at 2615 keV and two additional Gaussian components, one on the right and one on the left of the main peak. We find this model provides a better description of the data compared to other models considered, for example, a single- or double-Gaussian photopeak. The choice of line shape is treated as a systematic uncertainty.
![Bottom: Sum of the results of the 19 tower-dependent UEML fits we use to estimate the line shape parameters of each bolometer–dataset in calibration data. The solid red line is the sum of the best-fit line shape model of each bolometer–dataset; the components of this summed best-fit model are shown by the blue dashed lines. We identify (a) the multi-Gaussian photopeak that describes the detector response function, (b) a multiscatter Compton contribution, (c) multiple peaks due to 27–31 keV Te X-ray escape following an incident 2615-keV $\gamma$ ray, (d) a linear continuum background due to coincident events, and (e) a line due to coincident absorption of 2615-keV and 583-keV $\gamma$ rays from the $^{232}$Th decay chain followed by escape of a 511-keV annihilation $\gamma$ from pair production. Top: Ratio between calibration data and line shape model.[]{data-label="fig:lineshape"}](figs/Combined_Towers_PRL_v15_log){width="50.00000%"}
The three Gaussian components are parametrized with the same bolometer–dataset dependent width. The normalized line shape function of each bolometer-dataset thus has 6 parameters: the means of the main peak and two subpeaks, the relative intensities of the subpeaks, and the common peak width. We estimate the line shape parameters for each bolometer–dataset with a simultaneous, unbinned extended maximum likelihood (UEML) fit performed on each tower in the energy range 2530–2720 keV. The simultaneous fit over a tower helps constrain common nuisance parameters such as relative intensity of x-ray escape peaks and continuum background. A simultaneous fit over the full array was not performed due to the computational demands. A comparison of the fit results with the calibration data and a breakdown of the fit model are shown in .
To characterize possible differences in the detector response between physics and calibration data we fit prominent background peaks in the physics data, with known energies between 800 and 2615 keV, using the best-fit line shape parameters determined above for each bolometer–dataset. At each energy this fit includes a dataset-dependent (i.e., channel independent) energy offset variable to parametrize energy misreconstruction. In addition, as the calibration line shape study was performed near 2615 keV, each fit includes a dataset-dependent(channel independent) energy resolution scaling variable to parameterize energy dependence of the resolution or a difference between background and calibration resolution. We find the energy misreconstruction is less than 0.5 keV over the calibrated energy range. The best-fit resolution scaling parameters at 2615 keV are and for the first and second dataset, respectively. To parametrize the energy dependence of the resolution scaling, we fit the set of scaling parameters determined at each peak energy studied with a quadratic function. The resulting best-fit function is then used to estimate the resolution scaling at $Q_{\beta\beta}$. The exposure-weighted harmonic mean energy resolution of the detectors (denoted [*effective resolution*]{}) in physics data, extrapolated to $Q_{\beta\beta}$, is given for each dataset in ; to quote a single characteristic energy resolution for our entire exposure, we combine these, finding FWHM.
Before unblinding the physics data, we fix the model and fitting strategy to search for the [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay of $^{130}$Te. The ROI is taken from 2465 keV to 2575 keV. The model for each bolometer–dataset is composed of a [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay peak, a peak for $^{60}$Co coincident $\gamma$ rays, and a flat background. Each peak is modeled using the line shape discussed above, with the line width scaled by the resolution scaling extrapolated to the peak energy. All detectors are constrained to have the same [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay rate $\Gamma_{0\nu}$, which we allow to vary freely in the fit; the position of the [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay peak is fixed to $Q_{\beta\beta}$ for each bolometer-dataset. The $^{60}$Co peak position is a dataset-dependent free parameter; the $^{60}$Co rate is a single free parameter but the known isotope half-life is used to account for its decay. The background rate is a dataset-dependent free parameter and is not scaled by the event selection efficiency.
![Bottom: Best-fit model from the UEML fit (solid blue line) overlaid on the spectrum of $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay candidates observed in CUORE. The peak near 2506 keV is attributed to $^{60}$Co [@Alduino:2016zrl]. The normalized residuals of this model and the binned data are shown in the top panel. The dashed (blue) curve shows the best-fit for a model with no [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay component. The vertical band is centered at $Q_{\beta\beta}$; the width of the band reflects the systematic uncertainty on the reconstructed energy.[]{data-label="fig:unblinded_roi"}](figs/roifit_with_zero_signal){width="50.00000%"}
shows the candidate events in the ROI that pass all selection criteria together with the result of the UEML fit described above. The total TeO$_2$ exposure is , corresponding for $^{130}$Te. The best-fit $\Gamma_{0\nu}$ is .With zero signal, the best-fit background in the ROI averaged over both datasets is .
To evaluate the goodness of fit, we prepare a large set of pseudo-experiments, each with a number of events determined by a Poisson distribution with a mean of and energy distributed according to the best-fit zero-signal model. Repeating our [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay search fit on each of these, we find that 68% yield a negative log likelihood (NLL) larger than that obtained with our data.
We conclude there is no evidence for [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay and set a 90% confidence Bayesian upper limit on the rate, finding (stat. only) or . In constructing the posterior pdf for $\Gamma_{0\nu}$, we approximate the marginalized likelihood with the profile likelihood and use a flat prior for $\Gamma_{0\nu}>=0$. This approximation speeds up the computation and is valid when the marginalization is dominated by the most probable values of the nuisance parameters. We expect this for our likelihood as the number of events is large and the background dominates. To confirm this we perform an independent analysis using the BAT toolkit [@Caldwell:2008fw] with the same prior but marginalize over the nuisance parameters. The results agree with those above to the percent level.
We repeat our analysis on a large set of pseudo-experiments generated in the same way as for the goodness of fit study. We find the median 90% confidence lower limit (sensitivity) for $T^{0\nu}_{1/2}$ is , and there is a % probability of obtaining a more stringent limit than the one obtained with our data.
We estimate the systematic uncertainties following the same procedure used for [@Alduino:2016zrl]. We perform a large number of pseudo-experiments with zero and nonzero signals assuming different detector line shape models and background shapes (flat and first-order polynomial), varying the energy resolution scaling parameters within their uncertainty, and shifting the position of $Q_{\beta\beta}$ by to account for the energy reconstruction uncertainty. The results are summarized in . We find the fit bias on $\Gamma_{0\nu}$ to be negligible. Including these systematic uncertainties, the 90% confidence limits are and . A frequentist analysis [@Rolke:2004mj] yields at 90% C.L. with a median 90% C.L. lower limit sensitivity for $T_{1/2}^{0\nu}$ of .
[l c c]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
& Additive ($10^{-25}~\rm{yr^{-1}}$) & Scaling (%)\
Line shape & &\
Energy resolution & &\
Fit bias & &\
Energy scale & &\
Background shape & &\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selection efficiency &\
We combine our profile likelihood curve with those from 9.8 [[kg$\cdot$yr]{}]{} of $^{130}$Te exposure from [@Alfonso:2015wka] and 19.8 [[kg$\cdot$yr]{}]{} from Cuoricino [@Andreotti:2010vj] (see ). The combined 90% C.L. limits are and . The frequentist technique yields and .
We interpret the combined half-life limit, , as a limit on the effective Majorana neutrino mass ($m_{\beta\beta}$) in the framework of models of [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay mediated by light Majorana neutrino exchange. We use phase-space factors from [@Kotila:2012zza], nuclear matrix elements from a broad range of models [@Engel:2016xgb; @Barea:2015kwa; @Simkovic:2013qiy; @Hyvarinen:2015bda; @Menendez:2008jp; @Rodriguez:2010mn; @Vaquero:2014dna; @PhysRevC.91.024316; @Mustonen:2013zu; @Neacsu:2014bia; @Meroni:2012qf], and assume the axial coupling constant $g_A \simeq 1.27$; this yields $m_{\beta\beta}<({\CombinedMbbLow} - {\CombinedMbbHigh}$) meV at 90% C.L., depending on the nuclear matrix element estimate employed.
![Profile negative-log-likelihood curves for CUORE, , Cuoricino, and their combination.[]{data-label="fig:combined_nll"}](figs/combined_nll){width="50.00000%"}
In summary, we find no evidence for [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay of $^{130}$Te and place the most stringent limit to date on this decay half-life. The observed background, , is in line with our expectations [@Alduino:2017ods]. The characteristic energy resolution at $Q_{\beta\beta}$ is , which we foresee improving to $\sim$5 keV by optimizing operating conditions and through analysis improvements. A study of our future sensitivity for a number of scenarios is presented in Ref. [@CUORE-Sensitivity]. The experimental progress in $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay searches has been dramatic in recent years; half-lives greater than $10^{25}$ yr are now probed by several experiments [@PhysRevLett.117.082503; @Albert:2014awa; @Gerda:2017; @Albert:2017owj]. CUORE is the first ton-scale cryogenic detector array in operation, more than an order of magnitude larger than its predecessors. The successful commissioning and operation of this large-mass, low-background, cryogenic bolometer array represents a major advancement in the application of this technique to [[$0\nu\beta\beta$]{}]{} decay searches.
[^1]: Leiden Cryogenics DRS-CF3000 continuous-cycle
[^2]: Cryomech PT415-RM
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We perform an analytical investigation in the framework of generalized $K$ matrix theory of the scattering problem in tight isotropic and harmonic waveguides allowing for several open scattering channels. The scattering behavior is explored for identical bosons and fermions, as well as for distinguishable particles, the main aspect being the confinement-induced resonances (CIR) which are attributed to different partial waves. In particular we present the unitarity bounds which emerge when considering a quasi one dimensional system. Unitarity bounds are also given for the transition coefficients, which show the limitations for efficient transversal (de-)excitations by means of CIRs. We analyze the CIR for $d$-waves and find the intriguing phenomenon of a strong transmission suppression in the presence of more than one open channel, which represents an interesting regime to be applied in the corresponding many-particle systems. The corresponding channel threshold singularities are studied and it is shown that these are solely determined by the symmetry class of the partial wave.'
author:
- Benjamin Heß
- Panagiotis Giannakeas
- Peter Schmelcher
bibliography:
- 'litmc.bib'
title: An analytical approach to atomic multichannel collisions in tight harmonic waveguides
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Trapping ultracold atomic vapors in tight waveguides and thus effectively reducing their dimensionality has become a key concept in the contemporary study of ultracold atomic few- and many-body systems, as exotic low-dimensional quantum phases [@girardeau1960; @kinoshita2004; @paredes2004] such as the Tonks-Girardeau gas in one dimension (1D) or the Berezinsky-Kosterlitz-Thouless transition in two dimensions (2D) are available. Besides these intriguing phenomena, the reduction of dimensionality also allows for a novel mechanism to control the scattering physics of two-body interactions. This was first pointed out by Olshanii [@olshanii1998] who studied the influence of a tight cylindrical confinement on scattering events. In particular, a resonance appears when the $s$-wave scattering length becomes comparable with the length scale associated with the confining waveguide potential. This so called confinement-induced resonance (CIR) as a result can be controlled by tuning the trap frequency, which recently also led to the first experimental realization of a super Tonks-Girardeau gas [@haller2009; @haller2009]. A similar prediction of a CIR for spin-polarized fermions [@granger2004] was in the following also experimentally confirmed [@guenter2005; @moritz2005; @froehlich2011]. Except these experiments discovering CIRs in 1D and 2D, a recent experiment [@lamporesi2010] was carried out in mixed-dimensions.
However, the substantial theoretical effort prevail the experimental observations, while at the same time building up a comprehensive understanding of the principles of CIR and suggesting a variety of systems where CIRs can emerge. These efforts include works on different waveguide geometries [@petrov2001; @pricoupenko2006; @idziaszek2006; @peano2005; @sala2012; @peng2011; @zhang2013quasi1dscatt], resonant molecule formation [@melezhik2009], transparency induced by the confinement [@kim2006; @hess2014], CIRs in mixed dimensions and multiple open channels [@saeidian2008; @melezhik2011; @nishida2010], the coupling of various partial waves due to the confinement [@giannakeas2012], or atomic scattering with anisotropic interactions [@sinha2007; @giannakeas2013]. Alongside with these studies we also want to mention recent investigations on ultracold quantum gases on atom chips [@buecker2011; @buecker2012; @vanfrank2014] where excited transversal modes of the confinement are utilized in order to prepare entangled atom clouds.
The focus of the present study is the two-body multi-mode scattering behavior of atoms in the presence of an axially symmetric and harmonic waveguide. In addition to the treatment of bosonic and spin-polarized fermionic collisions, we also provide a theoretical description of the collisional properties of distinguishable particles, for which even and odd partial waves contribute. Similar to preceding studies [@giannakeas2012; @hess2014], the particles are allowed to interact with higher partial waves. The constraint of colliding with energies below the excitation energy of the first excited transversal state is however lifted in this work, thus allowing inelastic collisions, where particles can be scattered into different channels. The latter are asymptotically defined by the transversal trap modes. Our approach is based on the fully analytical and non-perturbative description in terms of $K$ matrices, whose usefulness has already been demonstrated in a series of previous works [@granger2004; @giannakeas2012; @giannakeas2013; @hess2014]. Due to the seminal results of Bo Gao [@gao1998solvdw; @gao1998qdtvdw; @gao2001angular] who investigated the free-space scattering properties of neutral alkaline atoms possessing a van der Waals tail, analytical formulas for the (generalized) scattering length were derived, which are used in the present setup to adequately describe the scattering event on the interatomic scale.
The $K$ matrix approach provides a generalization of the works of Granger [*et al*]{} [@granger2004] and Kim [*et al*]{} [@kim2005] incorporating however [*all*]{} the higher partial waves and contributions from [*all*]{} the closed channels. Furthermore, going beyond the previous studies we derive the connection of the [*physical*]{} $K$-matrix with all the relevant scattering observables obtaining thus the [*full* ]{} multi-component scattering wave function. Using this formalism we study the universal properties of ultracold collisions in the $\ell$-wave single partial wave approximation ([$\ell$-SPWA]{}). Here, we find the existence of energies above the corresponding channel threshold at which the collision effectively behaves as in free-space. This energy is found to be independent of the number of open channels for $s$- and $p$-wave interactions. Furthermore, we investigate the unitarity bounds for quasi-1D collisions. This quantitatively explains the transmission at a CIR in higher transversal modes and explains the confinement induced unitarity bound, from which we also derive the unitarity bounds for inelastic collisions in the waveguide. These bounds may be useful when investigating the possibilities and limitations of populating higher transversal modes by means of a CIR, as interest in coherent excitations in waveguides increases [@buecker2011; @buecker2012; @vanfrank2014]. Next, we investigate the intriguing possibility of a blockade in the first excited transversal mode, found from the quasi 1D unitarity bound in the [$d$-SPWA]{}, with an adequate interatomic potential and the coupling of partial waves taken into account, showing that an almost totally blockaded transmission channel may exist even if there are other possible scattering channels available. In addition we discuss the scattering of distinguishable particles in waveguides and show the qualitative difference of partial wave coupling for distinguishable particles by introducing resonance and transparency coefficients [@hess2014]. We discuss the occurring threshold singularities for collisions of indistinguishable particles and show the qualitatively different behavior for bosons and fermions.
In detail, this paper is organized as follows. Section \[sec:model\] gives a brief review of the considered waveguide Hamiltonian as well as the applied techniques, namely the $K$ matrix formalism while employing the local frame transformation. Thereafter, Sec. \[sec:scattering\_observables\] introduces and discusses the relevant scattering observables for 1D multichannel collisions as well as provides their connection to the physical $K$ matrix for the case of 1D geometries. Section \[sec:results\_discussion\] is devoted to the analysis of our results while our summary and conclusions are given in Sec. \[sec:conclusions\]. The Appendix provides among others some technical concepts used to derive the physical $K$ matrix.
Waveguide Hamiltonian and $K$-matrix approach {#sec:model}
=============================================
In the following we study the collisional behavior of two particles within a harmonic waveguide. Hereby indistinguishable or distinguishable particles are considered. The harmonic nature of the confining potential does not couple the center of mass (CM) coordinates with the relative ones and permits us to treat their motions separately. The Hamiltonian accounting for the CM motion simply describes a CM excitation in a harmonic potential. This solution is well known and thus of no further interest. The non-trivial part is the relative motion Hamiltonian, which reads $$H=\frac{-\hbar^2}{2\mu}\Delta+\frac{1}{2}\mu\omega_{\perp}^2\rho^2+V_{LJ}(r),
\label{eq:Hamiltonian}$$ where $r=\sqrt{z^2+\rho^2}$ is the interparticle distance, with $z$ and $\rho$ describing the longitudinal and transversal degrees of freedom, respectively. $\mu$ denotes the reduced mass of the colliding pair and $\omega_\perp$ is the confinement frequency. Accordingly, the harmonic oscillator length scale is given by $a_{\perp}=\sqrt{\hbar /
\mu \omega_{\perp}}$. The term $V_{LJ}(r)=\frac{C_{10}}{r^{10}}-\frac{C_{6}}{r^{6}}$ is the Lennard-Jones 6-10 potential indicating the short-range, two-body interatomic interactions. $C_{6}$ is the dispersion coefficient and it defines the van der Waals length scale via the relation $\beta_{6}=(2\mu C_{6}/\hbar^2)^{1/4}$. We regard $C_{10}$ as a parameter in order to tune the corresponding scattering lengths induced by the short-range potential. Among others, the particular choice $V_{LJ}(r)$ is motivated by the fact that we attribute to the two-body physics a realistic character avoiding the use of zero-range approximations. In addition, this particular type of interactions are analytically solvable by means of the generalized effective range theory [@gao2009single]. However, any other interatomic potential is also suited as long as the length scale $\beta_n$ associated with this potential is small compared to the oscillator length, i.e. $\beta_n\ll a_{\perp}$.
As in previous works [@granger2004; @giannakeas2012; @giannakeas2013; @hess2014] on the Hamiltonian given in Eq. , the separation of length scales is assumed, i.e. ${\beta_{6}}\ll{a_{\perp}}$. In short, this implies that the Hamiltonian has three distinct regions where (a) different potential contributions dominate and (b) different symmetries are obeyed by the corresponding Hamiltonian.
\(i) Starting in the inner region, where $r\sim {\beta_{6}}$ holds, the interatomic potential dominates. The two particles thus experience a free-space collision with total energy $E=\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2\mu}$.
\(ii) The effect of this collision on the wave function is best observed from the intermediate region $({\beta_{6}}\ll r\ll
{a_{\perp}})$, where both potential contributions are negligible. Hence, we can monitor the outcome of the collisional event in region (i) by a well defined phase shift ${\delta_{\ell}}$ for each partial wave. Due to the invariance under rotations $SO(3)$ we can arrange the full scattering information in a diagonal, energy dependent, K matrix ${\mathbf{K}^{3D}}$.
\(iii) As the asymptotic region $r\gg{a_{\perp}}$ is concerned, only the transverse confining potential contributes. The wave function is thus a direct product of a sine or cosine function in the $z$-direction and a 2D harmonic oscillator (HO) mode for the $\rho$-direction, i.e. $\ket{\psi}=\sum_{n}c_n\ket{q_{n};n;m}$, where $q_{n}$ denotes the channel momentum in $z$-direction, $n$ denotes the transversal oscillator mode and $m$ the magnetic quantum number. The total energy $E$ distributes over these two degrees of freedom according to the relation $E=\hbar\omega_{\perp}(2n+|m|+1)+\frac{\hbar^2
q_{n}^2}{2\mu}$.
We note however, that the azimuthal quantum number $m$ asymptotically associated to the $SO(2)$ rotations, is a good quantum number in both regimes and therefore is a fixed quantity throughout our analysis which is set to $m=0$ for what follows and is therefore also omitted in the labeling of the states. Hereafter, we drop the typical assumption in most of the existing literature that the total collision energy has to be sufficiently small such that only the energetically lowest transversal state can be populated, i.e. $\ket{\psi}\sim\ket{q_0;0}$ and thus we are going beyond previous studies by allowing inelastic collisions involving several transverse modes. Already from this expansion which is only invariant under $\mathcal{T}_z\otimes SO(2)$, where $\mathcal{T}_z$ denotes translation along the $z$-direction and $SO(2)$ rotations around that axis, we conclude that the mapping from region (ii) to (iii) cannot be accomplished by a unitary transformation. Thus, in order to transfer the scattering information between these two regions of different symmetry, an appropriate way is given by the local frame transformation $U_{ln}$ [@harmin1982nonhydrostark; @*harmin1982stark; @*harmin1985; @fano1981; @greene1987]. However, as already discussed previously [@granger2004; @giannakeas2013] the application of this technique comes at the price of rendering the closed channel $(\hbar \omega_\perp(2n+1)> E)$ components of the wavefunction unphysical. This drawback is due to the boundary conditions of our scattering approach, namely the standing wave approach, which after the analytical continuation to the closed channels turns the oscillating solutions into exponential diverging ones. To overcome this unphysical situation a standard channel closing procedure, familiar from multichannel quantum defect theory has to be applied [@aymar1996], leading to the physical K matrix, given by $${\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D,phys}}={\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D}}+i {\mathbf{K}_{oc}^{1D}}(1-i{\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}})^{-1}{\mathbf{K}_{co}^{1D}},
\label{eq:k_oo_1d_phys}$$ where in turn, ${\mathbf{K}_{}^{1D}}$ refers to the corresponding 1D $K$ matrix ${\mathbf{K}_{}^{1D}}=U^{T} {\mathbf{K}^{3D}}U$ [@granger2004; @giannakeas2012; @giannakeas2013; @zhang2013quasi1dscatt]. In addition, ${\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D}},{\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}}$ denote the open-open and closed-closed channel transitions, respectively. Accordingly, ${\mathbf{K}_{oc}^{1D}}$ and ${\mathbf{K}_{co}^{1D}}$ denote the open-closed channel transitions and vice versa. From Eq. the resonant processes are given as poles of the physical ${\mathbf{K}_{}^{1D}}$ matrix. Therefore, the roots of $\det(\openone-i{\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}})$ correspond to the positions of the closed channel bound states lying in the continuum of the open channels. The resonant structure thus fulfills a Fano-Feshbach scenario [@chin2010]. Performing the above calculations (cf. Appendix \[app:kphys\]) for a given $3D$ $K$ matrix $K^{3D}=\operatorname{diag}(\tan\delta_{\ell},\tan\delta_{{\ell^{\prime}}})$ yields a physical $K$ matrix, given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D,phys}}&=\frac{1}{\det(\openone-i
{\mathbf{K}^{3D}}{\mathfrak{U}_{}})}\times\Bigl\{\Delta_\ell{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}+\Delta_{\ell^{\prime}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}-\nonumber\\
&-i\Delta_{\ell}\Delta_{\ell^{\prime}}\bigl({\mathfrak{U}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}+{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}-{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}}({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}+{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})\bigr)\Bigr\},
\label{eq:kphys}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Delta_{\ell}(E)=\tan\delta_{\ell}(E)$ contains the energy dependent $\ell$-th phase shift and the matrices ${\mathbf{F}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ are given by $({\mathbf{F}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}=U_{\ell n}U_{{\ell^{\prime}}{n^{\prime}}}$, with $0\le n,{n^{\prime}}\le n_o-1$ and $n_o$ denoting the number of open channels. At this point we also introduce the generalized, energy dependent, scaled scattering length defined for all partial waves $\ell$, by ${\bar{a}_{\ell}}(E)^{2\ell+1}=(a_{\ell}(E)/{a_{\perp}})^{2\ell+1}=-\frac{\Delta_{\ell}(E)}{({a_{\perp}}k)^{2\ell+1}}$. As the local frame transformation $U_{\ell n}$ also depends on the energy, this also holds for the matrices ${\mathbf{F}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}}={\mathbf{F}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}}(E)$. Here, we also note that one should carefully distinguish the number of open channels $n_o$ from the actual quantum numbers of the corresponding transverse modes $n$, e.g. consider the single mode regime where only the population of the lowest transversal mode $\ket{q_0;0}$ is allowed, we have $n_o=1$.
The energy dependent $K$ matrix ${\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D,phys}}$, given in Eq. appropriately describes the scattering in a tight harmonic waveguide with several open transverse modes. The coupling of two arbitrary partial waves $\ell$ and ${\ell^{\prime}}$ belonging to the same symmetry class, i.e. $\ell-{\ell^{\prime}}=0\operatorname{mod}2$, is properly taken into account. Before proceeding let us recall that the effect of the closed channels on the scattering phase shift can conveniently be expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})&=\sum_{p=0}^{\ell+{\ell^{\prime}}}\frac{{c_{p}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}}{2({\epsilon}+\frac{1}{2})^\frac{p+1}{2}}{\zeta_{H}\big(-\frac{p-1}{2},n_{o}-{\epsilon}\bigr)},
\label{eq:closed_channel_umat}
\\
{c_{p}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}} &=
(-1)^{\frac{\ell+{\ell^{\prime}}}{2}}\sqrt{(2\ell+1)(2{\ell^{\prime}}+1)}\nonumber\\
&\times \sum_{\nu=\max\{p,|\ell-{\ell^{\prime}}|\}}^{\ell+{\ell^{\prime}}}\Gamma(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}},\nu,p)\quad,
\label{eq:clossel_channel_expansion_coefficients_cll}
\\
\Gamma(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}},\nu,p)&=i^{p-1}2^{\nu-1}(2\nu+1)\nonumber\\
&\times\begin{pmatrix}v\\p\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}\frac{\nu+p-1}{2}\\\nu\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}\ell&{\ell^{\prime}}&\nu\\0&0&0\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq:clossel_channel_gamma}\end{aligned}$$ where $\zeta_{H}(s,a)$ denotes the Hurwitz zeta function and $\Gamma(\cdot)$ are some combinatorial constants containing the Wigner $3j$-symbols. Equation is discussed in more detail in [@hess2014]. The dimensionless, channel-normalized energy ${\epsilon}$ is defined by the relation $E=2\hbar{\omega_{\perp}}({\epsilon}+\frac{1}{2})$, which is chosen such that $n\le{\epsilon}\le n+1$ is between the threshold of th $n$-th and the $(n+1)$-th channel. We note, that $n_{o}=\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor+1$ is the number of open channels, where $\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor$ denotes the largest integer smaller than ${\epsilon}$. The representation of Eq. , which differs from the one introduced in [@hess2014], is in particular useful when considering the threshold singularities below. One further remark is in order, which refers to the second argument of the Hurwitz zeta function. This argument is given by ${\epsilon_{c}}=n_{o}-{\epsilon}=1-{\Delta\epsilon}$, where ${\Delta\epsilon}={\epsilon}-\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor$ denotes the fraction of the total collision energy above the threshold of the last open channel rendering $\zeta_{H}$ periodic with a saw-tooth like behavior.
Throughout the following analysis the energy ranges up to ${\epsilon}=4$, passing several channel thresholds of the transverse confinement. We note that all these energies lie close to the threshold of the interatomic potential and thus the analytic solutions [@gao2009single] for our interatomic potential are applicable.
Scattering observables {#sec:scattering_observables}
======================
In the asymptotics of the scattering process the transversal and longitudinal degrees of freedom are decoupled and the quantum number of the transversal $2D$ HO modes can be used to define the asymptotic scattering channel. $$\psi_n(r)=e^{iq_{n}z}{\phi_{n}(\rho)}+\sum_{n^{\prime}=0}^{n_o}f_{nn^{\prime}}^{\pm}e^{iq_{n^\prime}|z|}{\phi_{n^{\prime}}(\rho)},
\label{eq:1d_scattering_wavefunction}$$ describing an incoming wave in channel $n$ which is then (in)-elastically scattered into all open channels. Here, the scattering amplitude $f_{nn^{\prime}}^{\pm}$ in forward $(+)$, respectively backward $(-)$ direction reads $$f_{nn^{\prime}}^{\pm}=f_{nn^{\prime}}^e+\operatorname{sgn}(z)f_{nn^{\prime}}^o,
\label{eq:scattering_forward_backward}$$ whereas in turn $f^{e}$ and $f^{o}$ refer to the respective scattering amplitudes for even and odd exchange symmetry and, $\operatorname{sgn}(z)=z/|z|$ denotes the sign function. By the conservation of flux, the forward $f^+$ and backward $f^-$ scattering amplitude contain the same information about a scattering event, we concentrate our analysis on $f^{+}$, for which the transmission and reflection coefficients $T_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}$ and $R_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}$, respectively, from channel $n$ to ${n^{\prime}}$ take the following form $$\begin{aligned}
T_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})} &= |\delta_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}+f^{\ell}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}+f^{{\ell^{\prime}}}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}|^2
\label{eq:transmission_fplus}
\\
R_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})} &= |f^{\ell}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}+f^{{\ell^{\prime}}}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}|^2,
\label{eq:reflection_fplus}\end{aligned}$$ where $\ell$ and ${\ell^{\prime}}$ refer to even and odd partial waves, respectively. The transition probability $W_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}$ characterizing the transversal excitation and de-excitation processes from channel $n$ into a specific channel ${n^{\prime}}$ are given by the sum of the corresponding transmission and reflection coefficients $$W_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}=T_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}+R_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}
\label{eq:transition_nnp}$$ If the constituents of the scattering event both belong to the same symmetry class, i.e. both are either bosons or fermions, we obtain a special case of Eq. , given by $T_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell)}=|\delta_{nn^{\prime}}+f_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell)}|^2$, where the scattering amplitudes $f_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell)}$ are connected to the physical $K$ matrix, via $$\boldsymbol f^{(\ell)}=i\;{\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}} \left[\openone-i\;{\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}}\right]^{-1},
\label{eq:connection_f_kphys}$$ see also [@hess2014]. This relation in particular allows for a extension of previous studies on the CIRs in harmonic waveguides to distinguishable particles, as it is in detail discussed in Sec. \[sub:distinguishable\].
Results and Discussion {#sec:results_discussion}
======================
Universal Properties {#sub:universalities}
--------------------
We start our discussion of the universal properties for the (in)-elastic scattering in waveguides by considering the $\ell$-wave single partial wave approximation ([$\ell$-SPWA]{}). Since the main focus is the study of CIRs which typically occur in the vicinity of a free space resonance, the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} can safely be assumed to be accurate in the description of the scattering process. Recall that for the particular choice of a Lennard-Jones type 6-10 interatomic potential the background scattering length from higher lying partial waves ($\ell>1$) is negligible. The advantage of the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} is given by the fact, that (i) analytical results can be derived straightforwardly, see below and (ii) for certain energy regimes it serves as a good approximation for the coupled $\ell$-wave CIR [@giannakeas2012].
Employing thus the physical $K$ matrix in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{}, where $\ell$ is not restricted to belong to a specific symmetry class $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}}&=-i\alpha_\ell{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}\quad,\textrm{with}
\label{eq:kphys_single_pw}
\\
\alpha_{\ell}&=\frac{i\Delta_{\ell}}{1-i\Delta_{\ell}{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}},
\label{eq:alpha_ell}\end{aligned}$$ we calculate according to Eqs. and the transmission- and reflection coefficients $$\begin{aligned}
T^{(\ell)}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}&=\delta_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}+\frac{\alpha_{\ell}^2\left(2{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}\delta_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}-({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^2\right)}{1-\alpha_{\ell}^2{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}^2}\\
R^{(\ell)}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}&=\frac{-\alpha_{\ell}^2({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^2}{1-\alpha_{\ell}^2{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}^2},
\label{eq:tmatrix_closed_form}\end{aligned}$$ from which we derive in particular the total transmission coefficient $T^{(\ell)}_n=\sum_{{n^{\prime}}<n_o}T^{(\ell)}_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}$, when incident in channel $n$ which takes the appealing form $$T_n^{(\ell)}=1-\frac{{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}}]}({\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}})_{nn}}{1+{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D,phys}}]}^2}
\label{eq:total_transmission_n}$$ This quantity is in the focus of the following analysis since it encapsulate all the relevant scattering information for both all the open and closed channels.
### General aspects of collisions in harmonic waveguides {#sss:resonance_limits}
In this subsection we focus on the general behavior of the transmission coefficients for partial waves $\ell=0$ and $\ell=1$ at total collision energies beyond the single mode regime. In particular we note, that the separation of length scale induces an energy scale separation. This means that even several quanta of the transversal excitation imply that the corresponding energy dependence of the scaled $s$-wave scattering length is negligible. Due to the increasingly narrow width of higher partial wave resonances, this simplification is not legitimate for $\ell\ge 1$. In addition we should recall that all the scattering lengths used in the analysis below are analytically obtained via a Lennard-Jones 6-10 potential.
![(Color online) (a) Transmission coefficients ${T_{0}^{(0)}},{T_{1}^{(0)}},{T_{2}^{(0)}}$ versus the scaled $s$-wave scattering length ${\bar{a}_{0}}$, for the first, second and third open channel (solid, dashed and dotted lines), respectively, at energy $\Delta{\epsilon}=0.95$. Higher lying curves for a particular number of open channels correspond to a lower entrance channel. Panel (b) shows ${T_{0}^{(1)}},{T_{1}^{(1)}},{T_{2}^{(1)}}$ at $\Delta{\epsilon}=0.05$ for the case $\ell=1$.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_t123_boson_fermion"}](figures/figure1.eps){width="45.00000%"}
First we show a typical case of the transmission coefficients $T_n^{(\ell)}$ for $\ell=0,1$ versus the corresponding scaled scattering length $\bar{a}^{2\ell+1}_\ell$ in panels (a) and (b) of Fig.\[fig:transmission\_t123\_boson\_fermion\], respectively. In particular we observe the asymmetric line shape of the transmission spectra for $\ell=0$. The scaled energy above the corresponding channel threshold $\Delta\epsilon=0.95$ is chosen such that the CIRs, identified as the minima of the respective transmission coefficients are best pronounced, i.e. we aim at a large difference between the transmission values taken for large $|\bar{a}_0|$ and the specific value of $\bar{a}_0$ leading to a CIR. This relative difference maximizes especially at energies below every threshold which can be readily seen in panel (a) of Fig. \[fig:transmission\_bounds\], where the transmission coefficient values for $|\bar{a}_0|\to \infty$ ($T_{\infty,i}^{(0)}$ - black lines) and for $\bar{a}_0$ at a CIR ($T_{\rm{CIR},i}^{(0)}$ - red lines) are displayed. Furthermore, we observe that a transmission blockade is present only for the single mode regime (see Fig.\[fig:transmission\_t123\_boson\_fermion\] (a) red solid line). However, in the case of several open channels the transmission blockade is lifted giving in turn rise to finite values of the transmission coefficient. In addition transparency, i.e. $T_i^{(0)}=1$ occurs in the absence of interactions ($\bar{a}^{2\ell+1}_\ell=0$) between the colliding particles. Analogously, panel (b) of Fig. \[fig:transmission\_t123\_boson\_fermion\] depicts the results for $\ell=1$, as a function of the scaled $p$-wave scattering volume $(\bar{a}_1)^3$. Unlike the $s$-wave case, here the asymmetry of the line shape is barely visible if the collision energy is raised above the first excited channel threshold.
![(Color online) (a) Transmission coefficient ${T_{0}^{(0)}}$ versus the channel scaled energy ${\epsilon}$ for $\ell=0$ for various scaled $s$-wave scattering lengths. The CIR obeys ${T_{0}^{(0)}}=0$ in the ground channel and for higher channels the resonances follow the confinement induced unitarity bound ${T_{\textrm{CIR},0}^{(0)}}$ (thick, dot-dashed line), see Eq. . (b) ${T_{1}^{(0)}}$ versus ${\epsilon}$ for the same scattering lengths. Again, the resonances are bounded by ${T_{\textrm{CIR},1}^{(0)}}$.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_trend_s"}](figures/figure2.eps){width="45.00000%"}
More insight into the behaviour of the transmission coefficients $T_i^{(0)}$ can be obtained from Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\], where we present $T_0^{(0)}$ and $T_1^{(0)}$ versus $\epsilon$ in panels (a) and (b), respectively. These results correspond to different values of the $C_{10}$ parameter. As it is discussed in more detail below (see Sec. IV A subsection 3 and 4), a CIR process belongs to the transmission minima which occur in the interval of energies among the open channels. Specifically, in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\] (a) we observe that for $\epsilon<1$, ie between the thresholds of the ground and first excited transverse state, the transmission minima for varying values of the scattering lengths leads to a transmission blockade. For $1<\epsilon<2$ and higher energies the minimal value of the transmission is nonzero and increases with increasing channel the energy belongs to. The transmission exhibits a repeating pattern shifted to higher values. The locations of the minima with varying scattering length form thus a “topos“ which in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\] is denoted by the black dot-dashed line: This is the [*confinement-induced*]{} (CI) unitarity bound and represents a universal feature. We should note however that the specific functional form of the CI unitarity bound depends on the particular $\ell$-wave character of the collisions. Furthermore, in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\](a) we observe that a CIR occurs for positive scattering length at $\Delta\epsilon < 0.69$, while CIRs of negative values of $\bar{a}_0$ emerge for $\Delta\epsilon > 0.69$. The particular value of $\bar{a}_0=0.3$ does not permit a CIR at all and is hence monotonically increasing, while departing from $\epsilon=0$ with a finite, non-vanishing slope.
![(Color online) (a) $T_{0}^{(1)}$ versus the scaled energy ${\epsilon}$ for four open channels. Different curves correspond to different values of the short range parameter $C_{10}$. It is clearly observed that the CIR saturates at the confinement induced unitarity bound depicted as the dot-dashed curve. As for general $\ell$ a CIR associated with a transmission blockade is only happening for ${\epsilon}\le 1$. In (b) the transmission coefficient $T_{1}^{(1)}$, when incident in the first excited channel is shown.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_trend_p"}](figures/figure3.eps){width="45.00000%"}
Finally we note that the transmission coefficient goes up to unity at the channel thresholds regardless of the value of the scattering length. Considering the case $\ell=1$, presented in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_p\], we use the $C_{10}$ parameter to label the different curves. This is due to the narrow width of the $p$-wave free space resonances which makes an energy independent treatment of the scaled $p$-wave scattering length impossible. For each curve the $C_{10}$ parameter is adjusted such that a free-space resonance occurs for every energetic interval $i-1 \le\epsilon\le
i$ for $0\le i\le 4$. Again, at a CIR the corresponding transmission coefficient touches the $p$-wave CI unitarity bound and thus we encounter a suppression of the transmission with a complete blockade $T=0$ for the case $\epsilon < 1$. Away from a free-space resonance the scattering length quickly decreases to its small background value leading to the large value of the transmission coefficient away from a resonance. Furthermore we observe that in the case of $p$-wave interactions the value of $T_i^{(1)}$ taken at the channel thresholds indeed strongly depends on the scaled $p$-wave scattering length, which drastically differs from the case of $\ell=0$ thus rendering the threshold behavior for $\ell=0$ universal with respect to the $s$-wave scattering length.
### The decoupling energies {#sss:decoupling_energy}
![(Color online) (a) Transmission coefficients at the decoupling energies $\lfloor
{\epsilon}^*_0\rfloor+\Delta{\epsilon}^*_0$ versus the scaled $s$-wave scattering length ${\bar{a}_{0}}$. Different curves depict the transmission coefficients for up to three open channels. The symmetric line shape centered around the non-interacting case ${\bar{a}_{0}}=0$ indicates an effective decoupling from the closed channels of the waveguide. For large values of $|{\bar{a}_{0}}|$, the transmission approaches the values given by Eq. . The case of $\ell=1$ is shown in (b) for energies $\lfloor {\epsilon}^*_1\rfloor+\Delta{\epsilon}^*_1$.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_decouple_sp"}](figures/figure4.eps){width="45.00000%"}
In Ref. [@hess2014] it was shown that the coupling of the partial waves to the closed channels, given by the ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}({\epsilon})$’s in Eq. exhibits roots for all considered partial waves $\ell$. These roots ${{\epsilon}^{*}_{\ell n}}=\lfloor {{\epsilon}^{*}_{\ell n}}\rfloor+\Delta{{\epsilon}^{*}_{\ell n}}$, in the following called *decoupling energies*, depend on the partial wave $\ell$, and, in general, also on the number of open channels $n$. The decoupling energies determine the particular energy where the bound state of the closed channels decouples from *all* the open channels. Therefore, in this case, the physical [$K$ matrix ]{}can be written in the following form $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D,phys}}|_{\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor+{\epsilon}^*}&=({\mathbf{K}^{3D}})_{\ell\ell}\;{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}(\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor+{\epsilon}^{*})\nonumber\\
&=\mathbf{U}^T{\mathbf{K}^{3D}}\mathbf{U}|_{\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor +{\epsilon}^*}
\label{eq:kmatrix_decoupled}\end{aligned}$$ where $\lfloor{\epsilon}\rfloor$ is the threshold energy for the largest open channel. Equation shows the expected result, that the 3D scattering information which emerges close to the origin is transfered to the asymptotic regime without being affected by the closed channels of the trapping potential. In other words the colliding pair experiences effectively a free space collision in the presence of the waveguide geometry.
In particular by using the expression for ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}({\epsilon})$ in Eq. one can show, that for the cases $\ell=0$ and $1$, the decoupling energies do not depend on the number of open channels, i.e. $\Delta{\epsilon}^{*}_{\ell n}=\Delta{\epsilon}^*_\ell$, which means that the closed channels decouple from the open channels at the same energy $\Delta{\epsilon}^*_\ell$ above the channel threshold, as it is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_decouple\_sp\]. Fig. \[fig:transmission\_decouple\_sp\](a) shows the bosonic case, with $\ell=0$ and $\Delta{\epsilon}^{*}_0\approx 0.69$, where the transmission coefficients ${T_{0}^{(0)}},{T_{1}^{(0)}},{T_{2}^{(0)}}$ versus the scaled $s$-wave scattering length ${\bar{a}_{0}}$ are shown for one, two and three open channels, respectively. The symmetric line shape centered around the non-interacting case ${\bar{a}_{0}}=0$ is clearly seen. Transmissions for $\ell=1$ and ${\epsilon}^{*}_1\approx 0.31$, are shown in panel (b) as a function of the scaled $p$-wave scattering volume $({\bar{a}_{1}})^3$. In both panels the respective scaled scattering length are considered as external parameters which is in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} equivalent to a change of the $C_{10}$ parameter.
### The CIR limit {#sss:cir_limit}
As already emphasized above a CIR occurs in the vicinity of a free-space resonance, i.e. in parameter regions $|\bar{a}_{\ell}|\gg1$. For this free-space unitarity regime the scattering amplitude matrix in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} is simply given by $$\boldsymbol f_{\infty}^{(\ell)}=-\frac{{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}}{{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}+{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}},
\label{eq:scattering_amplitude_unitarity}$$ from which we readily derive the corresponding transmission coefficients $$T_{\infty,n}^{(\ell)}=\frac{{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}^2-{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}({\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}-({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{nn})}{{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}^2-{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}^2}.
\label{eq:transmission_unitarity_temp}$$ This equation gives the values in the wings of large scattering length of the transmission coefficients of Figs. \[fig:transmission\_t123\_boson\_fermion\] and \[fig:transmission\_decouple\_sp\]. Furthermore, its general energy dependence is show in panels (a) and (b) of Fig. \[fig:transmission\_bounds\] for the cases of $\ell=0$ and $1$, respectively. There the transmission coefficients (ie. $T^{(\ell)}_{\infty,n}$) for large values of the scattering length are compared to the quasi 1D unitarity bound, i.e. the bound to the transmission coefficient at a CIR ie. $T^{(\ell)}_{\rm{CIR},n}$.
To understand the behavior of the transmission coefficient at a CIR, recall that the denominator of Eq. represents $\det(\openone-i{\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}})$, which implies, that if this expression vanishes for a particular value of $\Delta_\ell$, or the corresponding scattering length, respectively, a CIR occurs. We hence have a sufficient criterion for the occurrence of a CIR given by the condition $\alpha_{\ell}\rightarrow\infty$, with $\alpha_{\ell}$ from Eq. . A transmission value of $T=0$ can only be achieved in the [$s$-SPWA]{} when there is a single open channel, since then ${\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}={\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ holds. From a physical point of view this behavior is expected, since a transmission blockade in a specific channel will not prevent the scattering into other channels, which for example can be seen in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_transistion\_12\_bosons\], where the transmission coefficients ${T_{0}^{(0)}}$ and ${T_{1}^{(0)}}$ are shown, respectively. Both curves exhibit minima at the CIR. Also in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_transistion\_12\_bosons\] we plot the transition coefficient $W_{01}^{(0)}$ (dotted lines) which is enhanced at a CIR clearly demonstrating that for two open channels at CIR the inelastic process are enhanced prohibiting in this manner the transmission coefficient to be zero when more than one channel is involved.
![(Color online) (a) Transmission coefficient $T_{\text{CIR},i}^{(\ell)}$ at a CIR, i.e. the confinement induced unitarity bound, versus the scaled energy ${\epsilon}$ as well as the transmission coefficient $T_{\infty,i}^{(\ell)}$ taken for large scattering length $|\bar{a}_{\ell}|$, i.e. for scattering at the free-space unitarity bound. (b) Corresponding result for $\ell=1$. Note that the two curves rapidly converge, implying a far less pronounced CIR in terms of a transmission suppression than in the case of $\ell=0$. []{data-label="fig:transmission_bounds"}](figures/figure5.eps){width="45.00000%"}
The absence of a transmission blockade at a CIR in the case of more than one open channel, can be derived quantitatively from the formal limit $\alpha_{\ell}\rightarrow\infty$ taken in Eq. . This yields $$\boldsymbol f_{\textrm{CIR}}^{(\ell)}=-\frac{{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}}{{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}},
\label{eq:scattering_amplitude_CIR}$$ which generalizes the well known single mode result $f_{\textrm{CIR}}^{(\ell)}=-1$. It is remarkable that for the transversal ground state a non-trivial energy dependence is not present. We note that Eq. can, by virtue of [@hess2014], also be obtained by formally equating Eq. at a vanishing closed channel coupling, i.e. $\boldsymbol
f_{\textrm{CIR}}^{(\ell)}=\boldsymbol f_{\infty}^{(\ell)}|_{{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}=0}$. Writing down the transmission coefficients for the scattering amplitude at a CIR, or, equivalently considering $T_{\textrm{CIR},n}^{(\ell)}=\lim_{\alpha_{\ell}\rightarrow\infty}T^{(\ell)}_n$, yields $$T_{\textrm{CIR},n}^{(\ell)}=1-\frac{({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{nn}}{{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}}.
\label{eq:transmission_CIR}$$ This expression in particular contains the previous statement that a CIR for a single open channel has $T^{(\ell)}_0=0$.
In the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} the smallest value the transmission coefficient can take as a function of the energy is determined by Eq. , which serves as a lower bound for the transmission coefficient. This lower bound is compared to the value of the transmission coefficient for infinite scattering length in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_bounds\]. The channel of incidence varies within the first few transversal modes, i.e. $0\le i \le 4$. As it can be easily deduced from Eq. all quasi 1D unitarity bounds tend to unity irrespective of the partial wave $\ell$ under consideration. This makes the CIR being less pronounced for increasing energies (excited channels) with respect to the corresponding suppression of the transmission. The difference between the transmission for infinite scattering length and at a CIR is largest close to the channel thresholds for $\ell=0$. Remarkably, this difference $T_{\textrm{CIR},i}^{(1)}-T_{\infty,i}^{(1)}$ for $l=1$ happens to vanish as soon as the channel threshold to the first excited mode is exceeded. This also explains the rather symmetric line shapes observed in panel (b) of Fig. \[fig:transmission\_t123\_boson\_fermion\] for $n_o\ge 2$.
![(Color online) Confinement induced unitary bounds $W_{\textrm{CIR},nn^{\prime}}^{(\ell)}$ for energies ${\epsilon}\le 3$. Panels (a)-(c) depict the cases $\ell=0,1$ and $2$, respectively. In particular, $W_{\textrm{CIR},12}^{(\ell)}$ coincides for $\ell=1$ and $0$ for the first excited channel, as can be seen in panels (a) and (b). The $d$-wave bound (c) exhibits a non-monotonic behavior as well as a total suppression of transitions at ${\epsilon}=1.75$. []{data-label="fig:transitions_spd"}](figures/figure6.eps){width="45.00000%"}
A similar analysis can be performed in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} for the transition coefficient $W_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell)}$. In this case, the limit $\alpha_{\ell}\rightarrow\infty$ leads to $$W_{\textrm{CIR},{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(\ell)}=2\;\frac{({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^2}{{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}^2},
\label{eq:transition_CIR}$$ describing the unitarity bounds for the transition coefficients which occur between different channels during a CIR. Results for this observable are shown in Fig. \[fig:transitions\_spd\], where all possible transition coefficients are given for energies ${\epsilon}\le 3$. In particular, panel (a) and (b) depict the cases for $\ell=0$ and $1$, respectively. In the energetic range $1\le{\epsilon}\le2$ the transition coefficients exactly coincide and exhibit a monotonically increasing behavior. This coincidence abruptly changes when crossing the channel threshold to the second open channel especially for $W_{\textrm{CIR},12}^{(0/1)}$, which has a sharp drop to zero for $\ell=0$ while for $\ell=1$ the coefficient continuously decreases but remains the dominant transition process throughout the channel. Fig.\[fig:transitions\_spd\](c), depicts the case for $\ell=2$, which exhibits a non-monotonic behavior for all considered transition coefficients. Even though, as discussed in more detail below in Sec. \[sss:impact\_higher\_partial\_waves\], we do not expect this behavior to exactly describe the processes for $d$-waves as additional $s$-wave contributions have to be taken into account, it is nevertheless remarkable that for $\ell=2$ energetic regions exist where by means of a CIR no transitions between channels can be induced, i.e. at the energy ${\epsilon}=1.75$ the transition probability between the two available channels vanishes.
The interest in the observable $W$ is given by recent experiments on atom chips [@buecker2011; @buecker2012; @vanfrank2014] where coherent excitations in higher transversal confinement modes are engineered. From this viewpoint the presented analysis may contribute to an understanding in how far the CIR may be utilized to coherently excite atoms to higher modes and which are the most efficient energetic regions in which these transitions can be achieved.
### Unitarity and CIR {#sss:unitarity_and_cir}
To further illuminate the unitarity regime let us consider the situation from the viewpoint of traditional scattering theory. Here, by using the appropriate relation for one spatial dimension $$\mathbf{S}=1+2\boldsymbol{f}
\label{eq:1d_rel_sMatrix_sAmplitude}$$ between the scattering matrix and amplitude [@lupusax1998thesis], we readily derive the quasi 1D *unitarity relation* $$\boldsymbol{f}\boldsymbol{f}^\dagger=-\;\mathfrak{Re}\,(\boldsymbol{f}),
\label{eq:unitariry_relation}$$ where the right hand side denotes the real part of the scattering amplitude matrix, whereas the left hand side in particular encapsulates the total reflection coefficient $R^{(\ell)}_n=\sum_{n\le n_o} R_{nn^{\prime}}^{(\ell)}$ with $R_{n}^{(\ell)}=(\boldsymbol{f}\boldsymbol{f}^\dagger)_{nn}$. We thus conclude from the unitarity relation, that the total reflection coefficient $R_n$ when incident in a specific channel $n$ is fully contained within a single element of the scattering amplitude, namely $$R_n^{(\ell)}=-\mathfrak{Re}\,(f_{nn}^{(\ell)})
\label{eq:total_reflection_unitarity}$$ Equating now the right hand side with our system specific information from Eq. , we find after some algebra $$R_n^{(\ell)}=\frac{({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{nn}}{{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]}}\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{(\alpha_{\ell}{\operatorname{Tr}[{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}]})^2}},
\label{eq:reflection_n_unitarity}$$ which shows, that the scattering saturates at the unitarity bound $\alpha_\ell\rightarrow\infty$. It is hence legitimate to regard ${T_{\textrm{CIR},n}^{(\ell)}}$ or the equivalent quantity $R_n^{(\ell)}|_{\alpha_{\ell}\rightarrow\infty}$ as the *confinement induced* (CI) unitarity bound, similar to the unitarity bound in free space, which scales as $k^{-2}$.
Transmission suppression in excited channels {#sub:d-wave_blockade}
--------------------------------------------
![(Color online) Transmission coefficient ${T_{0}^{(0)}}$ (red solid line) for a small negative value of the $s$-wave scattering length where the CIR is expected to occur near the threshold, namely at ${\epsilon}= 1.98$. At the same position occurs also the CIR in the first excited channel see $T^{(0)}_1$ (dashed line). The total blockade is absent, since the transition $W^{(0)}_{01}$ (dotted line) between the channels is also resonantly enhanced at the position of the CIR.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_transistion_12_bosons"}](figures/figure7.eps){width="45.00000%"}
![(a) $T^{(2_0)}_0$ versus ${\epsilon}$ for coupled partial waves $\ell=0$ and $2$ constituted by different regions of near resonant behaviour belonging to different $C_{10}$ values. In the middle of each vertical stripe a free-space resonance translates to a corresponding CIR. The thick dashed line depicts ${T_{\textrm{CIR},0}^{(2)}}$. Deviations of the transmission minima from the unitarity bound arise due to the [$d$-SPWA]{}. The inset (b) shows a zoom-in plot around the blockade region ($T=0$) in the neighbourhood of ${\epsilon}\approx 1.75$. The leftmost resonance (see arrow) coincides with the unitarity bound in which case the partial waves decouple, i.e. ${\mathfrak{U}_{20}}=0$. Panels (c) and (d) show the results for $T^{(2_0)}_1$. Deviations from the [$d$-SPWA]{} become small around the decoupling energy. We also observe that around this energy scattering becomes almost transparent.[]{data-label="fig:t1_dwave_comb_trend"}](figures/figure8.eps){width="40.00000%"}
Increasing the total collision energy across the threshold of the first excited transversal mode lifts in general the blockade in a particular channel as the scattering constituents may escape via inelastic collisions to a different asymptotic state. This is for example present in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_transistion\_12\_bosons\], where a pronounced $s$-wave CIR is shown for a total collision energy of ${\epsilon}\approx 1.98$. In particular, the transmission coefficients $T^{(0)}_0$ and $T^{(0)}_1$ are shown together with the transition amplitude $W^{(0)}_{01}$ illustrating the resonantly enhanced transition between the channels at a CIR.
Although Fig. \[fig:transmission\_transistion\_12\_bosons\] depicts the case of $s$-wave interactions it provides the typical scenario when a CIR happens in the presence of more than one open channel. However, the first exception where there is no resonantly enhanced transition between the channels at a CIR, occurs for $d$-waves when the particles are incident in the first excited channel as we will demonstrate in Sec. \[sss:strong\_surpression\]. But before doing so, we will provide a general brief discussion of the influence of higher partial waves.
### The impact of higher partial waves {#sss:impact_higher_partial_waves}
The analysis of $s$- and $p$-waves scattering carried out in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} was justified because of the negligible phase shifts of allowed higher partial waves in the presence of a free-space resonance of $\ell=0$ and 1, respectively. This particular simplification does of course depend on the considered interatomic potential, and in case of Lennard-Jones 6-10 potential this certainly holds. Nevertheless, when considering the CIRs associated to a higher partial wave, e.g. $d$-wave for the present discussion, we have to take into account the non-vanishing $s$-wave scattering in the case of collisions between indistinguishable bosons. This observation led to the idea of partial wave coupling due to closed channels of the confinement, as firstly discussed in [@giannakeas2012]. The corresponding physical $K$ matrix of this problem based on Eq. is now expanded in terms of ${\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}, {\mathbf{F}_{{\ell^{\prime}}{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}},{\mathbf{F}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ and ${\mathbf{F}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}$, which serve as a basis for the two partial wave $K$ matrices. Therefore, it is not feasible to obtain a version of Eq. valid for two partial waves, since an inversion as needed in Eq. by means of a repeated application of the Sherman-Morrison method would yield a physical [$K$ matrix ]{}with several hundreds of summands and is thus prohibitive. We therefore have to rely on a more qualitative analysis and take the intuition from the transparent results obtained in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{}.
However, the coupling between the two contributing partial waves $\ell$ and ${\ell^{\prime}}$, mediated by the closed channels, is conveniently described by the corresponding off-diagonal element ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})$ of the closed channel coupling matrix $\mathfrak{U}$. Similar to the previous case in Sec. \[sss:decoupling\_energy\], where the vanishing diagonal elements ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}$ were used to identify the decoupling energies for which the scattering process exhibits strong free-space character within the confinement, we generalize it here in the presence of a ${\ell^{\prime}}$-$\ell$ wave system. Our first observation is that there exist also energies for which the off-diagonal elements of $\mathfrak{U}$ vanish, i.e. ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon}_D)=0$ and the confinement-induced coupling between the partial waves is absent. For the case of a coupled $s$-$d$-wave system, this energy in the first excited channel is ${\epsilon}_D\approx 1.65$. In particular this also implies that the position of the $d$-wave CIR is solely determined by the [$d$-SPWA]{}, i.e. $$\mathsf{RC}_{20}({\epsilon}_D)=\mathsf{RC}_2({\epsilon}_D),
\label{eq:partial_wave_decoupling_}$$ where the resonance coefficients $\mathsf{RC}_{\ell}({\epsilon})$ and $\mathsf{RC}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}({\epsilon})$ [@hess2014] are described in Appendix \[app:notations\].
For the case of $s$- or $p$-waves, the coupling to the closed channels has a discrete shift symmetry, i.e. $${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}({\epsilon}+N)={\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}({\epsilon}),\quad \mbox{with} \quad N\in \mathbb{N},
\label{eq:translational_symmetry}$$ which is equivalent to saying that the asymptotically defined transversal modes have no influence on the coupling through the closed channels in the lowest possible partial wave for each respective class of exchange symmetry. The origin of this symmetry is clearly the equidistant modes of the transversal harmonic oscillator in combination with the particularly simple nodal structure of the local frame transformation for $s$- and $p$-wave interaction for the case $m=0$. This changes from the $d$-wave on. Since this feature does not depend on the coupling of partial waves, it can already be understood in the [$d$-SPWA]{}, where a CIR occurs when ${\bar{a}_{\ell}}=\mathsf{RC}_\ell({\epsilon})$ is fulfilled. By inserting Eq. in Eq. one obtains $$\frac{1}{{\bar{a}_{\ell}}^{2\ell+1}}=-i\;\sum_{p=0}^{2\ell}\bigl(2\sqrt{{\epsilon}+\tfrac{1}{2}}
\bigr)^{2\ell-p}{c_{p}^{(\ell,\ell)}}{\zeta_{H}\big(-\frac{p-1}{2},{\epsilon_{c}}\bigr)},
\label{eq:spwa_rescon_scatlength}$$ which depends on the total collision energy ${\epsilon}$ for partial waves other than $\ell=0$ and $\ell=1$, since ${c_{0}^{(1,1)}}={c_{2}^{(1,1)}}=0$. This rather technical observation of a channel dependent coupling to the closed channels may indeed become relevant when experimentally trying to observe a $d$-wave CIR for collision energies ${\epsilon}>1$, since the corresponding scattering length required to be comparable with the confinement length scale is reduced by the additional energy dependent factor in Eq. , which will likely make the $d$-wave CIR less difficult to be observed at energies ${\epsilon}\gtrsim 1$. Having clarified this we can now focus our discussion of the transmission suppression in the regime of multiple open channels.
### Strong suppression in the first excited channel {#sss:strong_surpression}
Let us start the discussion on the strong transmission suppression in the first excited channel by a qualitative analysis of the [$d$-SPWA]{} from which we will gain some insight. A sufficient and necessary condition for the occurrence of a transmission blockade in the first excited channel ($1 \le \epsilon \le 2$) is of course a vanishing of the element ${T_{\textrm{CIR},n}^{(2)}}$, for either $n=0$ or $1$, respectively. Indeed this happens in the [$d$-SPWA]{} for ${T_{\textrm{CIR},0}^{(2)}}$ at an energy ${\epsilon}_b=1.75$. At the same energy ${T_{\textrm{CIR},1}^{(2)}}$ has to acquire an extremal value equal to unity. These two observations imply that a CIR at ${\epsilon}_b$ will lead to a blockade for particles which are incident in the lowest transversal mode, while for particles incident in the first excited channel, the CIR will result in complete transparency, i.e. ${T_{\textrm{CIR},1}^{(2)}}=1$.
Taking additionally into account $s$-wave scattering which couples to the $d$-wave this will influence the above-observed phenomena. The corresponding results are presented in panels (a) and (c) of Fig. \[fig:t1\_dwave\_comb\_trend\], where the two transmission coefficients ${T_{0}^{(2_0)}}$ and ${T_{1}^{(2_0)}}$ are shown versus ${\epsilon}$ and the notation $2_0$ is used here to avoid confusion with Eq. but to emphasize that the background contribution from the $s$-wave is properly taken into account. Here, the individual resonances lying within the shaded vertical stripes result from changing the $C_{10}$ parameter. Due to the narrow width of the $d$-wave resonance only a relatively small window on the energy axis is relevant to the collisional process since the scattering length rapidly decays back to a very small value, resulting in a transmission close to unity. From these two panels one readily observes that the [$d$-SPWA]{} for the CI unitarity bound ${T_{\textrm{CIR},0/1}^{(2)}}$, which is shown by the black dashed curve, is a rough approximation to the coupled $d$-$s$-wave system. However, by probing the CI unitarity bound for the coupled system we see that this approximation qualitatively captures the observed values of the transmission coefficients at a CIR.
Furthermore, we observe in panels (b) and (d) of the same figure, that around ${\epsilon}_b$ the [$d$-SPWA]{} becomes more reliable, which may be related to the decoupling of the partial waves, i.e. $\mathfrak{U}_{02}\approx 0$ also for energies in that region. Nevertheless, the blockade expected in channel one from the [$d$-SPWA]{}, as well as the transparency in channel two are not observed. This however is totally expected since the non-negligible $s$-wave scattering length in the background prevents these extremal values. But still, for an extended region of energies $1.6\le{\epsilon}\le 1.8$, the portion transmitted when incident in the ground channel is less than $1\%$. Similar, the transmitted part when incident in the first excited channel is above $99\%$. Furthermore, the vanishing of the transmission coefficient in the ground channel, i.e. $T_{0}^{(2_0)}=T_{00}^{(2_0)}+T_{01}^{(2_0)}\approx 0$ in particular also implies that $T_{01}^{(2_0)}\approx 0$, which in turn leads to $W_{01}^{(2_0)}\approx 0$. This means that in this region of energies the scattering processes preserve the channels, i.e. elastic collisions dominate since the transition probability between the two open channels is negligible. We emphasize that this behavior corresponds to a blockade for particles in the ground state while excited particles are effectively non-interacting regardless the fact that there are two open channels. This observation might lead to interesting implications for the corresponding many-body system, like a mixture of a Tonks-Girardeau gas and a non-interacting gas.
Distinguishable particles {#sub:distinguishable}
-------------------------
Let us start by briefly stating some single channel results, for which a similar analysis as in the case of indistinguishable particles was carried out before. As introduced in Eq. , the appropriate scattering observable for distinguishable particles (DP) is the transmission coefficient where both scattering amplitudes, one even and one odd, are present. The fact that the Hamiltonian of distinguishable particles still commutes with the parity operator permits us to treat collisional events within the framework of the K-matrix approach. Therefore, hereafter we will employ the Ansatz from Eq. with two single partial waves, namely $s$- and $p$-wave, yielding $$\begin{aligned}
T_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}^{(s,p)} &=\Bigl|\delta_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}+i\left({\mathbf{K}_{oo,s}^{1D,phys}}\left[\openone-i{\mathbf{K}_{oo,s}^{1D,phys}}\right]^{-1}\right)_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}\nonumber\\
&+i\left({\mathbf{K}_{oo,p}^{1D,phys}}\left[\openone-i{\mathbf{K}_{oo,p}^{1D,phys}}\right]^{-1}\right)_{{n{n^{\prime}}}}\Bigr|^2,
\label{eq:transmission_distinguishable}\end{aligned}$$ ${\mathbf{K}_{oo,s}^{1D,phys}}$ and ${\mathbf{K}_{oo,p}^{1D,phys}}$ denote the corresponding $K$ matrices for the $s$- and $p$-wave, respectively. We note, that likewise also both $K$ matrices with two contributing partial waves could be used, to describe a system where $s$-, $p$-, $d$- and $f$-waves are significant. From the scalar, i.e. single channel version of Eq. , an effective physical [$K$ matrix ]{}can be constructed which is explicitly given by $$K_{oo,\textrm{eff}}^{1D,phys}=\frac{K_{oo,s}^{1D,phys}-K_{oo,p}^{1D,phys}}{1+K_{oo,s}^{1D,phys}K_{oo,p}^{1D,phys}},
\label{eq:effective_k_matrix_distinguishable}$$ The construction is accomplished by simply demanding that the transmission coefficient takes the usual form of $T=(1+K_{\textrm{eff}}^2)^{-1}$ [@giannakeas2012]. As in our previous study, this effective $K$ matrix is clearly separated in numerator and denominator, which gives rise to transparency and resonance coefficients $\mathsf{TC}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}$ and $\mathsf{RC}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}$, respectively. These coefficients are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathsf{RC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}^{(\mathsf{dp})}({\epsilon})&=\frac{-1}{2\sqrt{{\epsilon}+\frac{1}{2}}}\sqrt[2{\ell^{\prime}}+1]{\frac{1}{i({\mathfrak{U}_{{\ell^{\prime}}{\ell^{\prime}}}}+\alpha_{\ell}U_{{\ell^{\prime}}0}^2U_{\ell 0}^2)}}
\label{eq:rescoeff_distin}
\\
\mathsf{TC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}^{(\mathsf{dp})}({\epsilon})&=\frac{-1}{2\sqrt{{\epsilon}+\frac{1}{2}}}\nonumber\\
&\times\sqrt[2{\ell^{\prime}}+1]{\frac{\Delta_{\ell} U_{\ell 0}^2}{U_{{\ell^{\prime}}0}^2-i\Delta_{\ell}({\mathfrak{U}_{{\ell^{\prime}}{\ell^{\prime}}}}U_{\ell
0}^2+{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}U_{{\ell^{\prime}}0}^2-2U_{{\ell^{\prime}}0}^2U_{\ell 0}^2)}},
\label{eq:transcoeff_distin}\end{aligned}$$ where the superscript $(\mathsf{dp})$ abbreviates “distinguishable particles” to separate the notation from the one used in Eqs. and for indistinguishable particles. Here, $\ell$ and ${\ell^{\prime}}$ belong to different, namely even and odd, symmetries. The explicit form of these coefficients is very similar to the ones introduced in [@hess2014] but, unlike them, do not contain off-diagonal elements of the matrix $\mathfrak{U}$, which indicates the absence of couplings between even and odd partial waves due to the confinement, becoming evident when comparing Eq. from above with Eq. , corresponding to indistinguishable particles. If we interpret $U_{{\ell^{\prime}}0}U_{\ell 0}$ as the trace over the open channels, which indeed can be shown rigorously in a lengthy calculation for a problem involving multiple open channels, we see that the term proportional to $\alpha_{\ell}$ in Eq. is this trace squared, contrasting Eq. where a analog squared trace over the closed channels is present. The same argument also holds for the transparency coefficients Eqs. and , showing that the mechanism relating the partial waves is different for indistinguishable and distinguishable particles, respectively. Whereas the former are coupled through the closed channels, the latter are connected via the frame transformation in the open channels. Even though, there is an obvious structural similarity between the corresponding resonance and transparency coefficients for distinguishable and indistinguishable particles the physical mechanism coupling the partial waves is very different. Since the parity in $z$-direction is a good quantum number the local frame transformation is not allowed to couple partial waves with $\Delta\ell\pm 1$. The appearing “mixing term” proportional to $\alpha_{\ell}$ in the coefficients $\mathsf{TC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}^{(\textsf{dp})}$ and $\mathsf{RC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}^{(\textsf{dp})}$ originates thus from the coherent superposition of the partial $s$- and $p$-wave contributions assumed in Eq. .
![Transmission coefficient $T_0^{(s,p)}$ versus potential depth $V_{0}$ of a spherical square well. Black solid lines: with $s$- and $p$-wave interactions; red dashed line: $s$-wave approximation; blue dotted line: $p$-wave interactions. The dual CIR is clearly seen to happen where the individual transmission coefficients of $s$- and $p$-wave interactions are equal, as well as the shift of the $p$-wave CIR due to the non-negligible $s$-wave scattering. The inset shows the scaled $s$- (red solid) and $p$-wave (blue solid) scattering lengths versus the potential depth. The crossings with the DP transparency coefficients (dashed lines) determines the position of the dual CIR.[]{data-label="fig:dual_cir_sp_zoom"}](figures/figure9.eps){width="50.00000%"}
The arguments for the single channel case made above are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:dual\_cir\_sp\_zoom\]. Here, the black solid line shows the transmission coefficient $T_0^{(s,p)}$ versus $V_{0}$, the depth of a spherical square well potential which was used in order to model the two-body interactions of the DP. For comparison there are also the corresponding transmission coefficients shown for the pure $s$- (red dashed) and $p$-wave (blue dotted) interaction, respectively. It is clearly observed that a dual CIR corresponding to complete transparency [@kim2006; @hess2014] appears when the transmission coefficients of $s$ and $p$ are equal, i.e. by Eq. this means that the quasi 1D wavefunctions induced by s and p wave interaction possess phase shifts of equal magnitude but differ by a sign yielding thus destructive interference. As in [@kim2006], this potential is used to mimic the possibility of having large values of ${\bar{a}_{s}}$ and ${\bar{a}_{p}}$ simultaneously, illustrating the peculiar quasi 1D feature of total transparency while strongly interacting with two partial waves. However, by inspecting the resonance and transparency coefficients $\mathsf{RC}^{(\mathsf{dp})}$ and $\mathsf{TC}^{(\mathsf{dp})}$ we see, that it is not necessary to have large values for both scattering lengths, i.e. a sufficient condition is one of them being large and the other one possessing a small but non-negligible value, as it was already discussed in [@hess2014] for indistinguishable particles. In addition, the inset shows the intersection of the $s$- and $p$-wave scattering length depicted by the red and blue solid lines with the corresponding transparency coefficients $\mathsf{TC}^{(\mathsf{dp})}_{10}$ (red dashed line) and $\mathsf{TC}^{(\mathsf{dp})}_{01}$ (blue dashed line), respectively.
![ (a) Transmission coefficient $T^{(s,p)}_0$ versus the scaled energy ${\epsilon}$ (b) transmission coefficient $T^{(s,p)}_1$ when incident in the first excited channel. Similar to Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_p\], individual curves correspond to different choices of the $C_{10}$ parameter in order to have resonanes in every energetic interval $i-4\le{\epsilon}\le i$. In addition we show in both panels (a) and (b) the corresponding CI unitarity bounds $T_{\textrm{CIR},n}^{(p)}$ (black dotted curve) for $n=0,1$.[]{data-label="fig:transmission_vs_energy_distinguishable"}](figures/figure10.eps){width="45.00000%"}
Let us now address the multichannel scattering properties, based on Eq.. We note, that an expanded representation for multiple open channels, similar to Eq. , in the single mode regime, is straightforwardly derived and thus not presented here. By considering a realistic short range potential as before, i.e. Lennard-Jones $6-10$ we have to distinguish two cases. Firstly, the $s$-wave CIR in the presence of $p$-wave interactions and vice versa.
An inspection of the corresponding scattering lengths in the former case shows that the $p$-wave scattering length in the vicinity of a $s$-wave free space resonance is negligible, as it is the case for the indistinguishable $s-d$-coupled case. Therefore, also for distinguishable particles, $\mathsf{RC^{(dp)}_{01}({\epsilon})}\approx\mathsf{RC^{(dp)}_{0}}({\epsilon}):=\mathsf{RC}_{0}({\epsilon})$, i.e. the [$s$-SPWA]{} is a very good approximation. Hence, the transmission coefficient versus energy would result in a behavior very much like the one shown in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\]. However, we note, that this simplification follows from our choice of LJ-type potential, which, as already said before, is the adequate choice to describe the interactions of neutral atoms. Nevertheless, in the vicinity of a free-space $p$-wave resonance the $s$-wave scattering length possesses a non-negligible value and thus its contribution has to be taken into account. The result on the transmission is shown in Fig. \[fig:transmission\_vs\_energy\_distinguishable\], where we consider the cases of incidence in the two lowest channels for the case of four open channels. To obtain the different curves, the $C_{10}$ parameter is adjusted, such that there is a free-space resonance of $p$-wave character at a particular energy. Focusing on the case of $p$-wave CIRs for distinguishable particles, the black dotted line represents ${T_{\textrm{CIR},1}^{(1)}}$ in Fig. 10(a), while ${T_{\textrm{CIR},2}^{(1)}}$ is depicted in Fig.10(b), showing that the neglect of a background $s$-wave scattering length leads to increasing deviations for more open channels from the unitarity bound. However, we generally observe that the transmission is a mixture of $s$- and $p$-wave scattering. For the $s-$wave part this is best seen by the zero energy value $T_1=0$ and the ${\epsilon}=1$ value of $T_{2}$ which is also zero. For the $p-$wave part we observe a transmission coefficient at threshold which is less than unity and strongly depends on the $C_{10}$ parameter. These are two features we find to be present in the [$p$-SPWA]{}. Therefore the contributions from both exchange symmetries strongly contribute to the scattering physics of distinguishable particles.
Threshold singularities {#sub:threshold_singularities}
-----------------------
In Figs. \[fig:transmission\_trend\_s\], \[fig:transmission\_trend\_p\] and \[fig:transmission\_vs\_energy\_distinguishable\] we observe that at every channel threshold the transmission spectra exhibit kinks. This constitutes another aspect of inelastic collisions, the so-called threshold singularities. More specifically, it is known [@baranger1990; @landau1981quantum] that when the total collision energy leads to the opening of a new channel where new states become available this leads to a non analytic behavior of the scattering matrix elements.
In order to firmly address this point it is useful to first consider the behavior of the individual elements constituting the $K$ matrix when energetically approaching a channel threshold from below or above the closed channel thresholds. Since the notion of transversal channels is inherently connected in our framework with the local frame transformation $U_{ln}$ [@granger2004] and its derived quantity ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}$, the channel threshold behavior will solely depend on these quantities and their properties around a corresponding threshold. We start this analysis with the local frame transformation $U_{ln}$, for which we find the following expression for the limit from below $${\lim_{{\epsilon}\nearrow N}}U_{lm}=\frac{(-1)^{d_0}\sqrt{2l+1}}{[4(N-m)(N+1/2)]^{1/4}}P_{l}(\sqrt{\frac{N-m}{N+1/2}}),
\label{eq:limup_openchannel_U}$$ which holds for all open channels $m<N$, where $N$ denotes the threshold to the lowermost closed channel. From Eq. we observe, that the elements of the local frame transformation acquire a finite value at threshold and are continuous across the threshold. Next we inspect the limit to the channel threshold from above for the element of the local frame transformation which corresponds to the least open channel, i.e. $U_{\ell N}$, which will then become a closed channel when slightly further decreasing the energy ${\epsilon}$. For this element we find the following expressions, which have to be distinguished for even and odd partial waves $$\begin{aligned}
{\lim_{{\epsilon}\searrow N}}U_{\ell N}
&=C^{+}_{\ell N}\;{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}\Bigl(\frac{1}{\sqrt[4]{{\Delta\epsilon}}}+{\mathcal{O}({\Delta\epsilon}^{\frac{3}{4}})}\Bigr),\label{eq:limdown_openchanel_U_even}\\
{\lim_{{\epsilon}\searrow N}}U_{\ell N} &=C^{-}_{\ell N}\;{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}\Bigl(\sqrt[4]{{\Delta\epsilon}}+{\mathcal{O}({\Delta\epsilon}^{\frac{5}{4}})}\Bigr),\quad
\textrm{with}
\label{eq:limdown_openchannel_U_odd}\\
C^{+}_{lN} &=\frac{\sqrt{2l+1}\;l!}{[(l/2)!]^2
2^{l+\frac{1}{2}}(N+\frac{1}{2})^{1/4}}\nonumber\\
C^{-}_{lN} &=\frac{\sqrt{2l+1}\;(l+1)!}{(\frac{l+1}{2})!(\frac{l-1}{2})!
2^{l+\frac{1}{2}}(N+\frac{1}{2})^{\frac{1}{4}}}\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where Eqs. and refer to the case of even and odd partial waves, respectively. $C^+_{\ell N}$ and $C^-_{\ell N}$ denote constants depending on the number of open channels as well as on the partial wave. Both equations exhibit a singular behavior at threshold when approaching from above. In the case of even partial waves, this singularity is a pole, while for the odd partial waves the local frame transformation becomes singular by means of an infinite slope at $\epsilon=N$.
Next, let us consider the trace over the squared local frame transformations $\mathfrak{U}_{ll^{\prime}}$ [@hess2014]. Here, we observe the following behavior for approaching the threshold from above $$\begin{aligned}
{\lim_{{\epsilon}\searrow N}}{\mathfrak{U}_{ll^{\prime}}}({\epsilon})
&=C^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}_N+{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}{\mathcal{O}({\Delta\epsilon})}\quad,\text{with}\label{eq:limdown_closedchannel_U}\\
C^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}_{N} &=
\sum_{p=0}^{l+l^{\prime}}\frac{{c_{p}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}}{(N-\frac{1}{2})^{\frac{p+1}{2}}}\;\zeta(-\frac{p-1}{2}),
\label{eq:limdown_closedchannel_U_coeff}\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficients $c_p^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}$ are defined in Eq. . In Eq. we observe, that for the limit from above the elements of the matrix ${\mathfrak{U}_{}}$ smoothly approach the channel threshold irrespective of the particle exchange symmetry. However, the actual value attained does of course depend on the partial wave $\ell$, but there is no specific distinction between even and odd partial waves. On the contrary the limit from below exhibits a more intricate behavior and is given by $${\lim_{{\epsilon}\nearrow N}}{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})=C^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}_{N}+{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}\Big(\sum_{p=0}^{\ell+{\ell^{\prime}}}\frac{{c_{p}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}}{(N-\frac{1}{2})^{\frac{p+1}{2}}}\Bigr)({\Delta\epsilon})^{\frac{p-1}{2}},
\label{eq:limup_closedchannel_U}$$ where we observe that except from the constant value only terms contribute which have a fractional exponent in the energy dependence, implying non-analytic behavior when approaching the channel thresholds from below. We note that by comparing the local frame transformation $U_{\ell n}$ and the elements of the closed channel coupling matrix ${\mathfrak{U}_{}}$, their limiting behavior is just reversed, i.e. one approaches the limit in a singular manner from above, while regular from below and vice versa.
For the case of even partial waves, it can be shown by exploiting general results on the Wigner $3j$-symbols that the coefficients ${c_{0}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}$ are always non-vanishing. This observation leads to the following asymptotic form $${\lim_{{\epsilon}\nearrow N}}{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})=C^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}_N+\frac{{c_{0}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}}{\sqrt{N-\frac{1}{2}}}{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}({\Delta\epsilon})^{-\frac{1}{2}},
\label{eq:limup_closedchannel_U_bosonic}$$ which means that the ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}$’s diverge at threshold as $\frac{1}{\sqrt{{\Delta\epsilon}}}$.
Similar to the case of even partial waves we again exploit general properties of the Wigner $3j$-symbols to show for the odd values of $\ell$ and ${\ell^{\prime}}$ that generally $c_{0}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}\equiv 0$, but $c_{1}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}\neq 0$. This leads to the general from for the closed channel coupling, via $${\lim_{{\epsilon}\nearrow N}}{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})=C^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}_N+\frac{{c_{1}^{(\ell,{\ell^{\prime}})}}}{(N-\frac{1}{2})}{\lim_{{\Delta\epsilon}\searrow 0}}({\Delta\epsilon})^{\frac{1}{2}}
\label{eq:limup_closedchannel_U_fermionic}$$ From Eqs. - we observe a fundamental difference between even and odd partial waves. While the elements ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}$ for even partial waves are discontinuous across a channel threshold, the odd counterpart is continuous. However, we note that the limit from above in the odd case approaches the value $C_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}$ with an infinite slope, which is equivalent to say, that ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}$ is not Lipshitz continuous across threshold.
![(a) - (c) Transmission thresholds for the case $\ell=0$. Close to threshold the transmission approaches unity with a universal slope independent of the scattering length. This universal behavior is present for all even partial waves in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{}. (d) - (f) Transmission around thresholds is shown for a variety of $p$-wave scattering lengths, demonstrating the dependence on the scattering length around threshold.[]{data-label="fig:threshold_singularities_sp"}](figures/figure11.eps){width="45.00000%"}
The different threshold behavior for indistinguishable bosons and fermions, i.e. even and odd partial waves, is clearly observed in Fig. \[fig:threshold\_singularities\_sp\], where panels (a)-(c) depict the case for $\ell=0$ where, as expected from the preceding analysis, the transmission obtains a universal slope and value around the thresholds, regardless of the magnitude and the sign of the $s$-wave scattering length. This is due to the divergent behavior of ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}$ and $U_{\ell n}$ across threshold. The trend exhibited in panels (a)-(c) is observed also for the first few even partial waves in [$\ell$-SPWA]{}. On the other hand, in panels (d)-(f) we illustrate the fermionic counterpart for $\ell=1$. Here, we observe a richer structure of the threshold behavior due to the finite values the quantities ${\mathfrak{U}_{11}}$ and $U_{1n}$ acquire. This circumstance renders the fermionic threshold behavior less universal in the sense that the transmission value obtained does depend on the scattering length. On the other side, this finiteness observed for odd partial waves allows for a CIR even at threshold. Notably the same behavior is apparent in panels (d)-(f) for odd partial waves other than $p$-wave in the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} picture.
Summary and Conclusions {#sec:conclusions}
=======================
The focus of our present study is on the scattering behavior of identical bosons and fermions as well as on distinguishable point-particles confined to a harmonic waveguide. The relevant coupling of different partial waves as well as the explicit energy dependence of the scattering properties are properly taken into account. The $K$ matrix formalism established in [@granger2004; @giannakeas2012; @giannakeas2013; @zhang2013quasi1dscatt; @hess2014] is employed to obtain the relevant scattering observables. For higher partial wave interactions the explicit energy dependence of the scattering lengths is properly taken into account by including the free-space scattering results of Gao [@gao2009single; @gao2000zero; @gao1998qdtvdw]. Using these results we are able to present fully analytical results including an adequate description for the interatomic scattering process.
We consider the scattering process under the assumption of scale separation of the length associated with the interatomic and trapping potential, respectively. This assumption results in two regions of different symmetry, i.e. spherical close to the origin and cylindrical in the asymptotic regime. The restriction that the total collision energy lies below the threshold of the first excited transversal mode, as studied in previous works [@olshanii1998; @granger2004; @giannakeas2012; @hess2014] was dropped and we thus allow for inelastic scattering describing transversal (de-)excitation processes. The relation between the quasi 1D scattering amplitude and the physical $K$ matrix found in [@hess2014] was employed again to obtain analytical relations for the scattering observables. This formalism allows for a unified treatment of inelastic collisions within a harmonic waveguide for distinguishable and indistinguishable particles.
For the scattering of identical particles we investigated the transmission coefficient for up to four open channels where we find good agreement in the single partial waves approximation (SPWA) with the numerical results derived earlier [@saeidian2008]. For the [$\ell$-SPWA]{} we also derived a quasi 1D unitarity bound (CI unitarity bound) which explains the influence of the open channels on the allowed transmission and transition coefficients around a CIR. The universal aspects of the CI unitarity bound is demonstrated encapsulating all the relevant information of the interatomic interactions. However, the form of the CI unitarity bound depends of the exchange particle symmetry. For the case of higher partial waves that are coupled we focus on the bosonic case where $\ell=0$ and $2$ waves are coupled through the confinement. Here we studied the deviations from the [$d$-SPWA]{} to the case where the second partial wave is taken into account. In particular we find that there is a region where the transmission when incident in the ground channel almost vanishes, while when incident in the first excited channel the particles are non-interacting to the same degree. We studied this behavior for the free-space phase shifts as energy dependent quantities by using the analytic results of Gao [@gao2009single] on the scattering phase shift for potentials possessing a van der Waals tail, relating to recent experimental observation [$\leftidx{^{133}}\rm Cs$ ]{}[@chin2004], where $d$-wave shape-resonances were found. Furthermore, similar to the decoupling from the closed channels, described before by a vanishing element ${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}$ we also find regions where the coupling between the partial waves vanishes, i.e. ${\mathfrak{U}_{02}}$ vanishes. Over there, the [$d$-SPWA]{} is a good approximation to the transmission at a CIR. We note that also the corresponding fermionic case can be treated within the same formalism. For the case of distinguishable particles we derive resonance and transparency coefficients for the (dual) CIR. Here we observe that the mechanism is way different from the case of indistinguishable particles where in particular the dual CIR was achieved by interference of partial waves coupled through the closed channels, while in the distinguishable case the coupling was accomplished by the open channels. Finally we provide a brief description of the origin and the type of the appearing threshold singularities.
P.G. acknowledges financial support by the NSF through grant PHY-1306905. The authors thank C.H. Greene and V. S. Melezhik for fruitful discussions.
The physical $K$ matrix {#app:kphys}
=======================
In order to analytically invert the contribution of the closed channels to the physical $K$ matrix, $(\openone-iK^{1D}_{cc})^{-1}$, we employ the following method. First, we recognize, that the $3D$ $K$ matrix, which is assumed to be diagonal, can be written as $$K^{3D}=\sum_{l=0}^{L}\Delta_{l}\mathbf{e}_{l}\mathbf{e}_{l}^{T},
\label{eq:3d_kmatrix_dyadic}$$ here $\Delta_{i}=\tan\delta_{i}$ and $\mathbf{e}_{i}$ denotes the i-th Cartesian basis vector. Using now the relation $K^{1D}=U^{T}K^{3D}U$ between the $K$ matrices in the different regions in configuration space, where $U$ denotes the local frame transformation [@harmin1982nonhydrostark; @*harmin1982stark; @*harmin1985; @fano1981; @greene1987], we obtain $$K^{1D}=\sum_{l}^{L}\Delta_{l}U^{T}\mathbf{e}_{l}\mathbf{e}_{l}^{T}U=\sum_{l=0}^L\Delta_l
{\mathbf{f}_{l}}{\mathbf{f}_{l}}^T,
\label{eq:1d_kmatrix_dyadic}$$ where we have introduced the frame transformed basis $$\mathbf{f}_i=U^{T}\mathbf{e}_i
\label{eq:lftransformed_basis}$$ For convenience we partition the frame transformed basis into two parts ${\mathbf{f}_{i}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ and ${\mathbf{f}_{i}^{\mathbf{c}}}$, corresponding to open and closed channels, respectively and also introducing the abbreviations ${\mathbf{F}_{ij}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ and ${\mathbf{F}_{ij}^{\mathbf{c}}}$ to denote the dyads ${\mathbf{f}_{i}^{\mathbf{o}}}\otimes{\mathbf{f}_{j}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ and ${\mathbf{f}_{i}^{\mathbf{c}}}\otimes{\mathbf{f}_{j}^{\mathbf{c}}}$, respectively. We note, that this definition generalizes the open and closed $K$ matrices attributed to a specific partial wave, since the diagonal elements of ${\mathbf{F}_{}^{\mathbf{o}}}$ and ${\mathbf{F}_{}^{\mathbf{c}}}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\ell\;{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}&=& {\mathbf{K}_{oo,\ell}^{1D}}\\
\Delta_\ell\;{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{c}}}&=& {\mathbf{K}_{cc,\ell}^{1D}}
\label{eq:generalization_k_to_dyad}\end{aligned}$$ In particular we encounter the following frequently appearing relation $$\begin{aligned}
& ({\mathbf{K}_{oc,i}^{1D}}{\mathbf{F}_{jk}^{\mathbf{c}}}{\mathbf{K}_{co,l}^{1D}})_{n,n^\prime} = \nonumber \\ &= \sum_{\eta=n_c}^\infty\sum_{\eta^{\prime}=n_c}^\infty
({\mathbf{K}_{oc,i}^{1D}})_{n,\eta}({\mathbf{F}_{jk}^{\mathbf{c}}})_{\eta,\eta^\prime}({\mathbf{K}_{co,l}^{1D}})_{\eta^\prime,n^\prime}\nonumber\\
&= \Delta_i\Delta_l\sum_{\eta=n_c}^\infty\sum_{\eta^{\prime}=n_c}^\infty
U_{in}U_{i\eta}U_{j\eta}U_{k\eta^{\prime}}U_{l\eta^{\prime}}U_{ln^{\prime}}\nonumber\\
&= \Delta_i\Delta_l
U_{in}U_{ln^{\prime}}\Bigl(\sum_{\eta=n_c}^\infty U_{i\eta}U_{j\eta}\Bigr)\Bigl(\sum_{\eta=n_c}^\infty
U_{k\eta}U_{l\eta}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
&= \Delta_i\;\Delta_l\;\mathfrak{U}_{ij}\;\mathfrak{U}_{kl}\;({\mathbf{F}_{il}^{\mathbf{o}}})_{n,n^{\prime}},
\label{eq:KcoFccKco}\end{aligned}$$ where $n,n^{\prime}$ range within the open channels and the $\mathfrak{U}_{ij}$’s are the coupling elements derived earlier [@hess2014]. These energy dependent elements are defined according to $${\mathfrak{U}_{\ell{\ell^{\prime}}}}=\sum_{n=n_o}^\infty U_{\ell n}U_{{\ell^{\prime}}n},
\label{eq:definition_umat_formal}$$ which are given in Eqs. , and in closed form. In a similar fashion to Eq. , the following relation is derived $${\mathbf{K}_{oc,i}^{1D}}\openone{\mathbf{K}_{co,j}^{1D}}=\Delta_i\Delta_j\;\mathfrak{U}_{ij}{\mathbf{F}_{ij}^{\mathbf{o}}}
\label{eq:Koc1Kco}$$ Appearing higher order products of the closed channel $K$ matrices are readily shown to satisfy $${\mathbf{K}_{cc,i}^{1D}}\cdot{\mathbf{K}_{cc,j}^{1D}}\cdot{\mathbf{K}_{cc,k}^{1D}}=\Delta_i\Delta_j\Delta_k\;\mathfrak{U}_{ij}\mathfrak{U}_{jk}{\mathbf{F}_{ik}^{\mathbf{c}}}
\label{eq:KcciKccjKcck}$$ The relations (A6) to (A8) turn out to be very useful when actually carrying out the analytical inversion of the matrix $(\openone-i {\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}})$. Similar to the procedure in [@giannakeas2012], the inversion is done by first recognizing, that the expansion of the 1D $K$ matrix given in Eq. is written as a sum over dyads, i.e. rank one matrices and then repeatedly applying the Sherman-Morrison formula [@press2007numrecipes]. The result of this procedure yields $$\begin{aligned}
(\openone-i{\mathbf{K}_{cc}^{1D}})^{-1} &=\openone+\alpha_i(\openone+\alpha_i\beta_{ji}{\mathfrak{U}_{ij}}^2){\mathbf{F}_{ii}^{\mathbf{c}}}\nonumber\\
&+\beta_{ji}{\mathbf{F}_{jj}^{\mathbf{c}}}+\alpha_{i}\beta_{ji}{\mathfrak{U}_{ij}}({\mathbf{F}_{ij}^{\mathbf{c}}}+{\mathbf{F}_{ji}^{\mathbf{c}}}),
\label{eq:inverse_closed_channel_contribution}\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficients $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_i&=& \frac{i\Delta_i}{1-i\Delta_i{\mathfrak{U}_{ii}}}
\label{eq:coupling_alpha_appendix}
\\
\beta_{ji}&=& \frac{i\Delta_j}{1-i\Delta_j({\mathfrak{U}_{jj}}-\alpha_i{\mathfrak{U}_{ij}}^2)}
\label{eq:coupling_beta_appendix}\end{aligned}$$ These coefficients play a similar role as the couplings $g_1$ and $g_2$ defined in [@giannakeas2012]. Inserting now the result of Eq. into the equation for the physical $K$ matrix and using the relation $\alpha_i\beta_{ji}=\alpha_j\beta_{ij}$ one ends up with $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{K}_{oo}^{1D,phys}}&=\frac{1}{\det(\openone-i
{\mathbf{K}^{3D}}{\mathfrak{U}_{}})}\times\Bigl(\Delta_\ell{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}+\Delta_{\ell^{\prime}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}-\nonumber\\
&-i\Delta_{\ell}\Delta_{\ell^{\prime}}\bigl({\mathfrak{U}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}}+{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}}{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}-{\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}}({\mathbf{F}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}^{\mathbf{o}}}+{\mathbf{F}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell}^{\mathbf{o}}})\bigr)\Bigr),
\label{eq:kphys_appendix}\end{aligned}$$ representing the physical $K$ matrix interacting with two partial waves $\ell$ and $\ell^{\prime}$. We note, that this formula only holds for indistinguishable particles, i.e. both partial waves have to be either even or odd. In addition, we readily observe that the $K$ matrix given in Eq. is real and symmetric as expected.
The resonance and transparency coefficients {#app:notations}
===========================================
This section is considered as a brief summary of notions used here, which were introduced in [@hess2014] in order to keep this presentation as self-contained as possible.
We remind that the formation of a CIR is described by a diverging physical $K$ matrix, i.e. the roots of $\det(\openone-iK_{cc})$. As it can be seen clearly in Eq. this divergence can only be achieved by a vanishing denominator. Equivalently, this can be expressed by a divergence of the couplings, given in Eqs. and . Explicitly this means that a $\ell$-wave CIR occurs in the SPWA when $\alpha_{\ell}$ diverges, and similar, a ${\ell^{\prime}}$-wave CIR occurs in the presence of $\ell$-wave interactions, when $\beta_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}$ diverges. Parameterizing this divergence of $\alpha_\ell$ in terms of the scattering length and energy, yields $$\begin{aligned}
{\bar{a}_{\ell}}({\epsilon})&=\mathsf{RC}_{\ell}({\epsilon})
\label{eq:rescon_single_appendix}
\\
\mathsf{RC}_{\ell}({\epsilon})&=\frac{-1}{2\sqrt{\epsilon+1/2}}\times
\sqrt[2\ell+1]{\frac{1}{i
\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}(\epsilon)}},
\label{eq:rescoeff_single_appendix}\end{aligned}$$ and similar when the coupling between two partial waves has to be taken into account $$\begin{aligned}
{\bar{a}_{{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})&=\mathsf{RC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}({\epsilon})
\label{eq:rescon_double_appendix}
\\
\mathsf{RC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}({\epsilon})&=\frac{-1}{2\sqrt{\epsilon+1/2}}\times
\sqrt[2\ell^{\prime}+1]{\frac{1}{i\bigl(\mathfrak{U}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}-\alpha_{\ell}\mathfrak{U}^{2}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}\bigr)}}
\label{eq:rescoeff_double_appendix}\end{aligned}$$
The so-called dual CIR, where the total transmission becomes unity, is obtained within the same framework by a vanishing numerator of the physical $K$ matrix and is due to the matrix nature of $K$ in the case of multiple open channels only expressible in terms of transparency coefficients $\mathsf{TC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}$ only in the case of a single open channel. However, by analogous arguments as for the resonance coefficients $\mathsf{RC}$, introduced above, the parametrization of a dual CIR is then given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\bar{a}_{{\ell^{\prime}}}}({\epsilon})&=\mathsf{TC}_{{\ell^{\prime}}\ell}({\epsilon})
\label{eq:transcon_double_appendix}
\\
\mathsf{TC}_{\ell^{\prime},\ell}(\epsilon)&=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\epsilon+1/2}}\nonumber\\
&\times \sqrt[2\ell^{\prime}+1]{ \frac{ \Delta_{\ell }U_{\ell 0}^2
}{U_{\ell^{\prime}0}^2-i\Delta_\ell(\mathfrak{U}_{\ell^{\prime}\ell^{\prime}}U_{\ell
0}^2+\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell}U_{\ell^{\prime}0}^2-2\mathfrak{U}_{\ell\ell^{\prime}}U_{\ell0}U_{\ell^{\prime}0})}},
\label{eq:transcoeff_double_appendix}\end{aligned}$$ where we note that due to the needed destructive interference, the dual CIR is only possible when more than one partial waves are taken into account.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We introduce a class of causal video understanding models that aims to improve efficiency of video processing by maximising throughput, minimising latency, and reducing the number of clock cycles. Leveraging operation pipelining and multi-rate clocks, these models perform a minimal amount of computation (e.g. as few as four convolutional layers) for each frame per timestep to produce an output. The models are still very deep, with dozens of such operations being performed but in a pipelined fashion that enables depth-parallel computation. We illustrate the proposed principles by applying them to existing image architectures and analyse their behaviour on two video tasks: action recognition and human keypoint localisation. The results show that a significant degree of parallelism, and implicitly speedup, can be achieved with little loss in performance.'
author:
- |
Jo[\~ a]{}o Carreira$^{\dagger,1}$, Viorica P[ă]{}tr[ă]{}ucean$^{\dagger,1}$, Laurent Mazare$^1$,\
Andrew Zisserman$^{1,2}$, Simon Osindero$^1$
bibliography:
- 'egbib.bib'
title: Massively Parallel Video Networks
---
Introduction
============
There is a rich structure in videos that is neglected when treating them as a set of still images. Perhaps the most explored benefit of videos is the ability to improve performance by aggregating information over multiple frames [@jampani17vpn; @pfister2015flowing; @zhuflowguided], which enforces temporal smoothness and reduces the uncertainty in tasks that are temporal by nature, e.g., change detection [@Stent-RSS-16], computing optical flow [@IMKDB17], resolving action ambiguities (standing up/sitting down) [@carreira2017cvpr] etc. An underexplored direction, however, is the ability to improve the processing efficiency. In this paper, we focus on this aspect in the context of the causal, frame-by-frame operation mode that is relevant for real-time applications, and show how to transform slow models to ones that can run at frame rate with negligible loss of accuracy.
Most existing state-of-the-art computer vision systems, such as object detectors [@NIPS2015_5638; @DBLP:conf/cvpr/RedmonF17; @he2017mask], process video frames independently: each new frame goes through up to one hundred convolutional layers before the output is known and another frame can be processed. This sequential operation in both depth and time can pose several problems: it can limit the rate at which predictions can be made, it can increase the minimum latency with which good predictions are available, and it can also lead to under-utilisation of hardware resources.
General-purpose computer processors encounter the same challenge when executing sequences of program instructions and address it with efficient pipelining strategies, that enable parallel computations. This also resembles the operation mode of biological neurons, which are not tremendously fast, but come in large numbers and operate in a massively parallel fashion [@Zeki20140174]. Our proposed design employs similar pipelining strategies, and we make four contributions: first, we propose pipelining schemes tailored to sequence models (we call this *predictive depth-parallelism*); second, we show how such architectures can be augmented using *multi-rate clocks* and how they benefit from skip connections. These designs can be incorporated into any deep image architecture, to increase their throughput (frame rate) by a large factor (up to 10x in our experiments) when applied on videos. However they may also negatively impact accuracy. To reduce this impact, and as a third contribution, we show that it is possible to get better parallel models by [*distilling*]{} them from sequential ones and, as a final contribution, we explore other wiring patterns – [*temporal filters and feedback*]{} – that improve the expressivity of the resulting models. Collectively, this results in video networks with the ability to make accurate predictions at very high frame rates.
We will discuss related work in the next section. Then, we will move on to describe predictive depth-parallelism, multi-rate clocks and our other technical contributions in sec. \[sec:model\]. In sec. \[sec:experiments\] we present our main experiments on two types of prediction tasks with different latency requirements: human keypoint localisation (which requires predicting a dense heatmap for each frame in a video); and action recognition (where a single label is predicted for an entire video clip), before the paper concludes.
Related work {#sec:related_work}
============
The majority of existing video models rely on image models [@inception; @huang2017densely; @Simonyan14c] executed frame-by-frame, the main challenge being to speed up the image models to process sequentially 25 frames per second. This can be achieved by simplifying the models, either by identifying accurate architectures with fewer parameters [@howard2017mobilenets], by pruning them post-training [@Chen:2015:CNN:3045118.3045361], or by using low-bit representation formats [@courbariaux+al-2016-binarized]. All of these can be combined with our approach.
A different type of model incorporates recurrent connections [@Srivastava:2015:ULV:3045118.3045209; @PatrauceanHC16; @Tokmakov_2017_ICCV] for propagating information between time steps [@PatrauceanHC16; @Tokmakov_2017_ICCV]. One simple propagation scheme, used by Zhu et al [@zhu2017deep] proposed periodically warping old activations given fresh external optical flow as input, rather than recomputing them. Our pipelining strategy has the advantage that it does not require external inputs nor special warping modules. Instead, it places the burden on learning.
There are also models that consider the video as a volume by stacking the frames and applying 3D convolutions to extract spatio-temporal features [@Tran:2015:LSF:2919332.2919929; @carreira2017cvpr]. These models scale well and can be trained on large-scale datasets [@caba2015activitynet; @gu2017; @DBLP:journals/corr/KayCSZHVVGBNSZ17] due to the use of larger temporal convolution strides at deeper layers. Although they achieve state-of-the-art performance on tasks such as action recognition, these methods still use purely sequential processing in depth (all layers must execute before proceeding to a next input). Moreover, they are not causal – the 3D convolutional kernels extract features from future frames, which makes it challenging to use these models in real-time.
In the causal category, a number of hierarchical architectures have been proposed around the notion of *clocks*, attaching to each module a possibly different clock rate, yielding temporally multi-scale models that scale better to long sequences [@pmlr-v32-koutnik14]. The clock rates can be hard-coded [@DBLP:conf/icml/VezhnevetsOSHJS17] or learnt from data [@neil2016phased]. Some recent models [@Shelhamer2016; @figurnov2017cvpr] activate different modules of the network based on the temporal and spatial variance of the inputs, respectively, yielding adaptive clocks. There is also a group of time-budget methods that focuses on reducing latency. If the available time runs out before the data has traversed the entire network, then emergency exits are used to output whatever prediction have been computed thus far [@karayev14cvpr; @Mathe_2016_CVPR]. This differs from our approach which aims for constant low-latency output.
Ideas related to pipelining were discussed in [@Shelhamer2016]; a recent paper also proposed pipelining strategies for speeding up backpropagation for faster training in distributed systems [@Petrowski:1993:PAP:2325858.2328362; @pipelined-back-propagation-for-context-dependent-deep-neural-networks; @jaderberg2017decoupled]. Instead, we focus on pipelining at inference time, to reduce latency and maximise frame rate.
Efficient online video models {#sec:model}
=============================
{width="85.00000%"} \[fig:architecture-lag\]
Consider the directed graph obtained by unrolling a video model with $n$ layers over time (see fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\]), where the layers of the network are represented by the nodes and the activations transferred between layers are represented by the edges of the graph. All the parameters are shared across time steps. Edges create dependencies in the computational graph and require sequential processing. Video processing can be efficiently parallelised in the offline case, by processing different frames in different computing cores, but not in the online case.
**Depth-parallel networks.** In basic depth-sequential video models, the input to each layer is the output of the previous layer at the same time step, and the network outputs a prediction only after all the layers have processed in sequence the current frame; see fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\] (a). In the proposed design, every layer in the network processes its input, passes the activations to the next layer, and immediately starts processing the next input available, without waiting for the whole network to finish computation for the current frame; fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\] (b). This is achieved by substituting in the unrolled graph the vertical edges by diagonal ones, so the input to each layer is still the output from the previous layer, as usual, but *from the previous time step*. This makes it possible to process all layers at one time step in parallel, given enough computing cores, since there are no dependencies between them.
**Latency and throughput**. We define *computational latency*, or just latency, as the time delay between the moment when a frame is fed to the network and the moment when the network outputs a prediction for that frame. It is the sum of the execution times of all layers for processing a frame. We consider *throughput* as the output rate of a network, i.e. for how many frames does the network output predictions for in a time unit. For the sequential model, throughput is roughly the inverse of the computational latency, hence the deeper the model, the higher the computational latency and the lower the throughput. Here resides a quality of the proposed depth-parallel models: irrespective of the depth, the model can now make predictions at the rate of its slowest layer.
It is useful to also consider the concepts of *[information latency]{}* as the number of frames it takes before the input signal reaches the output layer along the network’s shortest path. For example, in fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\], the [information latency]{} for the video model illustrated in (a) is 0, and for the model in (b) it is equal to 3. We define *[prediction latency]{}* as the displacement measured in frames between the moment when a network receives a frame and the moment when the network tries to emit the corresponding output. The [prediction latency]{} is a training choice and can have any value. Whenever the [prediction latency]{} is smaller than the [information latency]{}, the network must make a prediction for an input that it did not process yet completely.
For most of our experiments with depth-parallel models we used a [prediction latency]{} of zero based on the assumption that videos may be predictable over short horizons and we train the network to compensate for the delay in its inputs and operate in a predictive fashion; see fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\] (c). But the higher the [information latency]{}, the more challenging it is to operate with [prediction latency]{} of zero. We employ temporal skip connections to minimise the [information latency]{} of the different layers in the network, as illustrated in fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\] (d). This provides fresher (but shallower) inputs to deeper layers. We term this overall paradigm *predictive depth-parallelism*. We experimented thoroughly with the setting where [prediction latency]{} is zero and also report results with slightly higher values (e.g. 2 frames).
![Temporal receptive fields of: **(a)** standard; **(b)** causal; and **(c)** pipelined models. \[fig:latency\]](images/triangles.pdf){width="0.6\linewidth"}
**Pipelined operations and temporal receptive field.** Depth-parallelism has implications regarding the temporal receptive field of the network. In any standard neural network, by design, the temporal receptive field of a layer, i.e. the frames its input data comes from, is always a subset of the temporal receptive field of the next deeper layer in the network, resulting in a symmetric triangular shape; see fig. \[fig:latency\] (a). Stacked temporal convolutions and pooling layers are used for increasing the temporal visual field for deeper layers. In causal models the temporal receptive field is a right-angled triangle – no layer in the network has access to future frames; see fig. \[fig:latency\] (b). In the proposed design, the temporal receptive field along the depth of the network has a skewed triangular shape, the shallower layers having access to frames that the deeper layers cannot yet see ([information latency]{}). For example in fig. \[fig:latency\] (c), the latest frame that the deepest layer can see at time $t=0$ is the frame $\text{I}_{-4}$, assuming a temporal kernel of 3, which, since we define a [prediction latency]{} of zero, means it must predict the output 4 frames in advance. Adding temporal skip connections reduces the [information latency]{}; at the extreme the receptive field becomes similar to the causal one, bringing it to zero.
![**Left**: neural networks with three parallel subnetworks of two layers and two parallel subnetworks of three layers. **Right**: sequential-to-parallel distillation, the additional loss $L(\hat a, a)$ leverages intermediate activations of the pre-trained sequential model. \[fig:sub-distillation\]](images/semi2.pdf){width="80.00000%"}
**Levels of parallelism.** For simplicity, the proposed design ideas were illustrated in fig. \[fig:architecture-lag\] using the “extreme” models, i.e.: (a) which is fully-sequential (with only vertical edges); and (b-c): which are fully parallel (lacking any vertical edge). However, there is a whole space of semi-parallel models in between, which makes it possible to trade off accuracy and efficiency. A simple strategy to transform an image model with a linear-chain layer-architecture into a semi-parallel video model is to traverse the network starting from the first layer, and group together contiguous layers into sequential blocks of $k$ layers that we will call *parallel subnetworks* and which can execute independently – see the two diagrams on the right side of fig. \[fig:sub-distillation\], left; basic pseudocode is given in the supp. material.
Multi-rate clocks
-----------------
Features extracted deeper in a neural network tend to be more abstract and to vary less over time [@Shelhamer2016], obeying the so-called *slowness principle* [@Wiskott:2002:SFA:638940.638941] – fast varying observations can be explained by slow varying latent factors. For example, when tracking a non-rigid moving object, the contours, which are shallow features, change rapidly, but the identity of the object typically does not change at all. Since not all features change at the same rate as the input rate, it is then possible to reduce computation by reusing, and not recomputing, the deeper, more abstract, features. This can be implemented by having multi-rate clocks: whenever the clock of a layer does not tick, that layer does not compute activations, instead it reuses the existing ones. 3D ConvNets implement this principle by using temporal strides but does not keep state and hence cannot efficiently operate frame-by-frame. In our recurrent setting, multi-rate clocks can be implemented by removing nodes from the unrolled graph and preserving an internal state to cache outputs until the next slower-ticking layer can consume them. We used a set of fixed rates in our models, typically reducing clock rates by a factor of two whenever spatial resolution is halved. Instead of just using identity to create the internal state as we did, one could use any spatial recurrent module (conv. versions of vanilla RNNs or LSTMs). This design is shown in fig. \[fig:wiring-patterns\] (d).
For pixelwise prediction tasks, the state tensors from the last layer of a given spatial resolution are also passed through skip connections, bilinearly upsampled and concatenated as input to the dense prediction head, similar to the skip connections in FCN models [@Shelhamer:2017:FCN:3069214.3069246], but arise from previous time steps [^1].
Temporal filters and feedback
-----------------------------
The success of depth-parallelism and multi-rate clocks depends on the network being able to learn to compensate for otherwise delayed, possibly stale inputs, which may be feasible since videos are quite redundant and scene dynamics are predictable over short temporal horizons. One way to make learning easier would seem to be by using units with temporal filters. These have shown their worth in a variety of video models [@simonyan2014two; @Tran:2015:LSF:2919332.2919929; @carreira2017cvpr]. We illustrate the use of temporal filters in fig. \[fig:wiring-patterns\], (b) as *temporalisation*. Interestingly, depth-paralellisation by itself also induces temporalisation in models with skip connections.
For dense predictions tasks, we experimented with adding a feedback connection – the outputs of the previous frame are fed as inputs to the early layers of the network (e.g. stacking them with the output of the first conv. layer). The idea is that previous outputs provide a simple starting solution with rich semantics which can be refined in few layers – similar to several recent papers [@carreira2016human; @belagiannis2017recurrent; @li2016iterative; @stollenga2014deep; @zamir2017feedback]. This design is shown in fig. \[fig:wiring-patterns\], (c).
![Basic image models (left) can be extended along the temporal domain using different patterns of connectivity. Temporalisation adds additional inputs to the different computation nodes, increasing their temporal receptive field. Feedback re-injects past high-level activations to the bottom of the network. Both connectivity patterns aim to improve the expressivity of the models. For increasing throughput, having multi-rate clocks avoids always computing deeper activations (here shown for a temporal model), and instead past activations are copied periodically.[]{data-label="fig:wiring-patterns"}](images/architectures){width="100.00000%"}
Sequential-to-parallel “distillation”
-------------------------------------
The proposed parallel models reduce latency, but their computational depth for the current frame at the moment where they produce an output is also reduced compared to their fully sequential counterparts; additionally they are designed to re-use features from previous states through the multi-rate clocks mechanism. These properties typically make learning more difficult. In order to improve the accuracy of our parallel models, we adopt a strategy similar to distillation [@hinton2015distilling], or to Ladder networks [@Rasmus:2015:SLL:2969442.2969635], wherein a *teacher* network is privileged relative to a *student* network, either due to having a greater capacity or (in the case of Ladder networks) access to greater amounts of information.
In our case, we consider the sequential model as the teacher, since all of its layers always have access to fresh features extracted from the current frame. We first train a causal fully-sequential model with the same overall architecture as the parallel model. Then we modify the loss of the parallel model to encourage its activations to match those of the sequential model for some given layers, while still minimising the original classification error, such that it predicts how the abstract features would have looked, had the information from the current frame been available. This is illustrated for one layer on the right side of fig. \[fig:sub-distillation\]. In our experiment we used the average of this new loss over $m=3$ layers. The overall loss $L_d$ with distillation is: $$L_d = L(y, y_{gt}) + \lambda \sum_{i=1}^m \frac{1}{n_i} \left\lVert \hat a^{(i)} - a^{(i)} \right\rVert^2$$ where $L(y, y_{gt})$ is the initial cross-entropy loss between the predictions of the parallel network $y$ and the ground truth $y_{gt}$, and the second term is the normalised Euclidean distance between the activations of the pre-trained sequential model $\hat a^{(i)}$ for layer $i$ and the activation of the parallel model $a^{(i)}$ for the same layer; $n_i$ denotes the number of feature channels of layer $i$. A parameter $\lambda$ is used to weight the two components of the new loss. We set $\lambda=1$ for the dense keypoint prediction and $\lambda=100$ for action recognition.
Experiments {#sec:experiments}
===========
We applied the proposed principles starting from two popular image classification models: a 54 layer DenseNet [@huang2017densely] and Inception [@inception], which has 22 conv. layers. We chose these models due to their differences in connectivity. Inception has some built-in parallelism due to the parallel branches in the Inception blocks. DenseNet has no parallelism and instead has dense skip connections within blocks, which helps reduce [information latency]{} when parallelised. Full details on the architectures are provided in the supp. material.
We instantiated a number of model variations using the principles set in the previous section. In all cases we are interested in the online, causal setting (i.e. no peeking into the future), where efficiency matters the most. In the majority of the experiments we trained models with 0 [prediction latency]{} (e.g. the output at time t should correspond to the input at time t), the most challenging setting. We name pipelined DenseNet models as Par-DenseNet and Inception-based models as Par-Inception.
For evaluation, we considered two tasks having different latency and throughput requirements: (1) action classification, where the network must output only one label prediction for the entire video sequence, and (2) human keypoint localisation, where the network must output dense per-frame predictions for the locations of human joints – in our case spatial heatmaps for the keypoints of interest (see fig. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]).
The dataset for training and evaluation in all cases was miniKinetics [@Xie2017RethinkingSF], which has 80k training videos and 5k test videos. MiniKinetics is a subset of the larger Kinetics [@DBLP:journals/corr/KayCSZHVVGBNSZ17], but more pratical when studying many factors of variation. For heatmap estimation we populated miniKinetics automatically with poses from a state-of-the-art 2D pose estimation method [@45946] – that we will call *baseline* from now on – and used those as ground truth. This resulted in a total of 20 million training frames [^2].
Action recognition {#sec:experiments-actionrecognition}
------------------
For this task we experimented with three levels of depth-parallelism for both architectures: fully sequential, 5, and 10 parallel subnetworks for Par-Inception models and fully sequential, 7, and 14 parallel subnetworks for Par-DenseNet models. Table \[tab:sparse\_results\] presents the results in terms of Top-1 accuracy on miniKinetics. The accuracy of the original I3D model [@carreira2017cvpr] on miniKinetics is $78.3\%$, as reported in [@Xie2017RethinkingSF]. This model is non-causal, but otherwise equivalent to the fully sequential version of our Par-Inception [^3].
There is a progressive degradation in performance as more depth-parallelism is added, i.e. as the models become faster and faster, illustrating the trade-off between speedup and accuracy. One possible explanation is the narrowing of the temporal receptive field, shown in fig. \[fig:latency\]. The activations of the last frames in each training clip do not get to be processed by the last classifier layer, which is equivalent to training on shorter sequences – a factor known to impact negatively the classification accuracy. We intend to increase the length of the clips in future work to explore this further. Promisingly, the loss in accuracy can be reduced partially by just using distillation; see subsection \[subsec:misc\].
**Model** **\#Par. Subnets.** **Par-Inception Top-1** **Par-Dense. Top-1**
---------------------- --------------------- ------------------------- ---------------------- --
non-causal 1 71.8 -
sequential causal 1 71.4 67.6
semi-parallel causal 5 (7) 66.0 61.3
parallel causal 10 (14) 54.5 54.0
: Test accuracy as percentage for action recognition on the miniKinetics dataset [@Xie2017RethinkingSF], using networks with multi-rate clocks and temporal filters. The number of parallel subnetworks is shown in the second column. For the semi-parallel case, Par-Inception uses 5 parallel subnetworks and Par-DenseNet 7. The non-causal, single subnetwork Par-Inception in the first row is equivalent to the I3D model [@carreira2017cvpr].[]{data-label="tab:sparse_results"}
Human keypoint localisation {#sec:experiments-humanheatmap}
---------------------------
For this task we experimented with 5 different levels of depth-parallelism for Par-DenseNet: fully sequential and 2, 4, 7 and 14 parallel subnetworks. For Par-Inception, we used three different depth-parallelism levels: fully sequential, 5, and 10 parallel subnetworks. We employed a weighted sigmoid cross-entropy loss. Since the heatmaps contain mostly background (no-joint) pixels, we found it essential to weight the importance of the keypoint pixels in the loss – we used a factor of 10. For evaluation, we report results on the miniKinetics test set in terms of weighted sigmoid cross-entropy loss.
Results using the pipelining connectivity with multi-rate clock models are shown in fig. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\], left. For both models, it can be observed that the performance improves as more layers are allowed to execute in sequence. Par-Inception has slightly better performance for higher degrees of parallelism, perhaps due to its built-in parallelism; Par-DenseNet models become better as less parallelism is used.
Since Par-DenseNet offers more possibilities for parallelisation, we used it to investigate more designs, i.e.: with/without multi-rate clocks, temporal filters and feedback. The results are shown in fig. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\], right. Versions with temporal filters do better than without except for the most parallel models – these have intrinsically temporal receptive fields because of the skip connections in time, without needing explicit temporal filters. Feedback helps slightly. Clocks degrade accuracy a little but provide big speedups (see subsection \[sec:timings\]). We show predictions for two test videos in fig. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\].
\
![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_par_2 "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_par "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} [Fully sequential Par-DenseNet model, without clocks]{}\
![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_seq_2 "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_seq "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} [Par-DenseNet models with 14 parallel subnetworks, with clocks]{}\
![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_multiclock_par_2 "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_multiclock_par "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} [Fully sequential Par-DenseNet model, with clocks]{}\
![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_multiclock_seq_2 "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Example outputs on a subset of frames one second apart from two videos of the miniKinetics test set. “Ground truth" keypoints from the model [@45946] used to automatically annotate the dataset are shown as triangles, our models predictions are shown as circles. Note that the parallel models exhibit some lag when the legs move quickly on the video on the left. Best seen zoomed on a computer screen in color. \[fig:kinetics\_pose\_samples\]](images/arxiv_densenet_multiclock_seq "fig:"){width="49.00000%"}
![Weighted sigmoid cross-entropy (lower is better) for human keypoint localisation on miniKinetics test set for zero [prediction latency]{}. “Cl" denotes models with multi-rate clocks, “T" – models with temporal filters, “FB" – models with feedback. **Left**: Comparison between Par-Inception and Par-DenseNet for different levels of parallelism. Note that in terms of number of sequential convolutions, 14 subnetworks for Par-DenseNet are equivalent to 10 subnetworks for Par-Inception, and similar for 7(5). **Right**: Variations of Par-DenseNet. In the absence of parallelisation (1 subnetwork), the accuracy of the best models with multi-rate clocks is just slightly worse to that of a much slower sequential model. Parallelisation penalises the accuracy of models with clocks more. The basic Par-DenseNet can have up to 4 parallel subnetworks with modest drop of accuracy.[]{data-label="fig:kinetics_pose"}](images/inception-densenet.pdf "fig:"){width="40.00000%"} ![Weighted sigmoid cross-entropy (lower is better) for human keypoint localisation on miniKinetics test set for zero [prediction latency]{}. “Cl" denotes models with multi-rate clocks, “T" – models with temporal filters, “FB" – models with feedback. **Left**: Comparison between Par-Inception and Par-DenseNet for different levels of parallelism. Note that in terms of number of sequential convolutions, 14 subnetworks for Par-DenseNet are equivalent to 10 subnetworks for Par-Inception, and similar for 7(5). **Right**: Variations of Par-DenseNet. In the absence of parallelisation (1 subnetwork), the accuracy of the best models with multi-rate clocks is just slightly worse to that of a much slower sequential model. Parallelisation penalises the accuracy of models with clocks more. The basic Par-DenseNet can have up to 4 parallel subnetworks with modest drop of accuracy.[]{data-label="fig:kinetics_pose"}](images/densenet2_new.pdf "fig:"){width="40.00000%"}
Sequential to parallel distillation {#subsec:misc}
-----------------------------------
As mentioned in section \[sec:model\], we investigated training first a sequential model, then fitting the parallel model to a subset of its activations in addition to the original loss function. This led to significant improvements for both models. The parallel causal Par-Inception model obtains a relative improvement in accuracy of about 12%, from 54.5% to 61.2% for action recognition. The improvement for multi-rate Par-DenseNet model on the keypoint localisation task is shown in fig. \[fig:distill\].
![Comparison between the weighted sigmoid cross-entropy (lower is better) of models with different levels of parallelism and the same models distilled from sequential for human keypoint localisation on miniKinetics test set for zero [prediction latency]{}. Results presented for a DenseNet model with multi-rate clocks (“Cl"), temporal filters (“T"), and feedback (“FB"). See text for details.[]{data-label="fig:distill"}](images/densenet_distill.pdf){width="40.00000%"}
Training specifically for depth-parallelism
-------------------------------------------
Is it important to train a model specifically for operating in parallel mode or can we rewire a pretrained sequential model and it will work just as well at inference time? We ran an experiment where we initialiased Par-DenseNet models with different levels of parallelism with the weights from the DenseNet fully sequential model and ran inference on the miniKinetics test set. The results are shown in fig. \[fig:pred-latency\], left, and indicate the importance of training with depth-parallelism enabled, so the network learns to behave predictively. We similarly evaluated the test loss of Par-DenseNet models with different levels of parallelism when initialised from a fully-parallel trained model. As expected, in this case the behaviour does not change much.
Effect of higher [prediction latency]{}
---------------------------------------
All the results above were obtained when training for 0 frames of [prediction latency]{}. However, if a parallel model is several times faster than a sequential one, we can afford to introduce a [prediction latency]{} greater than zero frames. Figure \[fig:pred-latency\], right, shows results for Par-DenseNet models in this setting. As expected, the test loss decreases as the prediction latency increases, since more layers get to process the input frame before a prediction needs to be made. Strikingly, by using a predictive delay of 2 frames, models with up to 4 depth-parallel subnetworks are as accurate as fully sequential models with 0 frame predictive latency.
![**Left**: Seq. weights - Behaviour of Par-DenseNet with different levels of parallelism at inference time when trained with sequential connectivity. Par. weights - behaviour of Par-DenseNet with different levels of parallelism at inference time when trained with fully-parallel connectivity. **Right**: Test loss for Par-DenseNet when prediction latency is allowed to be greater than zero.[]{data-label="fig:pred-latency"}](images/densenet3.pdf "fig:"){width="40.00000%"} ![**Left**: Seq. weights - Behaviour of Par-DenseNet with different levels of parallelism at inference time when trained with sequential connectivity. Par. weights - behaviour of Par-DenseNet with different levels of parallelism at inference time when trained with fully-parallel connectivity. **Right**: Test loss for Par-DenseNet when prediction latency is allowed to be greater than zero.[]{data-label="fig:pred-latency"}](images/pred-latency.pdf "fig:"){width="40.00000%"}
Efficiency measurements {#sec:timings}
-----------------------
In this section, we present the efficiency improvements achieved by the proposed models, comparing the cases with and without multi-rate clocks and with different numbers of parallel subnetworks. Our parallel models improve efficiency under the assumption that parallel computation resources are available. We benchmark our models on CPUs and GPUs by running inference on a CPU with 48 cores and on hosts with 2, 4, and 8 k40 GPUs, respectively. The GPUs were on the same machine to avoid network latency. For benchmarking, each model is run on 3000 frames and we average the time used to process each frame. Results are presented in table \[tab:throughput\]. A figure illustrating the loss in accuracy as the throughput is increased can be found in the supp. material.
Our models are implemented using TensorFlow (TF) [@tensorflow2015-whitepaper], hence: (1) when running on a multi-core CPU, we can run multiple operations in parallel and to parallelise a single operation, e.g., for conv layers. This means that the sequential model becomes faster with more cores, but only up to a certain point, when the overhead cancels out the gain from parallelism. The proposed parallel models benefit far more from having many CPU cores. (2) Multiple operations cannot run in parallel on the same GPU, hence there is little benefit in running our models on a single GPU. (3) A single operation cannot be split between GPUs. This explains why the sequential image model performance does not improve with more GPUs.
**Par-DenseNet.** Our Par-DenseNet architecture has a total of 4+8+8+6=26 miniblocks so when using 14 parallel subnetworks, each parallel subnetwork is made of at most 2 miniblocks. When not using multi-rate clocks, 26 miniblocks are executed for each frame resulting in 416 miniblocks executions for a sequence of 16 frames. However when using multi-rate clocks, only 86 miniblocks are executed for such a sequence, which theoretically results in a speedup of $4.8\times$. We observe some smaller speedup but this is likely to be explained by the miniblocks having different sizes.
**Par-Inception.** Our models have 9 inception blocks. The most parallel version uses 10 parallel subnetworks: one for the initial convolutions and one for each inception block. For the sequential version, roughly a third of the time is spent on these initial convolutions. This explains why we do not observe speedups greater than 3 for the models without clocks when using more GPUs and we do not see much difference between using 4 and 8 GPU. More details together with execution timelines are included in the supp. material.
[|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|]{} **Model**&**\# Par. subnets** & **48 cores** & **2 GPUs** & **4 GPUs** & **8 GPUs**\
\
sequential &1&$1.0$ & $1.0$ & $1.0$ & $1.0$\
semi-parallel&2 & $1.3$ & $1.6$ & $1.7$ & $1.7$\
semi-parallel&4& $1.8$ & $1.7$ & $2.5$ & $2.9$\
semi-parallel&7 & $2.2$ & $1.6$ & $2.6$ & $3.7$\
parallel&14& $2.6$ & $1.7$ & $2.7$ & $3.8$\
\
sequential&1 & $2.6$ & $3.4$ & $3.4$ & $3.4$\
semi-parallel&2 & $3.0$ & $3.9$ & $4.0$ & $4.0$\
semi-parallel&4& $3.6$ & $4.5$ & $5.1$ & $5.2$\
semi-parallel&7 & $4.6$ & $4.5$ & $5.6$ & $6.1$\
parallel&14& $5.1$ & $5.0$ & $6.2$ & $7.4$\
\
sequential&1 & $1.0$ & $1.0$ & $1.0$ & $1.0$\
semi-parallel&5& $1.3$ & $1.8$ & $2.7$ & $2.7$\
parallel&10& $1.3$ & $1.8$ & $2.6$ & $2.6$\
\
sequential&1 & $2.4$ & $2.6$ & $2.6$ & $2.6$\
semi-parallel&5& $3.0$ & $3.4$ & $5.0$ & $5.0$\
parallel&10& $3.0$ & $3.4$ & $4.9$ & $5.0$\
Conclusion
==========
We introduced the paradigm of processing video sequences using networks that are constrained in the amount of sequential processing they can perform, with the goal of improving their efficiency. As a first exploration of this problem, we proposed a family of models where the number of sequential layers per frame is a design parameter and we evaluated how performance degrades as the allowed number of sequential layers is reduced. We have also shown that more accurate parallel models can be learned by distilling their sequential versions. We benchmarked the performance of these models considering different amounts of available parallel resources together with multi-rate clocks, and analysed the trade-off between accuracy and speedup. Interestingly, we found that the proposed design patterns can bring a speedup of up to 3 to 4x over a basic model that processes frames independently, without significant loss in performance in human action recognition and human keypoint localisation tasks. These are also general techniques – applicable to any state-of-the-art model in order to process video more efficiently. As future work we plan to investigate further the space of possible wirings using automated strategies.
**Acknowledgements:** We thank Carl Doersch, Relja Arandjelovic, Evan Shelhamer, and Dominic Grewe for valuable discussions and feedback on this work.
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
Timing details with execution timelines {#section:timeline}
---------------------------------------
![Timeline for GPU usage for a sequential Par-Inception model on 8 GPUs at the top, a semi-parallel Par-Inception model using 4 GPUs in the middle, and a fully parallel model on 8 GPUs at the bottom. Each inception block is represented with a different color. Operations outside of inception blocks are colored in grey. Note that the timescale is different in the first picture compared to the two following ones.[]{data-label="fig:timeline-inception"}](images/timeline-inception-seq "fig:"){width="85.00000%"} ![Timeline for GPU usage for a sequential Par-Inception model on 8 GPUs at the top, a semi-parallel Par-Inception model using 4 GPUs in the middle, and a fully parallel model on 8 GPUs at the bottom. Each inception block is represented with a different color. Operations outside of inception blocks are colored in grey. Note that the timescale is different in the first picture compared to the two following ones.[]{data-label="fig:timeline-inception"}](images/timeline-inception-semipar4 "fig:"){width="85.00000%"} ![Timeline for GPU usage for a sequential Par-Inception model on 8 GPUs at the top, a semi-parallel Par-Inception model using 4 GPUs in the middle, and a fully parallel model on 8 GPUs at the bottom. Each inception block is represented with a different color. Operations outside of inception blocks are colored in grey. Note that the timescale is different in the first picture compared to the two following ones.[]{data-label="fig:timeline-inception"}](images/timeline-inception-par "fig:"){width="85.00000%"}
In this section we give more details on the timing measurements. Table \[tab:sup-throughput-densenet\] and table \[tab:sup-throughput-inception\] report the average throughput of Par-DenseNet and Par-Inception models. GPU measurements have been done using Nvidia K-40 GPUs. We include the throughput in frames per second in these tables. These numbers are only indicative as they depend on the implementation (which is why they were not included in the original paper).
Figure \[fig:timeline-inception\] represents the usage of each of the GPUs when running a sequential, a semi-parallel, and a fully-parallel Par-Inception model. The semi-parallel and fully-parallel models run 2.6 times faster than the sequential one (the time axis has been rescaled accordingly). Each inception block uses a different color.
We forced the sequential model to use all 8 GPUs but as expected each inception block only gets executed after the previous one in this case. It is also worth noting that the 4 branches of a given inception block are not executed in parallel, although they could be – we tried this and did not see any noticeable speedup as one of the branches is far slower than the other three. The inter-GPU communication overhead caused by using all 8 GPUs appears to be negligible: the frame rate we measured did not depend on the number of GPUs being used.
However when using the parallel model, all the inception blocks are able to run at the same time. The bottleneck when running with 8 GPUs is that the first three convolution layers represent roughly a third of the computation and in our model they are executed sequentially. The same bottleneck applies to the semi-parallel model, but the GPU usage is much more balanced in this case as each of the other GPUs have at least two inception blocks to compute. A simple workaround would be to run these three convolutional layers in parallel branches – we plan on doing so in future work.
In order to visualise the trade-off between efficiency improvements and performance degradation, figure \[fig:performance-efficiency\] plots model performance with respect to efficiency for the Par-DenseNet and Par-Inception models with clocks. Round markers represent the accuracy on the action task, normalized by the accuracy obtained by the sequential model. Square markers represent the inverse of the loss on the pose estimation task, again normalized by the loss obtained by the sequential model.
![Performance/efficiency trade-off introduced by depth-parallelising models with multi-rate clocks on 4 GPUs. Note that the baseline models use multi-rate clocks hence the smaller speedups compared to tables \[tab:sup-throughput-densenet\] and \[tab:sup-throughput-inception\].[]{data-label="fig:performance-efficiency"}](images/scatter_efficiency_performance){width="95.00000%"}
Pseudocode for predictive depth-parallelism {#section:pseudocode}
-------------------------------------------
Using the toy example in the figure below, we illustrate the construction of the TensorFlow graph for the proposed predictive depth-parallel models with multi-rate clocks in Algorithm \[alg:model\]. The model here has $n=6$ layers and a final classifier, and it is unrolled over $5$ time steps. The model outputs predictions $y_i$ at the same rate as the rate at which frames $I_i$ arrive. The layers are distributed into 2 parallel subnetworks, with $k=3$ sequential layers in each subnetwork, and uses a clock rate of 1 for the first subnetwork and clock rate of 2 for the second one.
This has three implications: (1) when we break the sequence path between subnetworks, the output layer of subnetwork 1 should cache its activations for one time step, when they can be processed by the second subnetwork; (2) but because the second subnetwork ticks only every two time steps, the last layer of subnetwork 1 must actually cache its activations for two time steps, and (3) in every other time steps, the output classifier makes predictions based on stale inputs. The model is unrolled over time (line \[ln:unroll\_loop\]), similar to an RNN, and maintains its state, more precisely maintains two steps of computation as mentioned in observation (2) above.
At the first time step, the state is initialised to 0 (line \[ln:init\_state\]). In every unroll step, the outputs of the network are first initialised from the state (line \[ln:init\_outputs\]), and the current frame is appended to state (line \[ln:append\_frame\]) to be processed by the first layer. Then the computation traverses the network in depth (line \[ln:traverse\_net\_loop\]). If the clock of a layer did not reach its tick time (line \[ln:check\_tick\]), then the layer is simply not connected in the graph for this time step (line \[ln:continue\]), and its output will carry over a copy of the state to the next time step. If the clock does tick, we then need to check if the layer is to be connected in sequence (line \[ln:break\_seq\]) – inputs are taken from the last output of the previous layer as in standard models (line \[ln:inp\_output\]) – or in parallel – inputs are taken only from the state (line \[ln:inp\_state\]), using the two last entries in state, since the second subnetwork ticks slower. Eventually, the state is updated with the current outputs (line \[ln:update\_state\]) and the loop is repeated for the remaining frames. The output predictions of the network are extracted from the last layer, by applying (in sequence) a classifier (line \[ln:classif\]).
$n \leftarrow$ len{layers} clock\_rates $\leftarrow [1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2]$ state $\leftarrow [0]$ \[ln:init\_state\] $y \leftarrow$ \[ \] \[alg:model\]
{width="\linewidth"}
Additional details on training setups {#section:details}
-------------------------------------
We used randomly extracted subsequences of 32 frames for pose and 64 frames for action in training; the evaluation was done on the full sequences, that have up to 250 frames – 10 seconds of video. The spatial resolution of the input frames at both training and evaluation time is $224\times 224$, obtained by random cropping at training time and central cropping for evaluation. We also randomly flipped the videos horizontally during training.
For the task of keypoint localisation, we generate dense per-frame labels by convolving the binary joint maps with a gaussian filter and obtain 17D heatmaps. Note that there can be multiple people in a single image and although this is a state-of-the-art system the labels are slightly noisy since they were automatically extracted and not verified by human experts. Also, for simplicity, we do not consider the problem of person detection, just direct keypoint localization. As a consequence of these aspects of our setup, one predicted heatmap can contain several joints of the same type belonging to different individuals.
All our models were trained using SGD with momentum 0.9. For both tasks, the Par-Inception models were trained with initial learning rate of 0.1, and batch size of 4. For keypoint localisation, the learning rate was decreased by a factor of 10 after 35k and 55k iterations of training, whereas for action classification, it was decreased after 50k and 60k iterations. For both tasks, we ran 70k iterations of training.
The Par-DenseNet models were more memory intensive so we used a smaller batch size, 1 for keypoint localization, and 2 for classification. We trained the models with learning rate 1.0 for keypoints and 0.1 for actions, for a total of 150k iterations, lowering the learning rate by a factor of 10 at 100k iterations.
Architecture details {#sec:casestudies}
--------------------
In this section, we explain how the proposed principles were applied on two popular image classification models: DenseNet [@huang2017densely] and Inception [@inception].
**DenseNet model.** DenseNet [@huang2017densely] is a state-of-the-art model for image classification. It consists of densely-connected blocks, each composed of $b$ miniblocks. These blocks are densely connected such that every miniblock sends its activations to all the subsequent miniblocks in the same block. The model has growth-rate as a hyperparameter to control how many new features are added by each layer. Pooling layers are interleaved between the blocks. We used 4 blocks with average pooling operators in between, and growth-rate of 64. The blocks have 4, 8, 8, and 6 miniblocks (each with a 1x1 convolution followed by a 3x3 convolution). The model starts with a 7x7 convolutional layer and ends with a 3x3 heatmap prediction head for dense predictions tasks. The input to this head is a stack of skip-connections (upsampled feature maps, 56x56, from the end of each block plus the first convolutional layer). For classification tasks the head is replaced by a fully connected layer. We experimented with this model both with and without variable clock rates and temporal kernels (kernel dimension 2 along time for all layers but the first convolutional layer, where the model inputs a single image at a time). We also experimented with versions with and without feedback. When using feedback, the heatmaps predictions from the previous frame are stacked with the output of the first convolutional layer for the current frame. We trained the resulting models in all cases recurrently, restricting inputs to past frames so it behaves causally.
**Inception model.** The Inception architecture [@inception] is a directed graph that begins with 3 convolutional layers, followed by 9 inception blocks. Each inception block is composed of 4 parallel branches. For this model we experimented only with a version with temporal filters and variable clock rates, similar to the 3D ConvNet for action classification from the literature, I3D [@carreira2017cvpr], but transformed into a causal recurrent-style network. Masked 3D convolutions can be used for this (or, equivalently, shifting along the time dimension, as mentioned in [@DBLP:journals/corr/OordDZSVGKSK16], sec. 2.1), but we prefer the unrolling since we are interested in frame-by-frame operation. The parameters between time steps are shared, the unrolling in this case being equivalent to shifting the convolutional kernel over the time dimension when applying a 3D convolution. The variable temporal strides of I3D are incorporated by removing blocks from the unrolling graph at time steps when there is a stride gap. Similar to DenseNet model, for per-frame prediction tasks, we introduce skip-connections (upsampling the activations of each inception block and passing them through a prediction head to produce spatial heatmaps).
**Discussion.**
In terms of model capacity, the two models are comparable, the temporal version of Inception has 12M parameters, and the temporal version of DenseNet has 10M parameters. The length of the longest sequential path for the Inception-based model is only 22 (counted as convolutional layers), whereas for DenseNet it is 54. Hence there are more possible options for breaking down this path into parallel subnetworks for DenseNet than for Inception. The [information latency]{} is however shorter for DenseNet because of its dense connectivity. The next section gives speedups for the two architectures, for different levels of parallelism.
\[section:architecture-details\] We specify here the architectures trained for keypoint localisation or action, giving the layer structure (kernel shapes, number of channels, strides) and number of weights. ReLU and batch normalization layers are not shown, to reduce clutter, but are used as in the original image architectures.
### DenseNet: table \[tab:densenet\_params1\]
### Inception: tables \[tab:inception\_params1\] - \[tab:inception\_params2\]
[^1]: More sophisticated trainable decoders, such as those in U-Nets [@Ronneberger2015], could also be used in a similar pipelined fashion as the encoder.
[^2]: This is far higher than the largest 2D pose video dataset, PoseTrack [@PoseTrack], which has just 20k annotated frames, hardly sufficient for training large video models from scratch (although cleanly annotated instead of automatically).
[^3]: Note that this was pre-trained using ImageNet, hence it has a significant advantage over all our models that are trained from scratch.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In order to effectively prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus, almost everyone wears a mask during coronavirus epidemic. This almost makes conventional facial recognition technology ineffective in many cases, such as community access control, face access control, facial attendance, facial security checks at train stations, etc. Therefore, it is very urgent to improve the recognition performance of the existing face recognition technology on the masked faces. Most current advanced face recognition approaches are designed based on deep learning, which depend on a large number of face samples. However, at present, there are no publicly available masked face recognition datasets. To this end, this work proposes three types of masked face datasets, including Masked Face Detection Dataset (MFDD), Real-world Masked Face Recognition Dataset (RMFRD) and Simulated Masked Face Recognition Dataset (SMFRD). Among them, to the best of our knowledge, RMFRD is currently the world’s largest real-world masked face dataset. These datasets are freely available to industry and academia, based on which various applications on masked faces can be developed. The multi-granularity masked face recognition model we developed achieves 95% accuracy, exceeding the results reported by the industry. Our datasets are available at: <https://github.com/X-zhangyang/Real-World-Masked-Face-Dataset>.'
author:
- 'Zhongyuan Wang, Guangcheng Wang, Baojin Huang, Zhangyang Xiong, Qi Hong, Hao Wu, Peng Yi, Kui Jiang, Nanxi Wang, Yingjiao Pei, Heling Chen, Yu Miao, Zhibing Huang, and Jinbi Liang [^1]'
title: Masked Face Recognition Dataset and Application
---
COVID-19 epidemic, masked face dataset, masked face recognition.
Background
==========
everyone wears a mask during the COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic. Face recognition techniques, the most important means of identification, have nearly failed, which has brought huge dilemmas to authentication applications that rely on face recognition, such as community entry and exit, face access control, face attendance, face gates at train stations, face authentication based mobile payment, face recognition based social security investigation, etc. In particular, in the public security check like railway stations, the gates based on traditional face recognition systems can not effectively recognize the masked faces, but removing masks for passing authentication will increase the risk of virus infection. Because the COVID-19 virus can be spread through contact, the unlocking systems based on passwords or fingerprints are unsafe. It is much safer through face recognition without touching, but the existing face recognition solutions are no longer reliable when wearing a mask. To solve above mentioned difficulties, it is necessary to improve the existing face recognition approaches that heavily rely on all facial feature points, so that identity verification can still be performed reliably in the case of incompletely exposed faces.
The state-of-the-art face recognizers are all designed based on deep learning, which depend on massive training dataset \[\[ref:arcface\]\]-\[\[ref:8099646\]\]. Thus, developing face recognition algorithms for masked faces requires a large number of masked face samples. At present, there is no publicly available masked face dataset, and so this work proposes to construct masked face datasets by different means.
Proposed Datasets
=================
Regarding the current popular face masks, there are two closely related and different applications, namely,facial mask detection task and masked face recognition task. Face mask detection task needs to identify whether a person wear a mask as required. Masked face recognition task needs to identify the specific identity of a person with a mask. Each task has different requirements for the dataset. The former only needs masked face image samples, but the latter requires a dataset which contains multiple face images of the same subject with and without a mask. Relatively, datasets used for the face recognition task are more difficult to construct.
![Examples of a pair of face images. (a) and (b) are normal face images. (c) and (d) are masked face images.[]{data-label="fig:01"}](./figure1.png "fig:"){width="0.985\linewidth"}\
In order to handle masked face recognition task, this paper proposes three types of masked face datasets, including Masked Face Detection Dataset (MFDD), Real-world Masked Face Recognition Dataset (RMFRD) and Simulated Masked Face Recognition Dataset (SMFRD). The introduction of MFDD, RMFRD and SMFRD is shown below.
- MFDD: The source of MFDD mainly includes two parts: (a) Some of samples are from related researches \[\[ref:AIZOOM\]\]; (b) The other part of MFDD is crawled from the Internet. We further label the crawled face images, performing annotations such as whether the face wears a mask and the position coordinates of the masked faces. This built dataset contains 24,771 masked face images. MFDD dataset can be used to train an accurate masked face detection model, which serves for the subsequent masked face recognition task. Additionally, it can also be used to determine whether a person is wearing a mask, as it is illegal without wearing a mask during coronavirus epidemic.
- RMFRD: A python crawler tool is used to crawl the front-face images of public figures and their corresponding masked face images from massive Internet resources. Then, we manually remove the unreasonable face images resulting from wrong correspondence. The process of filtering images takes a lot of manpower. Similarly, we crop the accurate face areas with the help of semi-automatic annotation tools, like LabelImg and LabelMe \[\[ref:Label-tool\]\]. The dataset includes 5,000 pictures of 525 people wearing masks, and 90,000 images of the same 525 subjects without masks. To the best of our knowledge, this is currently the world’s largest real-world masked face dataset. Fig. 1 shows pairs of facial image samples.
- SMFRD: In order to expand the volume and diversity of the masked face recognition dataset, we meanwhile have taken alternative means, which is to put on masks on the existing public large-scale face datasets. To improve data manipulation efficiency, we have developed a mask wearing software based on Dlib library \[\[ref:Dlib-library\]\] to perform mask wearing automatically. This software is then used to wear masks on face images in the popular face recognition datasets, presently including LFW \[\[ref:lfw\]\] and Webface \[\[ref:webface\]\] datasets. This way, we additionally constructed a simulated masked face dataset covering 500,000 face images of 10,000 subjects. In practice, the simulated masked face datasets can be used along with their original unmasked counterparts. Fig. 2 shows a set of simulated masked face images.
![Samples of a set of simulated masked face images.[]{data-label="fig:01"}](./figure2.png "fig:"){width="0.985\linewidth"}\
Masked Face Recognition
=======================
Face-based identification can be roughly divided into two application scenarios: uncontrolled and controlled application environments. The former mainly refers to public video surveillance situations, where face shooting distance, view of sight, pose, occlusion and lighting are all uncertain. In these cases, the accuracy of face recognition is relatively low. Moreover, the accuracy will be further reduced when wearing a face mask. However, there are also a large number of controlled application scenarios, such as attendance checks in work places, security checks at train stations and facial scan payments, etc. In these situations, subjects are usually in a cooperative manner, typically, approaching and facing up the camera. Thus high-quality frontal face images are readily acquired, so that the masked face recognition task is no longer so difficult. Even if the mask covers part of the face, the features of upper half of the face, such as eye and eyebrow, can still be used to improve the availability of the face recognition system. Of course, the premise is to exclude mask interference and give higher priority to useful exposed face features.
Our proposed masked face recognition technique has been blessed with two aspects. One is the built dataset, and the other is the full use of uncovered useful face features. We took advantages of the existing public face recognition datasets, and combined them with the self-built simulated masked faces as well as the masked faces from actual scenes as the final dataset to train a face-eye-based multi-granularity recognition model. In particular, we applied different attention weights to the key features in visible parts of the masked face, such as face contour, ocular and periocular details, forehead, and so on, which effectively addresses the problem of uneven distribution of facial discriminative information. As result, we promote the recognition accuracy of masked faces from the initial 50% to 95%.
Application Status and Prospect
===============================
Probably because of the sudden emergence of the COVID-19 epidemic, at present, there are few institutions that apply facial recognition technology to people wearing masks. Based on our survey, Sense Time Technology reported a pass rate of 85% when the person exposes 50% of the nose \[\[ref:report\]\]. Hanvon Technology also reported that the accuracy of masked face recognition is about 85% \[\[ref:Hanvon\]\]. The best result reported so far is from MINIVISION Technology, with an accuracy of over 90% \[\[ref:MINIVISION\]\]. Our face-eye-based multi-granularity model achieves 95% recognition accuracy. Generally, masked face recognition technology can be used to identify people wearing masks but it is still not very reliable compared to the regular facial recognition technology which already witnessed an accuracy of over 99%. Another related task is face mask recognition, that is, identifying whether a person is wearing a mask as required or not. Because the task is relatively simple, the recognition accuracy is much higher. Tencent, Baidu, and Jingdong all reach a recognition accuracy of more than 99%.
We built the MFDD, RMFRD and SMFRD datasets, and developed a state-of-the-art algorithm based on these datasets. The algorithm will serve the applications of contactless face authentication in community access, campus management, and enterprise resumption scenarios. Our research has contributed scientific and technological power to the prevention and control of coronavirus epidemics and the resumption of production in industry. Furthermore, due to the frequent occurrence of haze weather, people will often wear masks, and the need for face recognition with masks will persist for a long time.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1903214, U1736206, 61971165, 61502354), Hubei Province Technological Innovation Major Project (2019AAA049,2019AAA045), and The Outstanding Youth Science and Technology Innovation Team Project of Colleges and Universities in Hubei Province (T201923).
Because the university was closed during the coronavirus epidemic, we thank the leaders and colleagues for coordinating research resources. Part of the computing has been done on the supercomputing system in the Supercomputing Center of Wuhan University.
[1]{}
\[ref:arcface\] J. Deng, J. Guo, N. Xue, S. Zafeiriou, “ArcFace: Additive Angular Margin Loss for Deep Face Recognition,” in *CVPR*, Jun. 2019, pp. 4685-4694.
\[ref:Fair-LOSS\] B. Liu, W. Deng, Y. Zhong, M. Wang, J. Hu, X. Tao, and Y. Huang, “Fair Loss: Margin-Aware Reinforcement Learning for Deep Face Recognition”, in *ICCV*, Oct. 2019, pp. 10051-10060.
\[ref:Sphereface\] W. Liu, Y. Wen, Z. Yu, M. Li, B. Raj, and L. Song, “Sphereface: Deep hypersphere embedding for face recognition”,in *CVPR*, Jul. 2017, pp. 6738-6746.
\[ref:liu2016large\] W. Liu, Y. Wen, Z. Yu, and M. Yang, “Large-margin softmax loss for convolutional neural networks”, in *ICML*, 2016, pp. 507-516.
\[ref:8099646\] A. T. Tran, T. Hassner, I. Masi, and G. Medioni, “Regressing Robust and Discriminative 3D Morphable Models with a Very Deep Neural Network”, in *CVPR*, Jul. 2017, pp. 1493-1052.
\[ref:AIZOOM\] <https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/107719641?utm_source=com.yinxiang>
\[ref:Label-tool\] <https://tzutalin.github.io/labelImg/>
\[ref:Dlib-library\] <http://dlib.net/>
\[ref:lfw\] G. B. Huang, M. Mattar, T. Berg, and E. Learned-Miller, “Labeled faces in the wild: A database for studying face recognition in unconstrained environments”, Technical report, 2007.
\[ref:webface\] D. Yi, Z. Lei, S. Liao, and S. Z. Li, “Learning face representation from scratch”, *arXiv:1411.7923*, 2014.
\[ref:report\] <http://ai.cps.com.cn/article/202002/937650.html>
\[ref:Hanvon\] <https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1658872342983093939&wfr=spider&for=pc>
\[ref:MINIVISION\] <https://blog.csdn.net/aizhushou/article/details/104393844>
[^1]: Z. Wang, G. Wang, B. Huang, Z. Xiong, Q. Hong, H. Wu, P. Yi, K. Jiang, N. Wang, Y. Pei, H. Chen, Y. Miao, Z. Huang, and J. Liang are with the National Engineering Research Center for Multimedia Software, School of Computer Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China. *(Corresponding author: Zhongyuan Wang, wzy\[email protected]).*
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- '<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jay Bartroff[^1] and Jinlin Song[^2]</span>'
title: '[**A Rejection Principle for Sequential Tests of Multiple Hypotheses Controlling Familywise Error Rates**]{}'
---
\[section\] \[section\] \[section\] \[section\] \[section\] \[section\] \[section\] \[section\]
= \[diamond, draw, text width=5em, text badly centered, node distance=3cm, inner sep=0pt\] = \[rectangle, draw, text width=10em, text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=2em\] = \[draw, -latex’\]
Introduction and background {#sec:intro}
===========================
The need for multiple-comparison-type corrections due to testing more than one null hypothesis occurs in nearly all areas of scientific inquiry in which statistical hypothesis testing is employed. In a number of these areas, the data is inherently sequential, or “streaming,” such as in multiple endpoint (or multi-arm) clinical trials [@Jennison00 Chapter 15], multi-channel changepoint detection [@Tartakovsky03] and its applications to biosurveillance [@Mei10], genetics and genomics [e.g., @Salzman11], and acceptance sampling with multiple criteria [@Baillie87]. Adopting the familywise error rate (FWER) metric, this paper takes a unifying approach to sequential multiple testing procedures that control the FWER. Specifically, we give sufficient conditions for a sequential multiple testing procedure to control the FWER, which turn out to be much simpler and easier to verify in many cases than comprehensive analysis of the procedure. We call these two sufficient conditions, given in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\], a *rejection principle for sequential tests*, following and extending the seminal work of @Goeman10 who accomplished this for fixed sample size procedures and in turn extended and unified the work of @Romano05, @Hommel07, and @Marcus76. Two overlapping aspects of the problem that we must deal with in the sequential setting that were absent from the fixed sample size setting are how to allow for acceptances of hypotheses as well as rejections, and the interplay of sequential sampling with the accept/reject decisions. In the fixed sample size setting, rejecting a hypothesis is equivalent to not accepting it, however in the sequential setting these are not necessarily equivalent because there is the third possibility of performing additional sampling. These aspects are dealt with by expanding the notion of a procedure’s rejection function, introduced in Section \[sec:theorem\], to incorporate not just the already rejected hypotheses as in Goeman and Solari’s [-@Goeman10] fixed sample size setting, but also the already accepted hypotheses as well as the current sample size of those data streams that are still being sampled.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. After briefly reviewing the relevant background in the next paragraph, our rejection principle is introduced in Section \[sec:theorem\] and its sufficiency for FWER control is established in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\]. In Section \[sec:apps\] we apply our rejection principle to derive sequential multiple testing procedures, first deriving two general procedures that do not assume a special structure among the hypotheses that control the FWER and both type I and II FWERs (defined below), respectively. Then our rejection principle is applied to derive sequential procedures for two settings wherein special structure of the hypothesis is known: testing hypotheses in order [@Rosenbaum08] and closed testing [@Marcus76]. In Section \[sec:ex\] we give examples of these derived procedures, first applying the sequential procedure for testing hypotheses in order to real data from a study [@Masjedi00] of chromosome aberration effects of an anti-tuberculosis drug, and then applying the closed testing procedure to finding the maximum safe dose of a treatment, wherein the sequential procedure is evaluated in a simulation study. Section \[sec:disc\] provides a summary and discussion.
Separately, multiple testing and sequential testing are both quite mature fields, the former dating back to classical multiple comparison procedures of @Fisher32, @Scheffe53, Tukey, and others [see @Seber03] for testing hypotheses about parameter vectors in linear models. Work on sequential hypothesis testing dates back to Wald’s [-@Wald47] invention of sequential analysis following World War II; see @Siegmund85 for a summary of the major developments. However, the intersection of these two areas is less well-developed in a general setting. One area that has been considered is the adaptation of some classical fixed sample size tests about vector parameters, such as those mentioned above, to the sequential sampling setting, including O’Brien and Fleming’s [-@OBrien79] sequential version of Pearson’s $\chi^2$ test, and Tang et al.’s [-@Tang89; -@Tang93] group sequential extensions of O’Brien’s [-@OBrien84] generalized least squares statistic. For bivariate normal populations, @Jennison93 proposed a sequential test of two one-sided hypotheses about the bivariate mean vector, and @Cook94b proposed a sequential test in a similar setting but where one of the hypotheses is two-sided. A procedure for comparing three treatments was proposed by @Siegmund93, related to Paulson’s [-@Paulson64] earlier procedure for selecting the largest mean of $k$ normal distributions, which @Bartroff10e showed to be a special case of their more general sequential step-down method; this procedure is presented in Section \[sec:BL\] where we give a simplified proof of its FWER control using our rejection principle. Recently @Ye13 proposed a group sequential Holm procedure that is also a special case of the procedure of @Bartroff10e, which allows arbitrary sampling schemes in addition to group sequential. The first sequential procedures to simultaneously control both the type I and II FWERs were introduced by @De12 [@De12b]. @Bartroff14b propose a different approach to sequential control of both type I and II FWERs, and their procedure will also be discussed in Section \[sec:I&II\] and shown to satisfy this rejection principle.
A rejection principle for sequential tests {#sec:theorem}
==========================================
We present a general framework for testing multiple hypotheses with sequential data, i.e., with data streams. Assume that there are $k\ge 2$ data streams $$\label{streams}
X_1^{(j)},X_2^{(j)},\ldots,{\quad\mbox{for}\quad}j=1,\ldots,k.$$ In general we make no assumptions about the dimension of the sequentially-observed data $X_n^{(j)}$, which may themselves be vectors of varying size, nor about the dependence structure of within-stream data $X_n^{(j)}, X_{n'}^{(j)}$ or between-stream data $X_n^{(j)}, X_{n'}^{(j')}$ ($j\ne j'$). Assume that for each data stream $j=1,\ldots,k$, there is a parameter vector $\theta^{(j)}\in\Theta^{(j)}$ governing that stream $X_1^{(j)}, X_2^{(j)},\ldots$, and it is desired to test a hypothesis $H^{(j)}\subseteq \Theta^{(j)}$ about $\theta^{(j)}$, with $H^{(j)}$ considered true if $\theta^{(j)}\in H^{(j)}$, and false otherwise. The global parameter $\theta=(\theta^{(1)},\ldots,\theta^{(k)})$ is the concatenation of the individual parameters and is contained in the global parameter space $\Theta=\Theta^{(1)}\times\cdots\times \Theta^{(k)}$. Each $\theta\in\Theta$ indexes a probability measure $P_{\theta}$. With ${\mathcal{H}}=\{H^{(1)},\ldots,H^{(k)}\}$ denoting the set of hypotheses to be tested, given $\theta=(\theta^{(1)},\ldots,\theta^{(k)})\in\Theta$ we let $$\mathcal{T}(\theta) = \{ H^{(j)} \in {\mathcal{H}}: \theta^{(j)} \in H^{(j)}\}$$ denote the collection of true hypotheses when $P_{\theta}$ is the underlying probability measure, and $$\label{F}
{\mathcal{F}}(\theta) = \{ H^{(j)} \in {\mathcal{H}}: \theta^{(j)} \notin H^{(j)}\}={\mathcal{H}}\setminus \mathcal{T}(\theta)$$ the false hypotheses. The familywise error rate is the probability of rejecting any true hypothesis, $$\label{FWEI}
\mbox{FWER}=\mbox{FWER}(\theta)=P_\theta(\mbox{any $H^{(j)}\in\mathcal{T}(\theta)$ rejected}).$$ In what follows, we will frequently drop the argument $\theta$ from these expressions for brevity.
At any point during sampling we shall refer to the *active* hypotheses as those that have not yet been accepted or rejected, and *active* data streams as those corresponding to active hypotheses. A *sequential multiple testing procedure* for the data streams is simply a sampling and decision procedure that maps the current data from all the data streams and the list of active hypotheses to one of the following:
(a) A list of one or more active hypotheses to reject;
(b) A list of one or more active hypotheses to accept;
(c) \[add.samp\] An additional sample size to draw from each active data stream before reevaluation.
We note that the additional sample size in (\[add.samp\]) can be 1, as in full sequential sampling. As a simplistic example, suppose there are $k=2$ data streams and it is desired to test the respective hypotheses $H^{(1)}$ and $H^{(2)}$. A multiple testing procedure may first decide to sample 10 observations from the streams, yielding $$\begin{aligned}
&X_1^{(1)},X_2^{(1)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(1)}\\
&X_1^{(2)},X_2^{(2)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(2)}.\end{aligned}$$ Based on this data the procedure may decide to reject $H^{(2)}$ and then sample a single additional observation from stream 1 (the lone remaining active stream), yielding $$\begin{aligned}
&X_1^{(1)},X_2^{(1)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(1)},X_{11}^{(1)}\\
&X_1^{(2)},X_2^{(2)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(2)}.\end{aligned}$$ At this point the procedure may decide not to accept or reject $H^{(1)}$ but rather sample an additional 7 observations from stream 1, yielding $$\begin{aligned}
&X_1^{(1)},X_2^{(1)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(1)}, \ldots,X_{18}^{(1)}\\
&X_1^{(2)},X_2^{(2)}\ldots,X_{10}^{(2)},\end{aligned}$$ at which time the procedure may decide to accept $H^{(1)}$. Examples of sequential multiple testing procedures will be given in Section \[sec:apps\], below.
Our main result, given in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\], extends a result of @Goeman10 for fixed sample size multiple testing procedures to the sequential setting (i.e., for testing on data streams) in which sequential sampling may occur between acceptances/rejections of hypotheses. Given any sequential multiple testing procedure meeting the above general definition, its rejection behavior (and hence its FWER, as we will see) can be described by its *rejection function* which we denote by $\rho$, which is a possibly random function mapping the set ${\mathcal{R}}\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}$ of already rejected hypotheses, the set ${\mathcal{A}}\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}$ (disjoint from ${\mathcal{R}}$) of already accepted hypotheses, the current sample size $n\in{\mathcal{N}}$, and the set ${\mathcal{D}}_n$ of all data available at time $n$ to a set $\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n,{\mathcal{D}}_n)\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}\setminus({\mathcal{R}}\cup{\mathcal{A}})$ of hypotheses to reject. Here ${\mathcal{N}}$ is the set of all possible streamwise sample sizes of the procedure. Since the last argument ${\mathcal{D}}_n$ of $\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n,{\mathcal{D}}_n)$ will always be the available data at time $n$, in what follows we denote $\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n,{\mathcal{D}}_n)$ simply by $\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)$. Letting $\varnothing$ denote the empty set, the value $\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)= \varnothing$ indicates that either additional sampling will be performed or that the testing procedure is terminated, which occurs if $n=\max{\mathcal{N}}$ or ${\mathcal{R}}\cup{\mathcal{A}}={\mathcal{H}}$. By convention define $\rho({\mathcal{R}}, {\mathcal{A}},\infty) = \varnothing$. Therefore, iterations of $\rho$ describe the procedure’s successive rejections of hypotheses, and we will keep track of all the hypotheses that have been rejected after each iteration of $\rho$ in sets ${\mathcal{R}}_i\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}$, and the hypotheses that have been accepted after each iteration in ${\mathcal{A}}_i\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}$. To this end, define ${\mathcal{R}}_0 = \varnothing$, $n_0=0$, and $$\begin{gathered}
\label{rej.func} {\mathcal{R}}_{i+1} = {\mathcal{R}}_{i} \cup \rho({\mathcal{R}}_{i},
{\mathcal{A}}_{i},n_{i+1}){\quad\mbox{for $i=0,1,2,\dots$, where}\quad}\\ n_{i+1} =
\inf\left\{n \in {\mathcal{N}}, n \geq n_{i} : \rho({\mathcal{R}}_{i}, {\mathcal{A}}_{i},n) \neq
\varnothing\right\}, \end{gathered}$$ letting $\inf\varnothing=\infty$ as usual. In what follows we do not need to define the sets ${\mathcal{A}}_i$ of accepted hypotheses explicitly as we did for the ${\mathcal{R}}_i$ in , we only assume that the ${\mathcal{A}}_i$ are defined in some way such that $\varnothing={\mathcal{A}}_0\subseteq{\mathcal{A}}_1\subseteq\ldots$ and ${\mathcal{A}}_i\cap
{\mathcal{R}}_i=\varnothing$ for all $i$. There are at most $k$ nontrivial iterations of $\rho$ in the sense that $\rho\ne \varnothing$, by virtue of the fact that there are $k$ hypotheses and hence at most $k$ hypotheses that could be rejected. Consequently, ${\mathcal{R}}_k={\mathcal{R}}_{k+1}=\ldots$ and this common set is the totality of all hypotheses rejected by the procedure, and FWER$(\theta)$ can thus be written $P_\theta({\mathcal{R}}_k \not\subseteq
{\mathcal{F}}(\theta))$.
The following theorem gives a rejection principle for sequential tests and establishes its sufficiency for FWER control.
\[thm:rej.princ\] Let $\theta \in \Theta$ denote the true value of the global parameter, $\alpha\in(0,1)$, and ${\mathcal{H}}$ and ${\mathcal{R}}_k$ as defined above. If $\rho$ and ${\mathcal{N}}$ are the rejection function and sample size set, respectively, of a sequential multiple testing procedure such that
1. for any subsets ${\mathcal{R}}, {\mathcal{R}}', {\mathcal{A}}$ of ${\mathcal{H}}$ with ${\mathcal{R}}\subseteq {\mathcal{R}}'$ and ${\mathcal{A}}\cap {\mathcal{R}}=\varnothing$, and any $n \in {\mathcal{N}}$, we have $$\label{monotonicity}
\rho({\mathcal{R}}, {\mathcal{A}}, n) \subseteq \rho({\mathcal{R}}', \varnothing, n) \cup {\mathcal{R}}'$$ with $P_\theta$-probability 1, and
2. $$\label{singlestep}
P_\theta(\rho({\mathcal{F}}(\theta),\varnothing, n) \subseteq {\mathcal{F}}(\theta) \text{ for all } n \in {\mathcal{N}}) \geq 1-\alpha,$$
then $$\label{princ.FWE}
P_\theta({\mathcal{R}}_k \not\subseteq {\mathcal{F}}(\theta)) \le\alpha,$$i.e., FWER$(\theta)$ is no greater than $\alpha$.
Let ${\mathcal{F}}={\mathcal{F}}(\theta)$, $V=\{\rho({\mathcal{F}},\varnothing,n) \subseteq {\mathcal{F}}\text{ for all } n \in {\mathcal{N}}\}$, and $W_i=\{{\mathcal{R}}_i\subseteq{\mathcal{F}}\}$, $i=0,1,\ldots$. We will prove by induction that, as events, $V\subseteq W_i$ for all $i\ge 0$; the result then follows from the $i=k$ case and . The $i=0$ case is trivial since ${\mathcal{R}}_0=\varnothing \subseteq {\mathcal{F}}$. Suppose that $V\subseteq W_i$. Then on $V$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{R}}_{i+1} &= {\mathcal{R}}_i\cup \rho({\mathcal{R}}_i, {\mathcal{A}}_i,n_{i+1}){\quad\mbox{[by \eqref{rej.func}]}}\\
&\subseteq {\mathcal{R}}_i\cup \left(\rho({\mathcal{F}}, \varnothing,n_{i+1}) \cup {\mathcal{F}}\right){\quad\mbox{[by \eqref{monotonicity} and the inductive hypothesis]}}\\
&=\rho({\mathcal{F}}, \varnothing,n_{i+1}) \cup {\mathcal{F}}{\quad\mbox{[by the inductive hypothesis]}}\\
&= {\mathcal{F}}.\end{aligned}$$
The rejection principle for fixed sample size procedures presented in @Goeman10 can be regarded as a special case of Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\], since all fixed sample size procedures are sequential procedures with the fixed sample size being the only element of ${\mathcal{N}}$.
Applications of this rejection principle {#sec:apps}
========================================
In this section we apply the rejection principle in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\] in a number of settings, some with special structure and some without.
Testing hypotheses without assumed special structure {#sec:no.struc}
----------------------------------------------------
### A sequential step-down procedure {#sec:BL}
@Bartroff10e proposed a sequential multiple testing procedure, extending Holm’s [-@Holm79] fixed sample size step-down procedure, that controls FWER regardless of between-stream dependence, requiring only that each hypothesis have a sequential test statistic which marginally controls the conventional type I error probability. After briefly introducing Bartroff and Lai’s procedure, we show that its error control is a special case of Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\].
Here we present the Bartroff-Lai procedure in slightly more generality than in their original paper. In particular, here we remove the need for (a) common critical values among the $k$ sequential test statistics by using standardizing functions, below, introduced by @Bartroff14b, and (b) critical values for all possible significance levels; here we only need critical values corresponding to certain fractions of the desired FWER bound $\alpha$. Given a set ${\mathcal{N}}$ of possible per-stream sample sizes, assume that, for each $j=1,\ldots,k$, associated with the $j$th hypothesis $H^{(j)}$ and data stream $X_1^{(j)}, X_2^{(j)},\ldots$ is a scalar-valued sequential test statistic $T_n^{(j)}=T_n^{(j)}(X_1^{(j)}, \ldots,X_n^{(j)})$ with $k$ critical values $B_1^{(j)}\ge\ldots\ge B_k^{(j)}$ such that $$\label{criticalvalue}
P_{\theta^{(j)}}\left( T_n^{(j)}\ge B_s^{(j)}{\quad\mbox{for some $n \in {\mathcal{N}}$}}\right)\le\frac{\alpha}{k-s+1}{\quad\mbox{for all}\quad} \theta^{(j)} \in H^{(j)},$$ for all $s=1,\ldots,k$. The inequality just says that the sequential test that stops and rejects $H^{(j)}$ at the first $n\in {\mathcal{N}}$ such that $T_n^{(j)}\ge B_s^{(j)}$, and accepts $H^{(j)}$ otherwise, has type I error probability $\alpha/(k-s+1)$. For $j=1,\ldots,k$ define the *standardizing function* $$\label{std.func}
{\varphi}^{(j)}(x)=\begin{cases}
x-B_k^{(j)}+1,&\mbox{for}\;x\le B_k^{(j)}\\
\frac{x-B_s^{(j)}}{B_{s-1}^{(j)}-B_s^{(j)}}+k-s+1,&\mbox{for}\;B_s^{(j)}\le x\le B_{s-1}^{(j)}\;\mbox{if}\;B_{s-1}^{(j)}>B_s^{(j)},\quad 1<s\le k\\
x-B_1^{(j)}+k,&\mbox{for}\;x\ge B_1^{(j)},
\end{cases}$$ which is an increasing, piecewise-linear function such that ${\varphi}^{(j)}(B_s^{(j)})=k-s+1$ for $s=1,\ldots,k$, and thus $$\label{Tiffphi}
T_n^{(j)}\ge B_s^{(j)}\quad\Leftrightarrow\quad {\varphi}^{(j)}(T_n^{(j)})\ge k-s+1.$$ The standardizing functions will be applied to the test statistics before ranking them and they allow us to compare the test statistics $T_n^{(1)},\ldots,T_n^{(k)}$, which may be on different scales. In general, the standardizing function can be any increasing function such that ${\varphi}^{(j)}(B_s^{(j)})$ does not depend on $j$. To use a different standardizing function, all that would need to be adjusted in what follows is the right hand side of the inequality in , below.
Letting ${\mathcal{I}}_1=\{1, 2, \dots, k\}$, $r_1=0$, and $n_0=0$, the $i$th stage ($i=1, \dots, k$) of the Bartroff-Lai procedure proceeds as follows.
1. \[BL.step1\] Sample each active data stream $\{X_n^{(j)}\}_{j\in {\mathcal{I}}_i}$ up to sample size $$n_i=\inf\left\{n \in {\mathcal{N}}: n > n_{i-1}{\quad\mbox{and}\quad} T_n^{(j)} \ge B_{r_i+1}^{(j)} {\quad\mbox{for some}\quad} j\in {\mathcal{I}}_i\right\}.$$
2. With ${\varphi}^{(j)}$ given by , standardize and order the active test statistics ${\widetilde{T}}^{(j)}_{n_i}={\varphi}^{(j)}(T^{(j)}_{n_i})$, $j\in{\mathcal{I}}_i$, as follows: $${\widetilde{T}}_{n_i}^{(j(i,1))}\ge {\widetilde{T}}_{n_i}^{(j(i,2))}\ge\ldots\ge {\widetilde{T}}_{n_i}^{(j(i,|{\mathcal{I}}_i|))}.$$
3. Reject $H^{(j(i,1))}, H^{(j(i,2))},\ldots, H^{(j(i,m_i))}$, where $$\label{BL.mi}
m_i = \min\left\{m\geq 1: {\widetilde{T}}_{n_i}^{(j(i,m+1))}< k-r_i-m \right\}.$$
4. \[BL.step4\] If $i=k$ or $n_i =\max {\mathcal{N}}$, stop and accept all remaining active hypotheses. Otherwise, let ${\mathcal{I}}_{i+1}$ be the indices of the remaining hypotheses, set $r_{i+1}=r_i+m_i$, and continue on to stage $i+1$.
An important caveat is that, at any point, any of the active hypotheses may be accepted without violating the FWER control proved below, as long as the set ${\mathcal{I}}_i$ of active hypotheses is appropriately updated. To maintain generality, here we do not specify an acceptance rule for the Bartroff-Lai procedure. Sequential multiple testing procedures with explicit acceptance, as well as rejection, rules are considered in Section \[sec:I&II\], which control both the type I and II FWERs, the latter defined there.
Because the Bartroff-Lai procedure presented here is slightly more general than the one proved to control FWER in @Bartroff10e [Theorem 2.1], we record this procedure’s FWER control in Corollary \[thm:BL\] which we prove by applying the rejection principle in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\].
\[thm:BL\] If holds then the procedure defined above in steps \[BL.step1\]-\[BL.step4\] satisfies FWER$(\theta)\le\alpha$ for all $\theta\in\Theta$.
It is not hard to see that the rejection function of the above procedure is given by $$\label{rho.BL}
\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)=\left\{H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{H}}\setminus({\mathcal{R}}\cup{\mathcal{A}}):\quad {\widetilde{T}}_n^{(j)}\ge k-|{\mathcal{R}}| \right\},$$ about which we verify and . For , given ${\mathcal{R}}, {\mathcal{R}}', {\mathcal{A}}$ as described there and $n\in{\mathcal{N}}$, if $H^{(j)}\in\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)\setminus{\mathcal{R}}'$ then ${\widetilde{T}}_n^{(j)}\ge k-|{\mathcal{R}}|\ge k-|{\mathcal{R}}'|$ since ${\mathcal{R}}\subseteq{\mathcal{R}}'$, hence $H^{(j)}\in\rho({\mathcal{R}}',\varnothing,n)$ so $\rho$ satisfies . For , without loss of generality assume that ${\mathcal{T}}\ne\varnothing$ since the following probability is zero otherwise. Let $V_j=\{{\widetilde{T}}_n^{(j)}\ge k-|{\mathcal{F}}|\;\mbox{for some $n\in{\mathcal{N}}$} \}$. Using the Bonferroni inequality, , and , $$\begin{gathered}
P_\theta(\rho({\mathcal{F}},\varnothing,n)\not\subseteq{\mathcal{F}}{\quad\mbox{for some $n\in{\mathcal{N}}$}})
=P_\theta\left(\bigcup_{j:\,H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{T}}}V_j\right) \le \sum_{j:\,H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{T}}}P_{\theta^{(j)}}\left(V_j\right)\\
= \sum_{j:\,H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{T}}}P_{\theta^{(j)}}\left(T_n^{(j)}\ge B_{|{\mathcal{F}}|+1}^{(j)}\;\mbox{for some $n\in{\mathcal{N}}$}\right) \le \sum_{j:\,H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{T}}}\frac{\alpha}{k-|{\mathcal{F}}|} =|{\mathcal{T}}|\cdot\frac{\alpha}{|{\mathcal{T}}|}
=\alpha.\end{gathered}$$
### Tests that simultaneously control type I and II FWERs {#sec:I&II}
Extending the procedure in the previous section, @Bartroff14b proposed a sequential test that simultaneously controls both the type I and II FWERs, the latter defined below in analogously to the type I version . The error control of this procedure can also be seen as a special case of the rejection principle. Adding to the setup in Section \[sec:theorem\], suppose one also has alternative hypotheses $G^{(1)},\ldots,G^{(k)}$ such that $G^{(j)}\subseteq\Theta^{(j)}$ and $G^{(j)}\cap H^{(j)}=\varnothing$ for all $j=1,\ldots,k$. With this we redefine the false hypotheses from to be $${\mathcal{F}}(\theta) = \{ H^{(j)} \in {\mathcal{H}}: \theta^{(j)} \in G^{(j)}\}$$ and define the type II FWER as $$\label{FWEII}
\mbox{FWER}_{II}(\theta)=P_\theta(\mbox{any $H^{(j)}\in\mathcal{F}(\theta)$ accepted}).$$
Given desired FWER bounds $\alpha$ and $\beta$, the procedure requires only that each data stream $X_1^{(j)}, X_2^{(j)},\ldots$ has a scalar-valued sequential test statistic $T_n^{(j)}=T_n^{(j)}(X_1^{(j)}, \ldots,X_n^{(j)})$ with critical values $A_1^{(j)},\ldots, A_k^{(j)}, B_1^{(j)}, \ldots, B_k^{(j)}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
P_{\theta^{(j)}}(T_n^{(j)}\ge B_s^{(j)}\;\mbox{some $n$,}\; T_{n'}^{(j)}>A_1^{(j)}\;\mbox{all $n'<n$})&\le \frac{\alpha}{k-s+1}{\quad\mbox{for all}\quad}\theta^{(j)}\in H^{(j)}\label{typeI}\\
P_{\theta^{(j)}}(T_n^{(j)}\le A_s^{(j)}\;\mbox{some $n$,}\; T_{n'}^{(j)}<B_1^{(j)}\;\mbox{all $n'<n$})&\le \frac{\beta}{k-s+1}{\quad\mbox{for all}\quad}\theta^{(j)}\in G^{(j)}\label{typeII}\end{aligned}$$ for all $j, s=1,\ldots,k$. These inequalities simply guarantee that each sequential test marginally controls the conventional type I and II error probabilities at desired fractions of $\alpha, \beta$.
For brevity we do not restate Bartroff and Song’s [-@Bartroff14b] procedure here, but rather just say that it has a similar flavor to the one in Section \[sec:BL\] but is more complex in that it interweaves rejections and acceptances of the $H^{(j)}$ at each stage. It also utilizes a standardizing function, mapping $B_s^{(j)}$ to $k-s+1$ as above in , and mapping $A_s^{(j)}$ to $-(k-s+1)$. The procedure controls the type I and II FWERs, regardless of dependence between the data streams, as long as - hold. This can be easily proved using the rejection principle, whose application here is interesting because it is used to prove control of type II FWER as well as type I. The proof proceeds by defining the procedure’s *acceptance function* ${\widetilde{\rho}}({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)$, analogous to the rejection function $\rho$ in Section \[sec:theorem\], and these two are alternated to give the procedure’s accept/reject decisions. Then Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\] is applied to both $\rho$ and ${\widetilde{\rho}}$ separately to prove type I and II FWER control, respectively. For this procedure, $\rho$ takes the same form and the acceptance function is similar, $${\widetilde{\rho}}({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)=\left\{H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{H}}\setminus({\mathcal{R}}\cup{\mathcal{A}}):\quad
{\widetilde{T}}_n^{(j)}\le -(k-|{\mathcal{A}}|) \right\}.$$
Testing hypotheses with special structure {#sec:struct}
-----------------------------------------
Whereas the previous sections assumed no special structure of the hypotheses being tested, in some settings logical relationships or priorities exist among the hypotheses which can be exploited by testing the hypotheses in a certain order and allow less stringent (i.e., more powerful) tests to be used. In this section we consider sequentially testing hypotheses in order [@Rosenbaum08], and later the special case of sequentially testing closed hypotheses [@Marcus76].
### Testing hypotheses in order {#sec:IO}
In many multiple testing situations it is natural to only test a certain hypothesis if certain other hypotheses have already been rejected; two real examples are given in Section \[sec:ex\]. @Rosenbaum08 considered various ordering schemes and gave fixed sample size tests which control the FWER. The most general ordering scheme @Rosenbaum08 considers is the following, although his results apply to hypotheses and partitions with more general (e.g., infinite) index sets, whereas here we simply consider hypotheses indexed by $\{1,\ldots,k\}$ for coherence with the previous sections. Let ${\mathcal{H}}_1,\ldots,{\mathcal{H}}_s$ be a partition of ${\mathcal{H}}$ such that it is desired to only test the hypotheses in ${\mathcal{H}}_i$ if all the hypotheses in $\bigcup_{i'<i}{\mathcal{H}}_{i'}$ have already been rejected. Recall that ${\mathcal{H}}_1,\ldots,{\mathcal{H}}_s$ being a partition of ${\mathcal{H}}$ means that the ${\mathcal{H}}_i$ are disjoint and their union is ${\mathcal{H}}$. For $j=1,\ldots,k$, let $i_j$ denote the unique index $i$ of the ${\mathcal{H}}_i$ containing $H^{(j)}$, i.e., $H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{H}}_{i_j}$. @Rosenbaum08 calls a subset ${\mathcal{H}}'\subseteq{\mathcal{H}}$ *exclusive* if at most one hypothesis $H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{H}}'$ is true, and ${\mathcal{H}}_1, \cdots,
{\mathcal{H}}_s$ is *sequentially exclusive* if all the hypotheses in $\bigcup_{i'<i}{\mathcal{H}}_{i'}$ being false implies that ${\mathcal{H}}_i$ is exclusive, for all $i=1,\ldots,s$. In the fixed sample size setting with valid $p$-values $p^{(1)},\ldots,p^{(k)}$ for testing $H^{(1)},\ldots,H^{(k)}$, respectively, @Rosenbaum08 [Proposition 3] shows that if ${\mathcal{H}}_1, \cdots, {\mathcal{H}}_s$ are sequentially exclusive, then the following test controls the FWER at level $\alpha$: Reject $H^{(j)}$ if and only if $p^{(j)}\le\alpha$ and all hypotheses in $\bigcup_{i<i_j}{\mathcal{H}}_{i}$ have already been rejected.
Here we present a sequential multiple testing procedure for testing hypotheses in order, and use the rejection principle in Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\] to prove its FWER control. We adopt the notation for data streams, parameters, and hypotheses given in Section \[sec:theorem\], and we assume that there is a sequentially exclusive partition ${\mathcal{H}}_1, \cdots, {\mathcal{H}}_s$ of ${\mathcal{H}}$ representing the desired order of testing. Given a desired FWER bound $\alpha$ and a set ${\mathcal{N}}$ of possible streamwise sample sizes, we also assume that, for each $j=1,\ldots,k$, associated with the data stream $X_1^{(j)}, X_2^{(j)},\ldots$ and hypothesis $H^{(j)}$ is a scalar-valued sequential test statistic $T_n^{(j)}=T_n^{(j)}(X_1^{(j)}, \ldots,X_n^{(j)})$ with a critical value $B^{(j)}$ satisfying $$\label{typeI.IO}
P_{\theta^{(j)}}\left( T_n^{(j)}\ge B^{(j)}{\quad\mbox{for some $n \in {\mathcal{N}}$}}\right)\le \alpha{\quad\mbox{for all}\quad}\theta^{(j)} \in H^{(j)}.$$ Note that here we only need a single critical value $B^{(j)}$ for each test statistic rather than the $k$ critical values needed in the more general, unstructured setup of Section \[sec:BL\], which our exploitation of the sequential exclusivity property here will allow us to sidestep.
Let ${\mathcal{I}}_1=\{1,\ldots,k\}$, $\ell_1=1$ and $n_0=0$. The $i$th stage ($i=1,\ldots,k$) of the sequential procedure for testing hypotheses in order proceeds as follows.
1. \[IO.step1\] Sample each active data stream $\{X_n^{(j)}\}_{j\in {\mathcal{I}}_i}$ up to sample size $$n_i=\inf\left\{n \in {\mathcal{N}}: n > n_{i-1} {\quad\mbox{and}\quad}T_n^{(j)} \ge B^{(j)} {\quad\mbox{for some}\quad} j: H^{(j)}\in {\mathcal{H}}_{\ell_i}\right\}.$$
2. Reject $H^{(j)} \in {\mathcal{H}}_{\ell_i}$ if all hypotheses in $\bigcup_{\ell'<\ell_i}{\mathcal{H}}_{\ell'}$ have been rejected and $T_{n_i}^{(j)}\ge B^{(j)}$.
3. \[IO.step3\] If $i=k$ or $n_i =\max {\mathcal{N}}$, stop and accept all remaining hypotheses. Otherwise, set $$\begin{aligned}
\ell_{i+1}&=\begin{cases}
\ell_i+1, & \mbox{if all hypotheses in ${\mathcal{H}}_{\ell_i}$ have been rejected,}\\
\ell_i, &\mbox{otherwise},
\end{cases}\\
{\mathcal{I}}_{i+1}&=\left\{j: H^{(j)}\in \bigcup_{\ell'\ge \ell_{i+1}}{\mathcal{H}}_{\ell'}{\quad\mbox{and $H^{(j)}$ has not been rejected}}\right\},\end{aligned}$$ and continue on to stage $i+1$.
The FWER control of this procedure is easily established using the rejection principle of Theorem \[thm:rej.princ\].
\[order\] If ${\mathcal{H}}_1,\ldots,{\mathcal{H}}_s$ is a sequentially exclusive partition of ${\mathcal{H}}$ and holds, then the procedure defined above in steps \[IO.step1\]-\[IO.step3\] satisfies FWER$(\theta)\le\alpha$ for all $\theta\in\Theta$.
The rejection function is given by $$\label{rej.func.IO}
\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)=\{H^{(j)}\in{\mathcal{H}}\setminus({\mathcal{R}}\cup{\mathcal{A}}): T_n^{(j)} \ge B^{(j)}{\quad\mbox{and}\quad}{\mathcal{H}}_\ell\subseteq{\mathcal{R}}{\quad\mbox{for all}\quad} \ell<i_j\},$$ about which we verify and . For , with ${\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{R}}',{\mathcal{A}}$ as described there and $n\in {\mathcal{N}}$, if $H^{(j)}\in\rho({\mathcal{R}},{\mathcal{A}},n)\setminus{\mathcal{R}}'$ then all conditions for $H^{(j)}$ to be in $\rho({\mathcal{R}}',\varnothing,n)$ are satisfied, the latter since ${\mathcal{H}}_\ell\subseteq{\mathcal{R}}\subseteq {\mathcal{R}}'$ for all $\ell<i_j$. For , without loss of generality assume ${\mathcal{T}}\ne\varnothing$ and let $\ell^*$ be the smallest index of a subset ${\mathcal{H}}_{\ell^*}$ containing a true hypothesis, i.e., $\ell^*=\min\{\ell: {\mathcal{H}}_\ell\cap{\mathcal{T}}\ne\varnothing\}$, and let $H^{(j^*)}$ be an arbitrarily chosen but fixed hypothesis in ${\mathcal{H}}_{\ell^*}\cap{\mathcal{T}}$. On $V:=\{\rho({\mathcal{F}},\varnothing,n)\not\subseteq{\mathcal{F}}\;\mbox{for some}\;n\in {\mathcal{N}}\}$, there is some true $H^{(j)}\in\rho({\mathcal{F}},\varnothing,n)$ with $T_n^{(j)}\ge B^{(j)}$ and ${\mathcal{H}}_\ell\subseteq{\mathcal{F}}$ for all $\ell<i_j$. It follows from the latter that $i_j=\ell^*$ and by this and sequential exclusivity, $j=j^*$. Using these facts and we have $$P_\theta(V)\le P_{\theta^{(j^*)}}\left(T_n^{(j^*)}\ge B^{(j^*)}\;\mbox{for some $n\in {\mathcal{N}}$}\right)\le\alpha,$$ showing that $\rho$ satisfies .
### Closed Testing {#sec:closed}
A frequently encountered special case of testing hypotheses in order is closed testing. The set of hypotheses ${\mathcal{H}}=\{H^{(1)},\ldots,H^{(k)}\}$ is *closed* if it is closed under intersection. @Marcus76 introduced a fixed sample size method of testing a closed set ${\mathcal{H}}$ that controls the FWER and only requires a level-$\alpha$ test of each intersection hypothesis $\bigcap_{j\in J} H^{(j)}$, $J\subseteq
\{1,\ldots,k\}$. Beginning with the *global hypothesis* $\bigcap_{j=1}^k H^{(j)}$, their procedure tests the elements of ${\mathcal{H}}$ in order of decreasing *dimension* (the maximum number of $H^{(j)}$ being intersected), and $H\in{\mathcal{H}}$ is tested if and only if all elements of ${\mathcal{H}}$ contained in $H$ have been rejected. Fixed sample size closed testing is a special case of Rosenbaum’s [-@Rosenbaum08] testing in order formulation.
In the sequential realm, @Tang99 gave a group sequential procedure for closed testing of hypotheses about multivariate normal data. A more general sequential procedure for closed testing can be derived using the rejection principle via the sequential procedure in Section \[sec:IO\] and Corollary \[order\]. The relevant partition of ${\mathcal{H}}$ is the following, defined inductively for $i=1,\ldots,k$: $$\label{IO.part}
{\mathcal{H}}_i=\left\{H=\bigcap_{j\in J} H^{(j)}: |J|=k-i+1,\quad H\not\in {\mathcal{H}}_{i'}{\quad\mbox{any $i'<i$}}\right\}.$$ The subset ${\mathcal{H}}_i$ contains all hypotheses of dimension $k-i+1$, as is guaranteed by the last condition in . For example, ${\mathcal{H}}_1$ contains only the global hypothesis, ${\mathcal{H}}_2$ contains all intersections of dimension $k-1$, and so on. Applying the sequential procedure in Section \[sec:IO\] to this partition results in a sequential procedure that tests the hypotheses in order of decreasing dimension, using a level-$\alpha$ test for each, with sampling of the active data streams occurring between rejection decisions. After establishing that the partition is sequentially exclusive, it follows immediately from Corollary \[order\] that this procedure controls the FWER.
\[cor:closed\] If holds and ${\mathcal{H}}$ is closed, then the partition is sequentially exclusive, hence the procedure defined in steps \[IO.step1\]-\[IO.step3\] of Section \[sec:IO\] applied to satisfies FWER$(\theta)\le\alpha$ for all $\theta\in\Theta$.
To establish sequential exclusivity, suppose there are distinct hypotheses $H, H'\in{\mathcal{H}}_i$ that are both true, i.e., $\theta\in H$ and $\theta\in H'$. Then $\theta\in H\cap H'$ so $H\cap H'$ is true, and $H\cap H'\in{\mathcal{H}}_{i'}$ for some $i'<i$ by virtue of $H, H'$ being distinct.
A similar but distinct formulation of sequentially testing closed hypotheses is given in @Bartroff10e [Theorem 2.2], which does not explicitly force testing in order of decreasing dimension, but rather gives a sufficient condition on the test statistics under which the procedure in Section \[sec:BL\] would test in this order anyway.
Examples {#sec:ex}
========
In this section we give two examples of the sequential procedures in Section \[sec:struct\] applied to real testing situations. In Section \[sec:IOex\] we apply the sequential procedure for testing in order to an observational study involving chromosome aberration data, and in Section \[sec:closed.ex\] we apply the sequential closed testing procedure to estimate the maximum safe dose of a treatment. In both cases the performance of the sequential procedure is compared with the corresponding fixed sample size procedure and the efficiency gain, in terms of savings in average sample size, of the sequential procedure is highlighted.
Chromosome aberrations of patients exposed to anti-tuberculosis drugs {#sec:IOex}
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In non-randomized testing situations, such as observational studies, it is common for treatment responses to be compared with more than one “control” response, such as baseline and non-treatment, since this can provide information on differences due to nonrandom treatment assignment [e.g., see @Rosenbaum02 Section 8].
@Masjedi00 studied possible mutagenic effects of anti-tuberculosis drugs by comparing the frequency of chromosome aberrations including gaps per 100 cells in an observational study of $n=36$ patients before (denoted $b$) and after (denoted $a$) the treatment, and 36 healthy controls (denoted $c$), who matched the treatment group by sex and age and were selected from relatives of the treatment group when possible. The response triples $(y_{ci},y_{bi},y_{ai})$, $i=1,\ldots,n$, are given in Table \[table 1\], where larger numbers indicate more chromosome damage.
Control $y_{ci}$ Before treatment $y_{bi}$ After treatment $y_{ai}$
------------------ --------------------------- --------------------------
1.00 0.50 3.00
1.50 4.50 5.50
0.50 3.50 5.00
0.50 2,66 3.33
0.66 1.50 4.50
1.00 5.00 7.00
1.00 1.33 5.33
0.66 1.50 2.50
0.00 2.00 5.33
1.33 1.50 3.00
1.50 1.33 3.33
2.00 2.00 2.00
1.33 2.00 4.66
0.00 2.66 10.00
3.00 1.33 3.33
0.50 3.50 5.00
0.66 3.00 5.00
1.33 2.66 3.33
3.00 0.00 4.00
0.66 1.50 7.00
0.50 1.00 3.00
0.66 4.00 4.00
2.00 1.33 2.66
1.33 0.66 3.33
0.00 1.50 3.50
1.00 0.66 2.00
0.50 2.00 3.33
1.33 1.00 3.50
0.50 1.33 2.66
1.00 2.00 2.00
0.66 2.00 4.00
1.50 1.50 1.50
2.66 2.00 3.50
1.33 0.66 3.33
0.66 0.00 2.66
1.00 1.50 1.50
: @Masjedi00 data on total chromosome aberrations per 100 cells including gaps.
\[table 1\]
@Rosenbaum08 considers the model $$\begin{aligned}
y_{ai}&=\mu_a+\pi_i+\lambda_i+{\varepsilon}_i,\\
y_{bi}&=\mu_b+\pi_i+\lambda_i+\zeta_i,\\
y_{ci}&=\mu_c+\pi_i+\eta_i,\end{aligned}$$ $i=1, \dots, n$, where $\pi_i$, $\lambda_i$, ${\varepsilon}_i$, $\zeta_i$, and $\eta_i$ are independent with continuous distributions $F_\pi$, $F_\lambda$, $F_{\varepsilon}$, $F_\zeta$, and $F_\eta$, assumed to be symmetric about zero. Here $\mu$ represents the group effect, the random variables $\pi_i$ and $\lambda_i$ reflect the correlation due to matching and treatment vs. control, respectively, and ${\varepsilon}_i$, $\zeta_i$ and $\eta_i$ are error terms. The primary scientific question was to ascertain whether the post-treatment responses exceed the baseline and control responses by more than the baseline and control responses differ from each other, i.e., $$\mu_a-\max(\mu_b, \mu_c) > \max(\mu_b, \mu_c)-\min(\mu_b, \mu_c),$$ hence the null hypothesis of primary interest is the negation of this, $$H_0: \mu_a-\max(\mu_b, \mu_c) \leq \max(\mu_b, \mu_c)-\min(\mu_b, \mu_c).$$ However, even if $H_0$ cannot be rejected, it may be beneficial to be able to draw some weaker conclusions about the treatment. Namely, @Rosenbaum08 defines the five additional hypotheses: $$\begin{aligned}
&H_+: \mu_a \leq (\mu_b+\mu_c)/2,\\
&H_b: \mu_a \leq \mu_b,\\
&H_c: \mu_a \leq \mu_c,\\
&H_*: \mu_a-\mu_c \leq \mu_c-\mu_b,\\
&H_\sharp: \mu_a-\mu_b \leq \mu_b-\mu_c.\end{aligned}$$
The logical implications of these hypotheses suggest the sequentially exclusive partition ${\mathcal{H}}_1=\{H_+\}$, ${\mathcal{H}}_2=\{H_b, H_c\}$, ${\mathcal{H}}_3=\{H_*, H_\sharp\}$, and ${\mathcal{H}}_4=\{H_0\}$ of ${\mathcal{H}}=\{H_0, H_+, H_b, H_c, H_*, H_\sharp\}$, and Figure \[flowchart\] describes the procedure for testing these hypotheses in order, which applies to both the fixed sample size procedure of @Rosenbaum08 as well as the sequential procedure defined above in which sampling may occur between decisions and Corollary \[order\] shows that the FWER is controlled.
Because the @Masjedi00 data $(y_{ai}, y_{bi}, y_{ci})$ exhibits strong non-normality, @Rosenbaum08 applied the one-sided version of Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test to obtain the fixed sample size $p$-values, using $y_{ai}-(y_{bi}+y_{ci})/2$ to test $H_+$, $y_{ai}-y_{bi}$ to test $H_b$, and so on. Following this approach, we apply a sequential version of these tests in which the sequential test statistics $T_n^{(j)}$ ($j=1,\ldots,6$) are taken to be the repeatedly-calculated $p$-values for Wilcoxon’s test, with the common critical value $B=B^{(1)}=\ldots=B^{(6)}$ adjusted to control the marginal type I error probability at $\alpha=.05$, and was determined by Monte Carlo. These sequential tests were then applied to the Masjedi et al. data in Table \[table 1\], after setting aside the 5 tied observations for a total of 31 triples. To assess the performance of this sequential test, Monte Carlo simulations were performed in which the order of the triples were permuted 50,000 times and the sample size needed to reach an accept/reject decision on all hypotheses was recorded each time. In order to see the effect of different sequential sampling schemes, this was carried out for the five different choices of sample size sets ${\mathcal{N}}$ given in Table \[table 3\]: fully-sequential sampling in which ${\mathcal{N}}=\{1,\ldots,31\}$, and four group-sequential schemes with 5, 4, 3, and 2 groups, respectively, with evenly sized groups (until the final group, which is 1 larger). Table \[table 3\] also reports the common critical value $B$ and the average total sample size over the 50,000 simulated paths for each scheme. In all cases, the average sample size was dramatically reduced from 31. Even in the worst case of 2-stage sampling, with ${\mathcal{N}}=\{15,31\}$, more than 9 observations were saved on average, nearly one third of the largest possible sample size, $31$. Interestingly, the 5-group scheme with ${\mathcal{N}}=\{10,15,20,25,31\}$ has nearly the same average sample size as the fully-sequential scheme, which may be appealing in applications where fully sequential testing is not practical.
${\mathcal{N}}$ $B$ Average sample size
---------------------- ---------- ---------------------
$\{1, \dots, 31\}$ 0.0031 18.9
$\{10,15,20,25,31\}$ 0.0068 18.9
$\{10,20,25,31\}$ $0.0082$ 20.1
$\{10,20,31\}$ 0.0098 20.8
$\{15,31\}$ 0.0140 21.3
: The sample size set ${\mathcal{N}}$, critical value $B$, and average sample size of various Wilcoxon signed-rank tests for testing hypotheses about the chromosome aberration data.
\[table 3\]
Identifying the maximum safe dose in toxicological studies {#sec:closed.ex}
----------------------------------------------------------
@Tamhane01 describe a novel multiple testing approach to determining the maximum safe dose (MAXSD) of crop protection products such as pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides, which are tested for safety on non-target species, and for which the multiple testing error control guarantees a prescribed bound on recommending an unsafely high dose; their approach is equally applicable to clinical trials for safety with human subjects. In this section we apply the rejection principle developed above to derive a sequential version of this procedure.
Assume there are $k$ discrete nonzero dose levels which we label $1,\ldots,k$ in increasing order, and include the level $0$ to denote “no treatment.” Following @Tamhane01 [Section 3], we adopt an ANOVA setup in which there are $k+1$ groups of subjects, each treated at one of these dose levels. Let $y_{ij}$ ($i=1,\ldots,n_i$, $j=0,\ldots,k$) denote the response of the $i$th subject in the $j$th group, and let $\mu_j=E(y_{ij})$ ($j=0,\ldots,k$). Large values of $y_{ij}$ indicate safety of the treatment. For example, in the crop protection setting mentioned above, $y_{ij}$ may be the growth of a non-target organism when exposed to the potentially toxic treatment. Define the hypotheses $$H^{(j)}: \mu_j\le \lambda \mu_0\quad\text{ vs. }\quad G^{(j)}: \mu_j>\lambda \mu_0, \quad j=1, \dots, k,$$ in which $\lambda\in(0,1]$ is a fixed, agreed-upon response threshold for safety, and therefore the null hypothesis $H^{(j)}$ means that the $j$th dose is unsafe; the MAXSD is defined as the largest $j\in\{0,\ldots,k\}$ such that $H^{(j)}$ is false. @Tamhane01 propose a multiple testing approach to encode the natural ordering $\mu_0\ge \mu_1\ge\ldots\ge \mu_k$, as follows. Replacing $H^{(j)}$ by $${\widetilde{H}}^{(j)}=\bigcap_{j'=j}^k H^{(j')},$$ we see that ${\widetilde{H}}^{(1)},\ldots, {\widetilde{H}}^{(k)}$ form a closed family of hypotheses and the test for closed hypotheses in Section \[sec:closed\] and Corollary \[cor:closed\] can be used to test these hypotheses sequentially. Since this procedure tests the hypotheses in order of decreasing dimension, as discussed in Section \[sec:closed\], the hypotheses will be tested in the order ${\widetilde{H}}^{(k)}, {\widetilde{H}}^{(k-1)},\ldots, {\widetilde{H}}^{(1)}$. Here we focus on sequential control of only type I FWER but, alternatively, simultaneous control of type I and II FWERs could be considered using the test of @Bartroff14b discussed in Section \[sec:I&II\].
The following simulation study was performed to explore the operating characteristics of the sequential testing procedure. Setting $k=4$ and taking $y_{ij}$ to be i.i.d. $N(\mu_i,1)$ observations, the mean responses $\mu_i$ were chosen to be those in the second column of Table \[table 4\], making the true MAXSD 1, indicted by an asterisk in the table. This choice of mean responses, with $\mu_1=0$, represents the commonly encountered but confounding testing situation in which the smallest nonzero dose actually has mean response zero, but is also the correct dose; we further note that recommending dose level 0 as the MAXSD, although it has the same mean response as dose level 1, has much different and possibly dangerous implications for the utilization of the MAXSD in future scientific work. An $\alpha=.05$ version of both the sequential test in Section \[sec:closed\] and the fixed sample size version was implemented and Table \[table 4\] gives the estimated average sample size (denoted Avg. SS) of each group and the probability (denoted by $P(\mbox{MAXSD}=j)$) of choosing each dose level as the estimated MAXSD for both the sequential and fixed sample size procedures, based on $50,000$ Monte Carlo simulated data sets. For both of these tests, standard two-sample $t$ tests were used as the individual test statistics to test the $H^{(j)}$, with $\lambda$ taken to be 1, and the critical values were determined by Monte Carlo in the sequential case. The maximum sample size of the sequential procedure was 50, to mirror the sample size of the fixed sample size procedure. At the three dose levels $j=2, 3, 4$ exceeding the MAXSD, the sequential procedure only required on average 28.6, 8.9, and 2.6 observations, respectively, a dramatic reduction from the fixed sample size procedure which used 50 observations at each of these dose levels. While dosing subjects at levels above the MAXSD may not be a concern in some studies involving plants, etc., it would be of chief concern in clinical trials with human patients who are likely to experience toxicity, or even possibly death, at those levels. Both the sequential and fixed sample size procedures correctly identified the true MAXSD more than 80% of the time, with the sequential procedure less likely to identify the true MAXSD than the fixed sample size procedure. On the other hand, the fixed sample size procedure was more likely to underestimate the MAXSD (4.70%) compared to the sequential procedure (1.57%), which is also undesirable but for different reasons such as an ineffective crop protection plan being implemented or sick human patients receiving ineffective treatment. The last line of the table contains a weighted average estimated MAXSD for both tests.
------------ --------- --------- --------------------- --------- ---------------------
Level $=j$ $\mu_j$ Avg. SS $P(\mbox{MAXSD}=j)$ Avg. SS $P(\mbox{MAXSD}=j)$
0 0 50.0 1.57% 50 4.70%
1$^*$ 0 49.7 82.43% 50 89.68%
2 0.5 28.6 16.00% 50 5.62%
3 1.0 8.9 0% 50 0%
4 2.0 2.6 0% 50 0%
------------ --------- --------- --------------------- --------- ---------------------
: Performance of the sequential and fixed sample size procedures for identifying the MAXSD.[]{data-label="table 4"}
Discussion {#sec:disc}
==========
We have given sufficient conditions, in the form of -, for a sequential procedure to control the FWER, and have shown that they can be applied to testing situations where special structure is assumed, or not assumed. In addition to the rejection principle’s utility in deriving new sequential procedures, it also provides a unified view of sequential FWER control. Although it remains an open question whether this rejection principle is also a necessary condition for FWER control, in any case the principle may be useful for developing optimality theory of sequential multiple testing procedures, about which little is known, even in the case of independent data streams. It seems likely that finding the most sequentially efficient procedure satisfying - may be more attainable than finding the best sequential procedure controlling the FWER.
We have not gone into detail about applying the general sequential procedures discussed in Sections \[sec:BL\] and \[sec:I&II\], and we refer interested readers to the respective references [@Bartroff10e; @Bartroff14b] for details. We will say here that both of these procedures can handle testing, in a given data stream $j$, the commonly-encountered hypotheses of the form $$\label{t=t0}
H^{(j)}: \theta^{(j)}=\theta_0^{(j)}{\quad\mbox{vs.}\quad} G^{(j)}: \theta^{(j)}\ne\theta_0^{(j)},$$ where $\theta^{(j)}$ is a possibly vector-valued parameter, and $\theta_0^{(j)}$ is some fixed value of interest. For example, in a parametric setup, sequential generalized log-likelihood ratio statistics can be used and signed-root normal approximations [@Jennison97] or Monte Carlo can be used to compute critical values; see @Bartroff14b for details. Which of the procedures, in Sections \[sec:BL\] or \[sec:I&II\], to use in practice may depend on the application. The procedure in Section \[sec:BL\] does not explicitly specify an acceptance rule (although, as mentioned there, acceptances can be incorporated without violating the FWER control), and it therefore may be more appropriate in situations where “early stopping” is not as high a priority under the null $H^{(j)}$ as under $G^{(j)}$, such as when $H^{(j)}$ represents a drug being safe or a process being “in control.” On the other hand, if early stopping is desirable under both $H^{(j)}$ and $G^{(j)}$, then the procedure of @Bartroff14b discussed in Section \[sec:I&II\] that controls both the type I and II FWERs may be more appropriate. In order to control the type II FWER, this procedure naturally requires control of the marginal type II error rate in the form of , which may not be possible with $G^{(j)}$ as written in , because values of $\theta^{(j)}\in G^{(j)}$ arbitrarily close to $\theta_0^{(j)}$ can make bounds like impossible for any test. This can be remedied by constructing a surrogate alternative hypothesis ${\widetilde{G}}^{(j)}$ under which type II error control is possible, for example ${\widetilde{G}}^{(j)}: ||\theta^{(j)}-\theta_0^{(j)}||\ge \delta$ for some $\delta>0$ and norm $||\cdot||$. Here $\delta$ may represent the minimum significant separation of the parameter, or similar, and be well-motivated by the domain of application. On the other hand, the statistician could treat $\delta$ as a parameter to choose before testing in order to attain a sequential procedure with desirable operating characteristics, such as expected sample size. A similar analysis pertains to null hypotheses of the form $H^{(j)}: \theta^{(j)}\le \theta_0^{(j)}$ for scalar-valued parameter $\theta^{(j)}$ and, more generally, of the form $H^{(j)}: u(\theta^{(j)})\le u_0^{(j)}$ for vector-valued $\theta^{(j)}\in\mathbb{R}^d$ and given smooth function $u: \mathbb{R}^d{\rightarrow}\mathbb{R}$ and fixed scalar value $u_0$; see @Bartroff08c, @Bartroff08, and @Bartroff13 for examples of sequential generalized likelihood ratio tests for these situations.
In addition to the optimality theory mentioned above, another area of further work is to generalize the sequential sampling schemes. Above, we assumed that the set of possible streamwise sample sizes ${\mathcal{N}}$ is fixed in advance, but an alternative approach is to incorporate an efficient adaptive scheme, wherein the next sampling increment can be chosen as a function of the data, making the resulting procedures “adaptive” in yet another sense. Adaptive sequential sampling schemes for hypothesis testing have been considered by many authors including @Jennison06a and @Bartroff06b [@Bartroff06; @Bartroff07c]. Incorporating adaptive sampling schemes such as these into the multiple testing procedures is an exciting area of future research.
Acknowledgements {#sec:Ack .unnumbered}
================
Bartroff’s work was partially supported by grant DMS-1310127 from the National Science Foundation and grant R01 GM068968 from the National Institutes of Health.
Baillie, D. (1987). Multivariate acceptance sampling – some applications to defense procurement. , 36(5):465–478.
Bartroff, J. (2006a). Efficient three-stage [$t$]{}-tests. In [*Recent Developments in Nonparametric Inference and Probability: Festschrift for [M]{}ichael [W]{}oodroofe*]{}, volume 50 of [*IMS Lecture Notes Monograph Series*]{}, pages 105–111, Hayward. Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
Bartroff, J. (2006b). Optimal multistage sampling in a boundary-crossing problem. , 25:59–84.
Bartroff, J. (2007). Asymptotically optimal multistage tests of simple hypotheses. , 35:2075–2105.
Bartroff, J. and Lai, T. L. (2008a). Efficient adaptive designs with mid-course sample size adjustment in clinical trials. , 27:1593–1611.
Bartroff, J. and Lai, T. L. (2008b). Generalized likelihood ratio statistics and uncertainty adjustments in adaptive design of clinical trials. , 27:254–276.
Bartroff, J. and Lai, T. L. (2010). Multistage tests of multiple hypotheses. , 39:1597–1607.
Bartroff, J., Lai, T. L., and Shih, M. (2013). . Springer, New York.
Bartroff, J. and Song, J. (2014). Sequential tests of multiple hypotheses controlling type [I]{} and [II]{} familywise error rates. , 153:100–114.
Cook, R. and Farewell, V. (1994). Guidelines for monitoring efficacy and toxicity responses in clinical trials. , 50:1146–1152.
De, S. and Baron, M. (2012a). Sequential [B]{}onferroni methods for multiple hypothesis testing with strong control of family-wise error rates [I]{} and [II]{}. , 31(2):238–262.
De, S. and Baron, M. (2012b). Step-up and step-down methods for testing multiple hypotheses in sequential experiments. , 142:2059–2070.
Fisher, S. (1932). . Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
Goeman, J. and Solari, A. (2010). The sequential rejection principle of familywise error control. , 38(6):3782–3810.
Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. , 6:65–70.
Hommel, G., Bretz, F., and Maurer, W. (2007). Powerful short-cuts for multiple testing procedures with special reference to gatekeeping strategies. , 26(22):4063–4073.
Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. (1993). Group sequential tests for bivariate response: Interim analyses of clinical trials with both efficacy and safety endpoints. , 49:741–752.
Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (1997). Group sequential analysis incorporating covariate information. , 92:1330–1341.
Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (2000). . Chapman & Hall/CRC, New York.
Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (2006). Adaptive and nonadaptive group sequential tests. , 93:1–21.
Marcus, R., Peritz, E., and Gabriel, K. R. (1976). On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. , 63:655–660.
Masjedi, M. R., Heidary, A., Mohammadi, F., Velayati, A. A., and Dokouhaki, P. (2000). Chromosomal aberrations and micronuclei in lymphocytes of patients before and after exposure to anti-tuberculosis drugs. , 15:489–494.
Mei, Y. (2010). Efficient scalable schemes for monitoring a large number of data streams. , 97(2):419–433.
O’Brien, P. C. (1984). Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. , 40:1079–1087.
O’Brien, P. C. and Fleming, T. R. (1979). A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. , 35:549–556.
Paulson, E. (1964). A sequential procedure for selecting the population with the largest mean from $k$ normal populations. , 35:174–180.
Romano, J. P. and Wolf, M. (2005). Exact and approximate stepdown methods for multiple hypothesis testing. , 100(469):94–108.
Rosenbaum, P. (2002). . Springer.
Rosenbaum, P. (2008). Testing hypotheses in order. , 95(1):248–252.
Salzman, J., Jiang, H., and Wong, W. H. (2011). Statistical modeling of [RNA]{}-seq data. , 26:62–83.
Scheff[é]{}, H. (1953). A method for judging all contrasts in the analysis of variance. , 40:87–110.
Seber, G. A. F. and Lee, A. J. (2003). . Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. Wiley-Interscience \[John Wiley & Sons\], Hoboken, NJ, second edition.
Siegmund, D. (1985). . Springer-Verlag, New York.
Siegmund, D. (1993). A sequential clinical trial for comparing three treatments. , 21(1):464–483.
Tamhane, A., Dunnett, C., Green, J., and Wetherington, J. (2001). Multiple test procedures for identifying the maximum safe dose. , 96(455):835–843.
Tang, D.-I. and Geller, N. L. (1999). Closed testing procedures for group sequential clinical trials with multiple endpoints. , 55:1188–1192.
Tang, D.-I., Geller, N. L., and Pocock, S. J. (1993). On the design and analysis of randomized clinical trials with multiple endpoints. , 49:23–30.
Tang, D.-I., Gnecco, C., and Geller, N. L. (1989). Design of group sequential clinical trials with multiple endpoints. , 84:776–779.
Tartakovsky, A., Li, X., and Yaralov, G. (2003). Sequential detection of targets in multichannel systems. , 49(2):425–445.
Wald, A. (1947). . Wiley, New York. Reprinted by Dover, 1973.
Ye, Y., Li, A., Liu, L., and Yao, B. (2013). A group sequential [H]{}olm procedure with multiple primary endpoints. , 32:1112–1124.
[^1]: Department of Mathematics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA. Email: `[email protected]`.
[^2]: Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
Jia Wei$^{1}$, Zhifu You$^{2,*}$\
*$^{1}$Department of Mathematics, South China University of Technology\
*Guangzhou 510640, P.R. China\
*$^{2}$School of Mathematics and Systems Science, Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University\
*Guangzhou 510665, P.R. China\
*E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]*****
title: 'The degrees, number of edges, spectral radius and weakly Hamilton–connectedness of bipartite graphs '
---
[ A path of a graph $G$ is called a Hamilton path if it passes through all the vertices of $G$. A graph is Hamilton-connected if any two vertices are connected by a Hamilton path. Note that any bipartite graph is not Hamilton-connected. We consider the weak version of Hamilton-connected property among bipartite graphs. A weakly Hamilton-connected graph is a balanced bipartite graph $G=(X,Y,E)$ that there is a Hamilton path between any vertex $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$. In this paper, we present some degrees, number of edges, and spectral radius conditions for a simple balanced bipartite graph to be weakly Hamilton–connected. ]{}
[ Weakly Hamilton–connected; Balanced bipartite graph; Degree; Number of edges; Spectral radius ]{}
[**MSC:** ]{} 05C50
Introduction
============
In this paper, only connected graphs without loops and multiple edges are considered. A graph $G$ is *bipartite* if its vertex set can be partitioned into two subsets $X$ and $Y$, such that every edge has one end in $X$ and one end in $Y$. The partition $(X,Y)$ is called the *bipartition* of graph $G$. $X$ and $Y$ are its *parts*. The graph $G$ is *balanced bipartite* when $|X|=|Y|$. Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph with the bipartition $(X,Y)$ and edge set $E(G)$. The *quasi–complement* of $G$, denoted by $\widehat{G}$, is a graph with vertex set $V(\widehat{G})=V(G)$ and edge set $E(\widehat G)=\{xy|x\in X,y\in Y,xy\notin E(G)\}$. Let $e(G)$ and $\delta(G)$ be the number of edges and minimum degree of graph $G$, respectively. The set of neighbours of a vertex $u$ in $G$ is denoted by $N_G(u)$ and let $d_G(u)=|N_G(u)|$. For $S\subseteq V(G)$, the *induced subgraph* $G[S]$ is the graph whose vertex set is $S$ and edge set is $\{uv\in E(G)\mid u,v\in S\}$. *The disjoint union* $G_1+G_2$ of two graphs $G_1$ and $G_2$, is the graph with the vertex set $V(G_1)\cup V(G_2)$ and edge set $E(G_1)\cup E(G_2)$. $K_{m,n}$ is the complete bipartite graph with parts of sizes $m$ and $n$.
A path or cycle of $G$ is called a *Hamilton path or Hamilton cycle* if it passes through all the vertices of $G$. A graph $G$ is called *traceable or Hamilton* if $G$ has a Hamilton path or Hamilton cycle. A graph is *Hamilton–connected* if any two vertices are connected by a Hamilton path. Let $P$ be a path of $G$ with a given direction. For two vertices $x$ and $y$ on $P$, we use $x\overrightarrow{P}y$ ($x\overleftarrow{P}y$) to denote the segment from $x$ to $y$ of $P$ along (against) the direction.
Note that any bipartite graph $G=G(X,Y,E)$ is not Hamilton–connected. If $\big||X|-|Y|\big|\geq2$, then there is no a Hamilton path for any two vertices. If $\big||X|-|Y|\big|=1$, then we can only consider whether there is a Hamilton path between any two different vertices of the part with size $max\{|X|,|Y|\}$. If $|X|=|Y|$, then we can only consider whether there is a Hamilton path for any two different vertices in different parts.
\[de1\] A balanced bipartite graph is weakly Hamilton–connected if any two different vertices in different parts can be connected by a Hamilton path.
Let $Q_n^t $ $(2\leq t\leq \frac{n+1}{2})$ be the graph obtained from $K_{n,n}$ by deleting all edges of one subgraph $K_{t-1, n-t}$. It is obvious that $Q_n^t $ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Let $ A(G)$ and $D(G)$ be the adjacency matrix and degree matrix of $G$, respectively. The largest eigenvalue of $A(G)$ is called the *spectral radius* of $G$, denoted by $\rho(G)$. Let $Q(G)=A(G)+D(G)$ be the signless Lapalacian matrix of $G$. The largest eigenvalue of $Q(G)$ is called the *signless Lapalacian spectral radius* of $G$, denoted by $q(G)$.
The problem that a graph is Hamilton or not has attracted many interests (see [@lesM1963], [@lesM2012], [@lesN.L2017] and the references therein). In Sections 2-4, we present some degrees, number of edges, and spectral radius conditions for a simple balanced bipartite graph to be weakly Hamilton–connected, respectively.
Degrees and weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graphs
======================================================
We first state a known consequence as our tool which has been used to prove a simple graph to be Hamilton–connected.
(Berge[@lesB1976])\[le1\] Let $\mathscr H$ be a class of simple graphs of order $n$ satisfying the following conditions:\
(1) If $G\in \mathscr H$, each edge of $G$ is contained in some Hamilton cycle.\
(2) If $G\in \mathscr H$, the graph $G'$ obtained from $G$ by adding any new edge also belongs to $\mathscr H$.\
Then $G$ is Hamilton–connected.
Note that simple balanced bipartite graphs are also simple graphs. By Lemma \[le1\], the following corollary holds.
\[co1\] Let $\mathscr B$ be a class of simple balanced bipartite graphs of order $2n$ satisfying the following conditions:\
(1) If $G\in \mathscr B$, each edge of $G$ is contained in some Hamilton cycle.\
(2) If $G\in \mathscr B$, the graph $G'$ obtained from $G$ by adding any new edge also belongs to $\mathscr B$.\
Then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Next, by Corollary 2.1, we obtain Theorem \[th1\] and Lemma \[le2\].
\[th1\] A bipartite graph $G=G(X,Y,E)$ with $X=\{x_1,x_2, \dots, x_n\}$ and $Y=\{y_1,y_2, \dots, y_n\}$ is weakly Hamilton–connected if $G$ satisfies the following property: for any nonempty subset $\Gamma=\{x_i|d(x_i)\leq k\}$ where $|\Gamma|=k-1$ and $k\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$, every vertex $y_i$ with $d(y_i)\leq n-k+1$ is adjacent to at least one vertex in $\Gamma$. And the same result holds while $x_i$ and $y_i$ are interchanged.
\[**Proof\]By contradiction. Suppose that $G$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected, then $G$ is contained in a maximal non–weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graph $G^*$ ( It means the addition of any new edge to $G^*$ makes a weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graph). By Corollary \[co1\], there is an edge $e$ in $G^*$, which is not contained in any Hamilton cycle of $G^*$. Since $G^*$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected, it is not a complete bipartite graph. Choose two nonadjacent vertices $x\in X, y\in Y$ in $G^*$ with $d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)$ as large as possible. Since $G^*+xy$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, there is a Hamilton cycle containing the edges $e$ and $xy$. Then there exists a Hamilton path $P$ in $G^*$ containing $e$ with the form $xy_1x_2y_2\cdots x_ny$ $(x=x_1,y=y_n)$.**
Let $I=\{i |1\leq i \leq n-1, xy_i\in E(G^*) \quad and \quad x_iy_i\neq e\}$, then $$\label{eq1}
|I|\geq d_{G^*}(x)-1.$$
For arbitrary $i\in I$, it must have $x_iy\notin E(G^*)$. Otherwise, there exists a Hamilton cycle $y_ix\overrightarrow{P} x_iy \overleftarrow{P}y_i$ containing $e$. Thus $$\label{eq2}
n-d_{G^*}(y)\geq |I|.$$
By (\[eq1\]) and (\[eq2\]), $$\label{eq3}
d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)\leq n+1.$$
If $d_{G^*}(x)\leq d_{G^*}(y)$, then $d_{G^*}(x)\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$. If $d_{G^*}(x)\geq d_{G^*}(y)$, then $d_{G^*}(y)\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$. Without loss of generality, assume that $d_{G^*}(x)\leq d_{G^*}(y)$. Let $k=d_{G^*}(x)$. By (\[eq3\]), $ d_{G^*}(y)\leq n-k+1$.
Since for arbitrary $i\in I$, $x_iy\notin G^*$, and $|I|\geq d_{G^*}(x)-1=k-1$, there are at least $k-1$ such vertices $x_i$ not adjacent to $y$. By the choice of $x$ with $d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)$ as large as possible, we get $d_{G^*}(x_i)\leq d_{G^*}(x)=k$. Thus there are at least $k-1$ vertices with degree no more than $k$ in $X$ not adjacent to $y$, a contradiction.
Hence, $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
By the proof of Theorem \[th1\], the following two corollaries hold:
\[co2\] A bipartite graph $G=G(X,Y,E)$ with $|X|=|Y|=n$ is weakly Hamilton–connected if $d(x)+d(y)\geq n+2$ for any two nonadjacent vertices $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$.
\[co3\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph of order $2n$. The graph $G$ satisfies that the number of vertices $x$ in $X$ such that $d(x)\leq k$ is less then $k-1$, where $1\leq k\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$, and similar conditions holds for replacing $x$ by $y$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Similar to the proof of Theorem \[th1\], we have the following lemma.
\[le2\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph with $X=\{x_1, \ldots, x_n \}$, $Y=\{y_1, \ldots, y_n \}$, and $|X|=|Y|=n$. If $d(x)+d(y)\geq n+2$ for any two nonadjacent vertices $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected if and only if $G+xy$ is weakly Hamilton-connected.
\[**Proof\] Sufficiency is obvious.**
Necessity is completed by contradiction. Suppose that $G$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected. Adding some suitable edges to $G$, we can get a maximal non–weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graph $G^*$. By Corollary \[co1\], there is an edge $e$ of $G^*$ not contained in any Hamilton cycle. Since $G+xy$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, $G^*+xy$ is weakly Hamilton–connected. For $G^*$, there is a Hamilton path $P$ in $G^*$ containing $e$ with the form $xy_1x_2y_2\cdots x_ny (x=x_1, y=y_n)$.
Let $I=\{i |xy_i\in E(G^*) \quad and \quad x_iy_i\neq e\}$, then $$\label{equ1}
|I|\geq d_{G^*}(x)-1.$$ For arbitrary $i\in I$, $x_iy\notin G^*$ holds. Otherwise, there exists a Hamilton cycle $y_ix\overrightarrow{P} x_iy \overleftarrow{P}y_i$ containing $e$. Thus $$\label{equ2}
n-d_{G^*}(y)\geq |I|.$$ By (\[equ1\]) and (\[equ2\]), $$\label{equ3}
d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)\leq n+1,$$ which leads to a contradiction.
Hence, $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\[de2\]
The $B_{n+2}$–closure of a balanced bipartite graph $G$ of order $2n$, denoted by $cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, is obtained from $G$ by recursively joining pairs of nonadjacent vertices in different parts, whose degree sum is at least $n+2$ until no such pair remains.
By Lemma \[le2\], each time an edge such that vertices in different parts and degree sum at least $n+2$ is added to $G$ in the formation of $cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$. Then we have the following result.
\[th3\] A balanced bipartite graph $G=G(X,Y,E)$ of order $2n$ is weakly Hamilton–connected if and only if $cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$ is weakly Hamilton-connected.
Because a complete bipartite graph is weakly Hamilton–connected and by Theorem \[th3\], we get the following corollary.
\[co4\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph with $|X|=|Y|=n$. If the $B_{n+2}$–closure of $G$ is a complete bipartite graph, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Next, we give another sufficient degree condition to prove a balanced bipartite graph is weakly Hamilton–connected. And Theorem \[th4\] is used to prove Theorem \[th5\] in Section 3.
\[th4\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph of order $2n$ and degree sequence $(d_1,d_2,\dots,d_{2n})$. Suppose that there is no integer $2\leq k\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$ such that $d_{k-1}\leq k$ and $d_{n-1}\leq n-k+1$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\[**Proof\]Let $G'$ be the $B_{n+2}$–closure of $G$, i.e., $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$.\
[**Claim:**]{} $G'$ is a complete bipartite graph.**
By contradiction. If $G'$ is not complete, then we choose two nonadjacent vertices $x\in X, y\in Y$ with $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)$ as large as possible. By the definition of $G'$, $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\leq n+1$.
There are two cases:
Case 1: $d_{G'}(x)\leq d_{G'}(y)$, let $k=d_{G'}(x)$.
Denote $$X_1=\{ x_i|x_iy\notin E(G') \}, \qquad Y_1=\{ y_i|xy_i\notin E(G') \},$$ then $$|X_1|=n-d_{G'}(y),\qquad |Y_1|=n-d_{G'}(x).$$ Thus $$|Y_1|=n-k,\qquad |X_1|\geq n-(n+1-d_{G'}(x))=k-1.$$ That is, there are $n-k$ vertices in $Y$ not adjacent to $x$ and at least $k-1$ vertices in $X$ not adjacent to $y$. By the choice of $x$, for any $x_i\in X_1$, $d_{G'}(x_i)\leq d_{G'}(x)$. It implies that there are at least $k-1$ vertices with degree no more than $k$ in $G'$.
Since $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\leq n+1$ and $k=d_{G'}(x)$, $d_{G'}(y)\leq n-k+1$. By the choice of $y$, for any $y_i\in Y_1$, $d_{G'}(y_i)\leq d_{G'}(y)$. It implies there are exactly $n-k$ vertices with degree less than or equal to $n-k+1$ in $Y_1$. Since $d_{G'}(x)\leq d_{G'}(y)$, there are at least $n-1$ vertices with degree less than or equal to $n-k+1$ in $G'$.
Note that $G$ is a spanning subgraph of $G'$. For any one vertex $v\in V(G)=V(G')$, $d_{G}(v)\leq d_{G'}(v)$ holds. Thus $$d_{k-1}\leq k \quad and \quad d_{n-1}\leq n-k+1,$$ a contradiction.
Case 2: $d_{G'}(x)\geq d_{G'}(y)$, let $k=d_{G'}(y)$.
Similarly, we have $d_{k-1}\leq k$ and $d_{n-1}\leq n-k+1$, a contradiction.
Thus $G'$ is a complete bipartite graph.
By Corollary \[co4\], $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
The proof is finished.
Number of edges and weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graphs
==============================================================
In this section, we obtain the weakly Hamilton-connected property of bipartite graphs by the number of edges, namely, Theorems \[th5\] and \[le4\].
\[th5\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph with $X=\{x_1,x_2, \dots, x_n\}$ and $Y=\{y_1,y_2, \dots, y_n\}$. The degree sequence of $G$ is $(d_1,\dots,d_{2n})$ with $d_{2n}\geq \cdots \geq d_1 \geq k$ where $2\leq k \leq \frac{n+1}{2}$. If $$\label{equ7}
e(G)>\max \left\{n(n-t+1)+t(t+1)\bigg|k\leq t \leq \frac{n+1}{2} \right\},$$ then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\[**Proof\] By contradiction. Suppose that $G$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected. By Theorem \[th4\], there is an integer $t$, $k\leq t\leq \frac{n+1}{2}$ such that $d_{t-1}\leq t$. Then there are at least $t-1$ vertices $v_1,\dots,v_{t-1}$ with degree not exceeding $t$. For any $1\leq i\leq t-1$, the number of edges of $G$ which are not adjacent to $v_i$ is at most $n(n-t+1)$. And the number of edges of $G$ incident to these $t-1$ vertices is at most $t(t-1)$. Thus $e(G)\leq n(n-t+1)+t(t+1)$ where $k\leq t \leq \frac{n+1}{2}$, a contradiction.**
Hence $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Bound (\[equ7\]) is not the best. Let $G=Q_n^t$, then $e(G)=n(n-t+1)+t(t-1)$ and $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Next, we present one lemma which is a main tool to prove Theorem \[le4\].
\[le3\] Let $G=(X, Y, E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph of order $2n$ and $G=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$. If $n\geq 2k$ and $e(G)>n(n-k)+k(k+1)$ for $k\geq 1$, then $G$ contains a complete bipartite graph of order $2n-k+1$. Furthermore, if $\delta(G)\geq k$, then $K_{n,n-k+1}\subseteq G$.
\[**Proof\]Let $X_1=\{x\mid x\in X\text{ and }d(x)\geq \frac{n+2}{2}\}$ and $Y_1=\{y\mid y\in Y\text{ and }d(y)\geq \frac{n+2}{2}\}$. For any $x\in X_1$ and $y\in Y_1$, then $d(x)+d(y)\geq n+2$. Note that $G=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, then $xy\in E(G)$. For any $x\in X_1$ and $y\in Y_1$, since $d(x)\geq \frac{n+2}{2}\geq k+1$ and $d(y)\geq \frac{n+2}{2}\geq k+1 $ hold, $K_{k+1,k+1}\subseteq G$.\
Let $t$ be the maximal integer such that $K_{t,t}\subseteq G$, then $t\geq k+1$.\
[**Claim 1:**]{} $t\geq n-k+1$.**
By contradiction. If $k+1\leq t\leq n-k$, then let $X_2\subseteq X$ and $Y_2\subseteq Y$ such that $ G(X_2,Y_2,E_2)=K_{t,t}$. There are two cases:\
(1) For any $x\in X\backslash{X_2}$, if there exists $y\in Y_2$ such that $xy\notin E(G)$, by the definition of $cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, then $d(x)+d(y)\leq n+1$. Note that $d(y)\geq t$, then we have $d(x)\leq n-t+1$.
$$\begin{aligned}
e(G)&=e(X_2,Y_2)+e(X_2,Y\backslash Y_2)+e(X\backslash X_2,Y)\\
&\leq t^2+t(n-t)+(n-t)(n-t+1)\\
&=n^2+n+t^2-(n+1)t\\
&\leq n^2+n+(n-k)^2-(n+1)(n-k)\\
&=n^2-nk+k(k+1)\\
&<e(G),\end{aligned}$$
a contradiction.\
(2) If there exists $x\in X\backslash{X_2}$ such that for any $y\in Y_2$, $xy\in E(G)$, then $d(w)\leq n-t+1$ for any $w\in Y\backslash Y_2$. Otherwise, if there is a vertex $w\in Y\backslash Y_2$ with $d(w)\geq n-t+2$, then $w$ is adjacent to every vertex in $X_2$, which violates the choice of $t$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
e(G)&=e(Y_2, X_2)+e(Y_2,X\backslash X_2 )+e( Y\backslash Y_2,X)\\
&\leq t^2+t(n-t)+(n-t)(n-t+1)\\
&<e(G),\end{aligned}$$ a contradiction.
Thus $t\geq n-k+1$.
Now, let $s$ be the largest integer such that $K_{s,t}\subseteq G$. Thus $s\geq t$.\
[**Claim 2:**]{} $s+t\geq 2n-k+1$.
By contradiction. Suppose that $s+t\leq 2n-k$. Since $s\geq t$, we have $t\leq n-\frac{k}{2}$ and $t\leq s\leq 2n-k-t$. By Claim 1, $n-k+1\leq t\leq n-\frac{k}{2}$. Without loss of generality, let $X_3\subseteq X$ and $Y_3\subseteq Y$ such that $G(X_3,Y_3,E_3)=K_{s,t}$. Then for any $x\in X\backslash X_3$, and any $y\in Y\backslash Y_3$, $d(x)\leq n-s+1$ and $d(y)\leq n-t+1$ hold, respectively. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
e(G)&=e(X_3,Y_3)+e(X\backslash X_3,Y)+e(X,Y\backslash Y_3)\\
&\leq st+(n-s)(n-s+1)+(n-t)(n-t+1)\\
&=s^2-(2n+1-t)s+n^2+n+(n-t)(n-t+1)\\
&\leq (2n-k-t)^2-(2n+1-t)(2n-k-t)+n^2+n+(n-t+1)(n-t)\\
&=t^2+(k-2n)t+2n(n+1)-(2n-k)(k+1)\\
&\leq (n-k+1)^2+(k-2n)(n-k+1)+2n(n+1)-(2n-k)(k+1)\\
&=n^2-nk+k^2+1\\
&<n(n-k)+k(k+1)\\
&<e(G),\end{aligned}$$ a contradiction.
Thus $s+t\geq 2n-k+1$.
[**Claim 3:**]{} $K_{n,n-k+1}\subseteq G$.
By contradiction. Assume that $K_{n,n-k+1}\nsubseteq G$, then $s\leq n-1$. By Claim 2, $s+t\geq 2n-k+1$ holds. Then $t\geq 2n-k+1-s\geq 2n-k+1-(n-1)=n-k+2$. Thus $n-k+2\leq t\leq s\leq n-1$. Note that $\delta(G)\geq k$ and $d(w)\geq s \geq t$ for any vertex $w\in Y_3$. Then $d(x)+d(w)\geq k+(n-k+2)=n+2$ for any $x\in X\backslash X_3$. By the definition of $cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, for any $x\in X\backslash X_3$, $x$ is adjacent to every vertex of $Y_3$. This implies that $s=n$, which contradict with $s\leq n-1$.
Hence if $\delta(G)\geq k$, then $K_{n,n-k+1}\subseteq G$.
The proof is finished.
Finally, we obtain Theorem \[le4\] by Lemma \[le3\].
\[le4\] Let $G(X, Y, E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph of order $2n$. If $\delta(G)\geq k \geq 1$, $n\geq 2k$, and $e(G)>n(n-k)+k(k+1)$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\[**Proof\] Let $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, by Lemma \[le3\], $K_{n,n-k+1}\subseteq G'$. Let $Y_1\subseteq Y$ such that $G(X,Y_1,E_1)=K_{n,n-k+1}$.\
[**Claim:**]{} All vertices in $ Y\backslash Y_1$ have the same neighbour set.\
By contradiction. If there are two vertices $y, y' \in Y\backslash Y_1$ such that $N_{G'}(y)\neq N_{G'}(y')$, then there exist $x\in N_{G'}(y)\backslash N_{G'}(y')$ or $x'\in N_{G'}(y')\backslash N_{G'}(y)$. Without loss of generality, assume that there exists $x\in N_{G'}(y)\backslash N_{G'}(y')$, then $d_{G'}(x)\geq n-k+2$. Since $d_{G'}(y')\geq k$ and $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, $x$ is adjacent to $y'$, a contradiction.**
By the above claim, $Q_n^k\subseteq G'$. Since $Q_n^k$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, $G'$ is weakly Hamilton–connected. By Theorem \[th3\], $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
Spectral radius and weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graphs
==============================================================
In Section 4, we give some sufficient conditions for weakly Hamilton-connectedness of bipartite graphs in terms of spectral radius and signless Laplacian spectral radius of $G$ and $\widehat G$.
Denote the minimum degree sum of nonadjacent vertices between different parts of $G$ by $\sigma(G)$. Let $G_1=G(X_1,Y_1,E_1)=K_{t,t}$, where $X_1=\{x_1,x_2,\ldots, x_t\}, Y_1=\{y_1,y_2,\ldots, y_t\}$; $G_2=G(X_2,Y_2,E_2)=K_{n-t+1,n-t+1}$, where $X_2=\{x_m,x_{t+1},\ldots, x_n\}, Y_2=\{y_m,y_{t+1},\ldots, y_n\}$. Let $R^t_n$ (Figure 1) be the graph obtained by gluing $x_t \text{ with } x_m$ and $y_t \text{ with } y_m$, respectively. Let $S_n^t$ be the graph obtained from $R^t_n$ by deleting the edge $x_ty_t$.
(6,1) ellipse (3.1 and 2); (11,1) ellipse (3.1 and 2);
(5,1.8) circle\[radius=0.05\]; (7,1.8) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(5.9,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (6,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (6.1,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\];
(8.5,1.8) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(10,1.8) circle\[radius=0.05\]; (12,1.8) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(10.9,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (11,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (11.1,1.8) circle\[radius=0.02\];
(5,0.2) circle\[radius=0.05\]; (7,0.2) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(5.9,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (6,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (6.1,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\];
(8.5,0.2) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(10,0.2) circle\[radius=0.05\]; (12,0.2) circle\[radius=0.05\];
(10.9,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (11,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\]; (11.1,0.2) circle\[radius=0.02\];
(5,1.8) –(5,0.2) ; (5,1.8) –(7,0.2) ; (5,1.8) –(8.5,0.2) ;
(7,1.8) –(5,0.2) ; (7,1.8) –(7,0.2) ; (7,1.8) –(8.5,0.2) ;
(5,0.2)– (8.5,1.8); (7,0.2)– (8.5,1.8);
(10,1.8) –(10,0.2) ; (10,1.8) –(12,0.2) ; (10,0.2) –(8.5,1.8) ;
(12,1.8) –(10,0.2) ; (12,1.8) –(12,0.2) ; (12,0.2) –(8.5,1.8) ;
(8.5,0.2)– (10,1.8); (8.5,0.2)– (12,1.8);
(8.5,0.2) –(8.5,1.8);
(v1) at (4.8,2); (v2) at (6.4,2); (v1) at (4.8,0); (v2) at (6.4,0);
(v2) at (8.3,2); (v2) at (8.3,0);
(v[n-1]{}) at (9.6,2); (vn) at (11.7,2); (v[n-1]{}) at (9.6,0); (vn) at (11.7,0);
(G2) at (6,-2); (K\_[n-k-1]{}) at (5.25,-0.5); (K\_[n-t,n-t]{}) at (10.2,-0.5);
(vn) at (1.8,-2.75);
The following lemma is inspired by Ferrara, Jacobson and Powell[@lesM2012].
\[th2\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a non–weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graph with $X=\{x_1,x_2, \dots, x_n\}$ and $Y=\{y_1,y_2, \dots, y_n\}$. If $\sigma(G)=n+1$, then $S^t_n \subseteq G\subseteq R^t_n$ where $2\leq t\leq n-1$.
\[**Proof\]Adding some suitable edges to $G$ to get a maximal non–weakly Hamilton–connected bipartite graph $G^*$. By Corollary \[co2\], $\sigma(G^*)\leq n+1$. Since $\sigma(G)=n+1$, $\sigma(G^*)=n+1$ holds. By Corollary \[co1\], there is an edge $e_0$ which is not contained in any Hamilton cycle of $G^*$. Note that $G^*$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected, then it is not a complete bipartite graph. For two nonadjacent vertices $x\in X$ and $ y\in Y$ with $d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)=n+1$, $G^*+xy$ is weakly Hamilton–connected. Thus there is a Hamilton path $P$ with the endpoints $x,y$ in $G^*$, where $P$ contains $e_0$ with the form $xy_1x_2y_2\cdots x_ny$ $(x=x_1,y=y_n)$.**
In $P$, let $$S_i=\{x_i,y_i\} \text{ be}
\begin{cases} \text{ an x--pair}, &\text{ if } xy_i\in E(G^*);\\
\text{ a y--pair}, &\text{ if } x_iy\in E(G^*).
\end{cases}$$
For any other Hamilton path $P'$ with the endpoints $x',y'$ in $G^*$, we similarly define $x'$–pair and $y'$–pair with respect to $P'$.
Let $I=\{i |1\leq i \leq n-1,xy_i\in E(G^*) \quad and \quad x_iy_i\neq e_0\}$, then for arbitrary $i\in I$, $x_iy\notin E(G^*)$. Otherwise, there exists a Hamilton cycle $y_ix\overrightarrow{P}x_iy\overleftarrow{P}y_i$ containing $e_0$. Since $d_{G^*}(x)+d_{G^*}(y)=n+1$, there exists a unique integer $m$ ($2\leq m\leq n-1$) such that $x_m$ is adjacent to $y$ and $y_m$ is adjacent to $x$ in $P$. Then $e_0=x_my_m$. And for any $i$ ($1\leq i\leq n$ and $i\neq m$), either $x$ is adjacent to $y_i$ or $y$ is adjacent to $x_i$, but not both.\
[**Claim:**]{} $S_1, \dots, S_m$ are $x$–pairs and $S_m, \dots, S_n$ are $y$–pairs with respect to $P$.
\(I) $S_1, \dots, S_m$ are $x$–pairs with respect to $P$.
For $m=2$, it is obvious.
For $3\leq m\leq n-1$, we prove Case (I) by contradiction.
Suppose that there exists $1\leq j\leq m-2$ such that $S_1, \dots, S_j$ are $x$–pairs and $S_{j+1}$ is $y$–pair with respect to $P$. Since there is a Hamilton path $P_1=y_{m-1}\overleftarrow{P}xy_mx_my\overleftarrow{P}x_{m+1}$ containing $e_0=x_my_m$ in $G^*$, $x_{m+1}y_{m-1}\notin E(G^*)$ holds. It implies that $d_{G^*}(y_{m-1})+d_{G^*}(x_{m+1})\geq n+1$. Since $S_m=\{y_m,x_m\}$ is both an $x_{m+1}$–pair and a $y_{m-1}$–pair with respect to $P_1$, $S_j=\{y_j,x_j\}$ is either an $x_{m+1}$–pair or a $y_{m-1}$–pair with respect to $P_1$, but not both.\
(1) If $x_{m+1}y_j\in E(G^*)$, then there is a Hamilton cycle $y_j\overleftarrow{P}xy_mx_m\overleftarrow{P}x_{j+1}y\overleftarrow{P}x_{m+1}y_j$ containing $e_0=x_my_m$ which is contrary to the hypothesis.\
(2) If $x_jy_{m-1}\in E(G^*)$, then $x_{m+1}\text { and } y_j$ is a pair of nonadjacent vertices in $G^*$ which implies $d_{G^*}(y_j)+d_{G^*}(x_{m+1})\geq n+1$. Since there is a Hamilton path $$P_2=y_j\overleftarrow{P}xy_mx_m\overleftarrow{P}x_{j+1}y\overleftarrow{P}x_{m+1},$$ there exists an integer $1\leq k\leq n$ such that $S_k=\{y_k,x_k\}$ is both $y_j$–pair and $x_{m+1}$–pair with respect to $P_2$. By the above proof, we have $k=m$. That is, $x_my_j\in G^*$. Then there is a Hamilton cycle $x_my_m\overrightarrow{P}yx_{j+1}\overrightarrow{P}y_{m-1}x_j\overleftarrow{P}xy_jx_m$, a contradiction.
Thus $S_1, \dots, S_m$ are all $x$–pairs with respect to $P$.
\(II) $S_m, \dots, S_n$ are $y$–pairs with respect to $P$.
By contradiction. Suppose that there exists $j$ ($m\leq j<n-1$) such that $S_m, \dots, S_j$ are $y$–pairs and $S_{j+1}$ is $x$–pair. Since there is a Hamilton path $P_3=x_{j+1}\overleftarrow{P}xy_{j+1}\overrightarrow{P}y$ which contains $e_0$, $y$ is not adjacent to $x_{j+1}$. It implies that $d_{G^*}(y)+d_{G^*}(x_{j+1})\geq n+1$. Then
\(1) If there exists $1\leq k\leq j-1$ such that $\{x_{k+1},y_k\}$ is both $x_{j+1}$–pair and $y$–pair with respect to $P_3$, then there is a Hamilton cycle $y_k\overleftarrow{P}xy_{j+1}\overrightarrow{P}yx_{k+1}\overrightarrow{P}x_{j+1}y_{k}$, which contains $e_0$, a contradiction.
\(2) If there exists $j+2\leq k\leq n-1$ such that $\{x_{k},y_k\}$ is both $x_{j+1}$–pair and $y$–pair with respect to $P_3$, then there is a Hamilton cycle $x_{j+1}\overleftarrow{P}xy_{j+1}\overrightarrow{P}x_{k}y\overleftarrow{P}y_{k}x_{j+1}$ which contains $e_0$, a contradiction.
Thus $S_m, \dots, S_n$ are all $y$–pairs with respect to $P$.
Hence, $S_1, \dots, S_m$ are $x$–pairs and $S_m, \dots, S_n$ are $y$–pairs with respect to $P$.
For arbitrary $i$, $ j$ with $1\leq i<m<j\leq n$, $x_i$ and $y_j$ is nonadjacent. Otherwise, there exists a Hamilton cycle $x\overrightarrow{P}x_iy_j\overrightarrow{P}yx_j\overleftarrow{P}y_ix$, which contains $e_0$ in $G^*$. Then {$x_1,\dots,x_{m-1},y_{m+1}, \ldots,y_n$} is an independent set.
For arbitrary $2\leq i<m$, there exists a Hamilton path $P'=x_i\overleftarrow{P}xy_i\overrightarrow{P}y$ contains $e_0$ in $G^*$. By the above claim, for any $1\leq l\leq i-1$ and $i+1\leq k\leq m$, $\{x_l, y_{l-1}\} $ and $\{x_k, y_{k}\}$ are $x_i$–pairs with respect to $P'$. For arbitrary $m<j\leq n-1$, there exists a Hamilton path $P''=y_j\overrightarrow{P}y x_j\overleftarrow{P}x$ contains $e_0$ in $G^*$. By the above claim, for any $m\leq k\leq j-1$ and $j+1\leq l\leq n-1$, $\{x_k, y_{k}\}$ and $\{y_l, x_{l+1}\} $ are $y_j$–pairs with respect to $P''$. Thus there exists a Hamilton path $P'''=x_ny_nx_{n-1}y_{n-1}\cdots x_2y_2x_1y_1$ contains $e_0$ in $G^*$.
For arbitrary $i$, $ j$ with $1\leq i<m<j\leq n$, $x_j$ and $y_i$ must be nonadjacent. Otherwise, $x\overrightarrow{P}y_ix_j\overrightarrow{P}yx_{j-1}\overrightarrow{P'''}y_{i+1}x$ is a Hamilton cycle which contains $e_0$ in $G^*$. Then {$y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},x_{m+1},\dots,x_n$} is an independent set. Since $\sigma(G^*)=n+1$, $G^*\subseteq R_n^m$ holds. And by the assumption on the maximality of $G^*$, we have $G^*\cong R_n^m$. Removing any edge $x_iy_j$ from $G^*$, where either $1\leq i\leq m$, $1\leq j\leq m$ or $m\leq j\leq n $, $m\leq i\leq n $ unless $i=j=m$, we obtain a graph with minimum degree sum of nonadjacent vertices less than $n+1$. Thus $S^m_n\subseteq G\subseteq R^m_n $.
Hence, $S^m_n\subseteq G\subseteq R_n^m$ holds for $2\leq m\leq n-1$.
The proof is completed.
By direct calculations, we have the following lemma.
\[le5\] (1) $\rho(Q_n^t)>\rho(K_{n,n-t+1})=\sqrt{n(n-t+1)}$.\
(2) $q(Q_n^t)>q(K_{n,n-t+1})=2n-t+1$.\
(3 )$\rho(\widehat{R^t_n})=\rho(\widehat{S^t_n})=\rho(\widehat{Q^t_n})=\rho(K_{t-1,n-t})=\sqrt{(t-1)(n-t)}$.\
(4) $q(\widehat{R^t_n})=q(\widehat{S^t_n})=q(\widehat{Q^t_n})=q(K_{t-1,n-t})=n-1$.
(Bhattacharya, Friedland, and Peled [@lesB2008])\[f1\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph. Then $$\rho(G)\leq \sqrt {e(G)}.$$
(Li and Ning[@lesN.L2016])\[f2\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a balanced bipartite graph of order $2n$. Then $$q(G)\leq \frac {e(G)}{n}+n.$$
(Li and Ning[@lesN.L2016])\[f3\] Let $G$ be a graph with nonempty edge set. Then $$\rho(G)\geq min\{\sqrt{d(u)d(v)}: uv\in E(G)\}.$$ If $G$ is connected, then the equality holds if and only if $G$ is regular or semi–regular bipartite.
(Li and Ning[@lesN.L2016])\[f4\] Let $G$ be a graph with nonempty edge set. Then $$q(G)\geq min\{d(u)+d(v): uv\in E(G)\}.$$ If $G$ is connected, then the equality holds if and only if $G$ is regular or semi–regular bipartite.
\[th6\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph with $|X|=|Y|=n$ and the minimum degree $\delta(G) \geq k\geq 2$.\
(1) If $n\geq k(k+1)$ and $\rho(G)\geq \rho(Q^k_n)$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.\
(2) If $n\geq k(k+1)$ and $q(G)\geq q(Q^k_n)$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.\
(3) If $n\geq 2k-1$ and $\rho(\widehat G)\leq \rho(\widehat {Q^k_n})$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected unless $S^k_n\subseteq G\subseteq R^k_n$.\
(4) If $n\geq 2k-1$ and $q(\widehat G)\leq q(\widehat {Q^k_n})$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected unless $S^k_n\subseteq G\subseteq R^k_n$.
\(1) By Lemmas \[le5\] and \[f1\], $$\sqrt{n(n-k+1)}<\rho(Q^k_n)\leq\rho(G)\leq\sqrt {e(G)}.$$ Then $e(G)>n(n-k+1)\geq n(n-k)+k(k+1)$ with $n\geq k(k+1)$. By Theorem \[le4\] and $Q^k_n$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\(2) By Lemmas \[le5\] and \[f2\] $$2n-k+1<q(G)\leq \frac{e(G)}{n}+n.$$ Then $$e(G)>n(n-k+1)\geq n(n-k)+k(k+1)$$ with $n\geq k(k+1)$. By Theorem \[le4\] and $Q^k_n$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
\(3) By contradiction. Suppose that $G$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected and $S^k_n\nsubseteq G\nsubseteq R^k_n$. Let $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$. By Theorem \[th3\], $G'$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected. For any a pair of nonadjacent vertices $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$, by $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, then $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\leq n+1$. Without loss of generality, assume that $d_{ {G'}}(x)\leq d_{ {G'}}(y)$. Then $$\label{equ08}
d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)+d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)=2n-\big(d_ {G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\big)\geq n-1.$$ Since $\delta(G')\geq\delta(G)\geq k$, $d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\leq n-k$ and $d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\leq n-k$ hold. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ09}
\begin{split}
d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\geq n-1-d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\geq n-1-n+k=k-1,\\
d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\geq n-1-d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\geq n-1-n+k=k-1.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ00}
\begin{split}
k-1\leq d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\leq n-k,\\
k-1\leq d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\leq n-k.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Note that $f(x)=x(n-1-x)\geq (k-1)(n-k)$ for $k-1\leq x \leq n-k$. By (\[equ08\]) and (\[equ09\]), $$\label{equ0bu}
d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\geq d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)(n-1-d_{\widehat {G'}}(x))\geq (k-1)(n-k),$$ the equality holds if and only if $d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)=n-k$, $d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)=k-1$.\
By Lemma \[f3\], $$\rho(\widehat {G'})\geq min\left\{\sqrt{d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)}\bigg| xy\in E(\widehat {G'})\right\}\geq \sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)}.$$ Then $$\sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)}\geq \rho(\widehat {G})\geq \rho(\widehat {G'})\geq \sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)}.$$ Hence $$\rho(\widehat {G'})=\sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)}.$$ And there is an edge $xy\in E(\widehat {G'})$, where $d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)=n-k$ and $d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)=k-1$.\
Let $F$ be the complement of $\widehat {G'}$ containing $xy$. By Lemma \[f3\], $F$ is a semi–regular bipartite graph with parts $X'\subseteq X$, and $Y'\subseteq Y$.
There are two cases:
Case (3.1): $F=K_{n-k,k-1}$.
Then $|V(F)|= n-1$. If $F$ is the unique nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$, then $G'=Q_n^k$, which implies that $G'$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, a contradiction. Then ${\widehat {G'}}$ has at least two nontrivial components. By (\[equ08\]), every nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$ has order at least $n-1$. Thus ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only two nontrivial components $F, F'$. For $|V(F')|$, there are three subcases:\
$(a)\quad |V(F')|=n-1; \quad (b) \quad |V(F')|=n; \quad (c)\quad |V(F')|=n+1.$\
Subcase (a): By (\[equ00\]) and Lemma \[f3\], it is easy to get $F'=K_{n-k,k-1}$.\
Subcases (b) and (c): If there exists $uv\in E(F')$ such that $d_{F'}(u)+d_{F'}(v)\geq n$, then $$\label{equ0bu1}
d_{{F'}}(u)d_{{F'}}(v)\geq d_{{F'}}(u)(n-d_{{F'}}(u))\geq k(n-k).$$ By (\[equ0bu1\]) and Lemma \[f3\], $$\rho(F')\geq min\left\{\sqrt {d_{F'}(u)d_{F'}(v)}\bigg|uv\in E(F')\right\}\geq\sqrt{k(n-k)}>\sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)},$$ a contradiction.
Thus for any $xy\in E(F')$, $d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)=n-1$. That is, for any two nonadjacent vertices $x,y$ in $G'$, $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\geq n+1$.
Case (3.2): $F\neq K_{n-k,k-1}$.
Then $|V(F)|> n-1$. Note that every nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$ has order at least $n-1$, then ${\widehat {G'}}$ has at most two nontrivial components.\
1)If ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only one nontrivial component $F$, then any two nonadjacent vertices in distinct parts of $G'$ has degree sum at least $n+1$.\
2)If ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only two nontrivial components $F, F'$, then there are three subcases: $$(a)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n;\\
|V(F')|=n-1.
\end{cases}
(b)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n+1;\\
|V(F')|=n-1.
\end{cases}
(c)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n;\\
|V(F')|=n.
\end{cases}$$ Subcases (a) and (b): By (\[equ00\]) and Lemma \[f3\], $F'=K_{n-k,k-1}$.\
Subcase (c): If there exists $xy\in E(F')$, such that $d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)=n$. By (\[equ0bu1\]), $$\rho(F')\geq min\left\{\sqrt {d_{F'}(x)d_{F'}(y)}\bigg|xy\in E(F')\right\}\geq\sqrt{k(n-k)}.$$ Thus $$\rho(\widehat {G'})=max\{\rho(F), \rho(F')\}>\sqrt{(k-1)(n-k)},$$ a contradiction.
Thus for any $xy\in E(F'), d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)=n-1$. That is, for any two nonadjacent vertices $x,y$ in $G'$, $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\geq n+1$.
Hence $\sigma(G')=n+1$ holds whether $F=K_{n-k,k-1}$ or $F\neq K_{n-k,k-1}$. By Lemma \[th2\], $S_n^k \subseteq G'\subseteq R_n^k$.
If $G\subsetneqq S_n^k$, then $\rho(\widehat G)>\rho(\widehat {S^k_n})$. By Lemma \[le5\], $\rho(\widehat G)>\rho(\widehat {Q^k_n})$, contradict with $\rho(\widehat G)\leq\rho(\widehat {Q^k_n})$. Thus $G\supseteq S_n^k$.
Then $S_n^k \subseteq G\subseteq R_n^k$, a contradiction.
(4)By contradiction. Suppose that $G$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected and $S^k_n\nsubseteq G\nsubseteq R^k_n$. Let $G'=cl_{B_{n+2}}(G)$, by Theorem \[th3\], $G'$ is not weakly Hamilton–connected. For any pair of nonadjacent vertices $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$, $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\leq n+1$. Without loss of generality, $d_{ {G'}}(x)\leq d_{ {G'}}(y)$. Then $$\label{equ8}
d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)+d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)=2n-(d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)+d_{\widehat {G'}}(y))\geq n-1$$ Since $\delta(G')\geq\delta(G)\geq k$, $d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\leq n-k$ and $d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\leq n-k$ hold. Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ9}
\begin{split}
d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\geq n-1-d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\geq n-1-n+k=k-1,\\
d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\geq n-1-d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\geq n-1-n+k=k-1.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equ0}
\begin{split}
k-1\leq d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)\leq n-k,\\
k-1\leq d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\leq n-k.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ By Lemma \[f4\] and (\[equ8\]), $$q(\widehat {G'}) \geq min\left\{ d_{\widehat{G'}}(x)+d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)\bigg| xy\in E(\widehat {G'}) \right\}\geq n-1.$$ By Lemma \[le5\], $$n-1 \geq q(\widehat{G})\geq q(\widehat {G'})\geq n-1.$$ Then $$q(\widehat {G'})=n-1.$$ And there is an edge $xy\in E(\widehat {G'})$, where $d_{\widehat {G'}}(x)=n-k$ and $d_{\widehat {G'}}(y)=k-1$.\
Let $F$ be the complement of $\widehat {G'}$ containing $xy$. By Lemma \[f4\], $F$ is a semi–regular bipartite graph with parts $X'\subseteq X$, and $Y'\subseteq Y$.
There are two cases:
Case (4.1): $F=K_{n-k,k-1}$.
Then $|V(F)|= n-1$. If $F$ is the unique nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$, then $G'=Q_n^k$, which implies that $G'$ is weakly Hamilton–connected, a contradiction. By (\[equ8\]), every nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$ has order at least $n-1$. Thus ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only two nontrivial components $F$ and $ F'$. For $|V(F')|$, there are three subcases:\
$(a)\quad |V(F')|=n-1; \quad (b) \quad |V(F')|=n; \quad (c)\quad |V(F')|=n+1.$\
Subcase (a): By (\[equ0\]) and Lemma \[f3\], $F'=K_{n-k,k-1}$.\
Subcases (b) and (c): If there exists $uv\in E(F')$, such that $d_{F'}(u)+d_{F'}(v)\geq n$, then $$\label{equ0bu2}
d_{{F'}}(u)+d_{{F'}}(v)\geq d_{{F'}}(u)+(n-d_{{F'}}(u))\geq n.$$ By (\[equ0bu2\]) and Theorem \[f3\], $$q(F')\geq min\left\{d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)\bigg|xy\in E(F')\right\}\geq n> n-1,$$ a contradiction.
Thus for any $xy\in E(F'), d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)=n-1$ holds. That is, for any two nonadjacent vertices $x,y$ in $G'$, we have $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\geq n+1$.
Case (4.2): $F\neq K_{n-k,k-1}$.
Then $|V(F)|> n-1$. Note that every nontrivial complement of ${\widehat {G'}}$ has order at least $n-1$. Then ${\widehat {G'}}$ has at most two nontrivial components.\
1)If ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only one nontrivial component $F$, then for any two nonadjacent vertices in distinct parts of $G'$ has degree sum at least $n+1$.\
2)If ${\widehat {G'}}$ has only two nontrivial components $F$ and $F'$, then there are three subcases: $$(a)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n;\\
|V(F')|=n-1.
\end{cases}
(b)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n+1;\\
|V(F')|=n-1.
\end{cases}
(c)
\begin{cases} |V(F)|=n;\\
|V(F')|=n.
\end{cases}$$ Subcases (a) and (b): By (\[equ0\]) and Theorem \[f3\], $F'=K_{n-k,k-1}$.\
Subcase (c): If there exist $uv\in E(F')$ such that $d_{F'}(u)+d_{F'}(v)=n$, by (\[equ0bu2\]) and Theorem \[f3\], then $$q(F')\geq min\left\{d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)\bigg|xy\in E(F')\right\}\geq n.$$ Thus $$q(\widehat {G'})=max\{q(F), q(F')\}>n-1,$$ a contradiction.
Thus for any $xy\in E(F')$, we have $d_{F'}(x)+d_{F'}(y)=n-1$. That is, for any two nonadjacent vertices $x,y$ in $G'$, $d_{G'}(x)+d_{G'}(y)\geq n+1$ holds.
Hence $\sigma(G')=n+1$ holds whether $F=K_{n-k,k-1}$ or $F\neq K_{n-k,k-1}$. By Lemma \[th2\], $S_n^k \subseteq G'\subseteq R_n^k$.
If $G\subsetneqq S_n^k$, then $q(\widehat G)>q(\widehat {S^k_n})$. By Lemma \[le5\], $q(\widehat G)>q(\widehat {Q^k_n})$, contradicts with $q(\widehat G)\leqq(\widehat {Q^k_n})$. Thus $G\supseteq S_n^k$.
Then $S_n^k \subseteq G\subseteq R_n^k$, a contradiction.
The proof is finished.
By the proof of Theorem \[th6\] (1) and (2), we get the following result.
\[co00\] Let $G=G(X,Y,E)$ be a bipartite graph with $|X|=|Y|=n$ and the minimum degree $\delta(G) \geq k\geq 2$.\
(1) If $n> k(k+1)$ and $\rho(G)\geq \sqrt{n(n-k+1)}$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.\
(2) If $n> k(k+1)$ and $q(G)\geq 2n-k+1$, then $G$ is weakly Hamilton–connected.
[15]{} O. Ore, Note on Hamilton circuits, Amer. Math. Monthly. 67 (1960) 55.
V. Chvatál, On Hamiltonian ideas, J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 12 (1972) 163–168.
J. Moon, L. Moser, On Hamiltonian bipartite graphs, Israel J. Math. 1 (3) (1963) 163–165.
O. Ore, Hamiltonian connected graphs, J. Math. Pures Appl. 42 (1963) 21–27.
P. Erdős, T. Gallai, On maximal Paths and Circuits of Graphs, Acta Math. Hung. 10 (1959) 337–356.
C. Berge, Graphs and hypergraphs. Minieka E, translator. 2nd revised ed. Vol. 6, North–Holland Mathematical Library. Amsterdam–London, New York (NY) 1976, French.
L. Pósa, A theorem concerning Hamilton lines. Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Kutat¨® Int. Közl. 7 (1962) 225–226.
M. Ferrara, M. Jacobson, J. Powell, Characterizing degree-sum maximal nonhamiltonian bipartite graphs. Discrete Math. 312 (2012) 459–461.
A. Bhattacharya, S. Friedland, UN. Peled, On the first eigenvalue of bipartite graphs. Electron. J. Combin. 15 (2008) R144.
A. Berman, X.D. Zhang, On the spectral radius of graphs with cut vertices. J. Combin. Theory. Ser. B. 83 (2001) 233–240.
W. Anderson, T. Morley, Eigenvalues of the Laplacian of a graph. Linear Multilinear Algebra. 18 (1985) 141–145.
E. Nosal, Eigenvalues of graphs Master thesis. University of Calgary 1970.
B.L. Li, B. Ning, Spectral analogues of Erdős’ and Moon-Moser’s theorems on Hamilton cycles, Linear Multilinear Algebra 64 (2016) 2252–2269.
B.L. Li, B. Ning, Spectral analogues of Moon-Moser’s theorem on Hamilton paths in bipartite graphs, Linear Algebra Appl. 515 (2017) 180–195.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
address:
- 'Ethan M. Coven, Deparment of Mathematics, Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT 06459-0128'
- 'Aaron Meyerowitz, Deparment of Mathematics, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL 33431-0991'
author:
- 'Ethan M. Coven and Aaron Meyerowitz'
title: Tiling the integers with translates of one finite set
---
amstex
=1200 -.75in
[^1]
A set [*tiles the integers*]{} if and only if the integers can be written as a disjoint union of translates of that set. We consider the problem of finding necessary and sufficient conditions for a finite set to tile the integers. For sets of prime power size, it was solved by D. Newman \[J. Number Theory [**9**]{} (1977), 107–111\]. We solve it for sets of size having at most two prime factors. The conditions are always sufficient, but it is unknown whether they are necessary for all finite sets.
Primary 05B45; Secondary 11B75, 20K01
Introduction
Let $A$ be a finite set of integers. $A$ [*tiles the integers*]{} if and only if the integers can be written as a disjoint union of translates of $A$, equivalently, there is a set $C$ such that every integer can be expressed uniquely $a+c$ with $a \in A$ and $c \in C$. In symbols, $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$. In this case $A$ is called a [*tile*]{}, $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ a [*tiling*]{}, and $C$ the [*translation set*]{}. For a survey of such tilings, see R. Tijdeman [@Tij]. For connections with group theory and functional analysis, see [@Haj] and [@L-W].
We consider the problem of finding necessary and sufficient conditions for a finite set to tile the integers. For sets of prime power size (cardinality, denoted $\#$), it was solved by D. Newman [@New]. Newman remarked that “even for so simple a case as size six we do not know the answer.” We find necessary and sufficient conditions for $A$ to tile the integers when $\#A$ has at most two prime factors.
There is no loss of generality in restricting attention to translates of a finite set $A$ of [*nonnegative*]{} integers. Then $A(x) = \sum_{a\in A}x^a$ is a $\# A=A(1)$. Let $S_A$ be the set of prime powers $s$ such that the $s$-th $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. Consider the following conditions on $A(x)$.
[(T2)]{}
“[(T1)]{}” $A(1) = \prod_{s\in S_A} \Phi_s(1)$.
“[(T2)]{}” If $s_1,\dots,s_m\in S_A$ are powers of distinct primes, then $\Phi_{s_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divides $A(x)$.
If $A(x)$ satisfies (T1) and (T2), then $A$ tiles the integers.
If $A$ tiles the integers, then $A(x)$ satisfies (T1).
If $A$ tiles the integers and $\# A$ has at most two prime factors, then $A(x)$ satisfies (T2).
If $\# A$ has at most two prime factors, then $A$ tiles the integers if and only if $A(x)$ satisfies (T1) and (T2).
It is unknown whether the sufficient conditions (T1) and (T2) are necessary for any finite set to tile the integers. (T1) is necessary but not sufficient (see the example after Theorem B1 in Section 2). However, if $\# A$ is a prime power, then (T2) follows from (T1), so in this case (T1) [*is*]{} necessary and sufficient. An examination of Newman’s proof essentially yields this result.
Our proof of Theorem B2 provides a structure theory for finite sets $A$ $A$ tiles the integers and $\#A$ has at most two prime factors. We sketch this in Section 4.
If $A$ is a finite set which tiles the integers, then $ \bigcup_{a \in A} [a,a+~1)$ tiles the reals. J. Lagarias and Y. Wang [@L-W] proved a structure theorem for closed subsets $T$ of the reals with finite Lebesgue measure and boundary of measure zero the reals can be written as a countable union of measure-disjoint translates of $T$. It describes such sets in terms of finite sets which tile the integers.
1\. Preliminaries
For $A$ and $B$ sets or multisets of integers, we denote the multiset $\{a+b: a \in~A, b \in B\}$ by $A+B$. We write $A \oplus B$ when every element can be expressed uniquely $a+b$. For $k$ an integer, we write $kA$ for $\{ka: a \in A\}$, we call $\{k\} \oplus A$ a [*translate* ]{} of $A$, and when $k$ is a factor of every $a \in A$, we write $A/k$ for $\{a/k: a \in A\}$.
For $s \ge 1$, the $s$-th [*cyclotomic polynomial*]{} $\Phi_s(x)$ is defined recursively by $x^s - 1 = \prod\Phi_t(x)$, where the product is taken over all factors $t$ of $s$. The factors of $s$ are positive and include both $1$ and $s$. Let $p$ be prime. Then
$\Phi_s(x)$ is the minimal of any primitive $s$-th root of unity.
$1+x+\dots+x^{s-1} = \prod\Phi_t(x)$, where the product is taken over all factors $t > 1$ of $s$.
$\Phi_p(x) = 1 + x + \dots +
x^{p-1}$ and $\Phi_{p^{\alpha +1}}(x)=\Phi_p(x^{p^\alpha})$.
$\Phi_s(1) = \cases
0&\text{if $s=1$}\\
q&\text{if $s$ is a power of a prime $q$}\\
1&\text{otherwise}.
\endcases$
$\Phi_s(x^p)= \cases
\Phi_{ps}(x)&\text{if $p$ is a factor of~$s$}\\
\Phi_s(x)\Phi_{ps}(x)&\text{if $p$ is not a factor
of~$s$}.
\endcases$
If $s$ and $t$ are relatively prime, then $\Phi_s(x^{t}) = \prod\Phi_{rs}(x)$, where the product is taken over all factors $r$ of $t$.
If $\bar A(x)$ is a polynomial and $A(x)=\bar A(x^p)$, then $ \{t:\Phi_t(x) \text{ divides } A(x)\}=$ $\{s':\Phi_s(x) \text{ divides } \bar A(x)\} \cup
\{ps:\Phi_s(x) \text{ divides } \bar A(x)\}$, where $s'=ps$ or $s$ according as $p$ is or is not a factor of $s$.
\(1) is a standard fact. (2) and (3) follow from the definition, (4) from (2) and (3), and (5) from (1) because the roots of $\Phi_s(x^p)$ are $e^{2\pi ik/ps}$ for $k$ relatively prime to $s$. Repeated application of (5) yields (6). For (7), let $\omega=e^{2 \pi i/t}$. Then $\omega^p$ is a primitive $s$@-th root of unity for some $s$ and, from (5), $t \in \{s',ps\}$. $\Phi_t(x)$ divides $\bar A(x^p)$ if and only $\bar A(\omega^p)=0$ if and only if $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $\bar A(x)$.
A set $C$ of integers is [*periodic*]{} if and only if $C \oplus
\{n\}=C$ for some $n \ge 1$. Then $C$ is a union of congruence classes modulo $n$ and $C=B\oplus n
\Bbb Z$, where $B$ is any set consisting of one representative from each class. If $A \oplus C = \Bbb Z$ is a tiling and $C$ is periodic, the smallest such $n$ is called the [*period*]{} of the tiling. Note that $n=(\#A)(\#B)$ and $A \oplus B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$. Conversely, if $A \oplus B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$, then $A \oplus (B \oplus n\Bbb Z) = \Bbb Z$ is a tiling of period $n$ or less, as are $B \oplus (A \oplus n\Bbb Z) = \Bbb Z$ and $A' \oplus C = \Bbb Z$ for any $A' \equiv A \pmod n$.
The following basic result is due to G. Hajós [@Haj] and N. deBruijn [@deB-1], then C. Swenson [@Swe], then Newman [@New].
Every tiling by translates of a finite set is periodic, i.e., if $A$ is finite and $A \oplus C\ = \Bbb Z $, then there is a finite set $B$ such that $C = B \oplus n \Bbb Z$, where $n = (\#A)(\#B)$.
Newman’s proof shows that the period of any tiling by $A$ is bounded by $2^{\max (A) - \min (A)}$. The tiling $\{j\} \oplus \Bbb Z = \Bbb
Z$ has period 1. The tiling $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$, where $A=\{j\} \oplus
\{0,k\}$ and $C=\{0,1,\dots,k-1\}\oplus 2k\Bbb Z$, has period $2k$. We know of no other tilings whose period is as large as $2\left( \max
(A) - \min (A)\right)$. See the remarks following Lemma 2.1.
The collection of all finite multisets of integers is in one-to-one correspondence with the set of all s with integer . The correspondence is $$A \longleftrightarrow A(x) =
\sum_{a \in A}m_ax^a,$$ where $m_a$ is the multiplicity of $a$ as an element of $A$. If $B$ is another such multiset and $k \ge 1$, then the polynomial corresponding to $A+B$ is $A(x)B(x)$, to $A \cup B$ is $A(x) + B(x)$, and to $kA$ is $A(x^k)$. Using this language we get
Let $n$ be an integer and let $A$ and $B$ be finite multisets of integers with corresponding s $A(x)$ and $B(x)$. Then the following statements are equivalent. Each forces $A$ and $B$ to be sets $(\#A)(\#B)=A(1)B(1)=n$.
$ A \oplus (B \oplus n\Bbb Z)=\Bbb Z$ is a tiling.
$A \oplus B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$.
$A(x)B(x) \equiv 1 + x + \dots + x^{n - 1}
\pmod{x^n-1}$.
$n=A(1)B(1)$ and for every factor $t > 1$ of $n$, the $\Phi_t(x)$ is a divisor of $A(x)$ or $B(x)$.
There is no loss is restricting attention to conditions for a finite set of [*nonnegative*]{} integers to tile the integers. We can further restrict to finite sets whose minimal element is $0$ and to translation sets which contain $0$, although we will not always do so. For if $A'$ and $C'$ are translations of $A$ and $C$, then $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ if and only if $A' \oplus C'=\Bbb Z$.
Recall that (T1) and (T2) concern the set $S_A$ of prime powers $s$ such that the cyclotomic polynomial $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. When $A$ and a translate $A'$ are finite sets of nonnegative integers, $A(x)$ and $A'(x)$ are divisible by the same cyclotomic polynomials, so
“[$\bullet$]{}”$A$ tiles the integers if and only if $A'$ tiles the integers.
“[$\bullet$]{}”$A(x)$ satisfies (T1) if and only if $A'(x)$ satisfies (T1).
“[$\bullet$]{}” $A(x)$ satisfies (T2) if and only if $A'(x)$ satisfies (T2).
The next lemma allow us to further restrict attention to finite sets of integers with greatest common divisor $1$.
Let $k > 1$ and let $A=k\bar A$ be a finite set of nonnegative integers.
$A$ tiles the integers if and only if $\bar A$ tiles the integers.
If $p$ is prime, then $S_{p\bar A} = \{p^{\alpha+1} : p^\alpha \in S_{\bar A}\}
\cup \{q^\beta \in S_{\bar A}\: q {\text{ prime\/}}, q \ne p\}$.
$A(x)$ satisfies (T1) if and only if $\bar A(x)$ satisfies (T1).
$A(x)$ satisfies (T2) if and only if $\bar A(x)$ satisfies (T2).
For one direction of (1), let $\bar A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$. Then $k\bar A \oplus kC = k\Bbb Z$ and hence $A \oplus (\{0,1,\dots,k-1\} \oplus kC) = \Bbb Z$. For the other, let $k\bar A \oplus D =\Bbb Z$. Then $k\bar A \oplus D_0 =k\Bbb Z$, where $D_0 = \{d \in D :
d\equiv 0 \pmod k\}$, and hence $\bar A \oplus D_0/k = \Bbb Z$. (2) follows from Lemma 1.1(7).
It suffices to prove (3) and (4) when $k$ is prime, say $k=p$. (3) follows from (2) and Lemma 1.1(4) since $\# A = \#\bar A$. It remains to prove (4). Let $s' =ps$ or $s$ according as $p$ is or is not a factor of $s$. Let $s_1,\dots,s_m$ be powers of distinct primes and $s=s_1\cdots
s_m$. Then $s_1',\dots, s_m'$ are powers of distinct primes and $s'=s_1'\cdots s_m'$. From (2), every $s_i \in S_{\bar A}$ if and only if every $s_i' \in S_A=S_{p \bar A}$. From 1.1(7), $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $\bar A(x)$ if and only if $\Phi_{s'}(x)$ divides $A(x)$. Putting all this together yields (4).
It follows from (2) that $B$ is not contained in $p\Bbb Z$ when $\Phi_p(x)$ divides $B(x)$.
Lemma 1.4 deals with $A \subset k\Bbb Z$. The related situation that $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ is a tiling with $C \subseteq k\Bbb Z$ leads to an important construction. We defer it to Lemma 2.5.
2\. Tiling results
Let $A$ be a finite set of integers with corresponding $A(x) = \sum_{a\in A}x^a$ and let $S_A$ be the set of prime powers $s$ such that the $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. If
[(T2)]{}
“[(T1)]{}” $A(1) = \prod_{s\in S_A} \Phi_s(1)$.
“[(T2)]{}” If $s_1,\dots,s_m \in S_A$ are powers of distinct primes, then $\Phi_{s_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divides $A(x)$, then $A$ tiles the integers.
We construct a set $B$ such that condition (4) of Lemma 1.3 is satisfied. Define $B(x) = \prod\Phi_s(x^{t(s)})$, where the product is taken over all prime power factors $s$ of $\lcm(S_A)$ which are not in $S_A$ and $t(s)$ is the largest factor of $\lcm(S_A)$ relatively prime to $s$. Since every such $s$ is a prime power, $B(x)$ has . Since 1.3(4) will be shown to hold, these are all $0$ and $1$.
Let $s > 1$ be a factor of $A(1)B(1)$ and write $s=s_1 \cdots s_m$ as a product of powers of distinct primes. If every $s_i \in S_A$, then by (T2), $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. Suppose then that some $s_i
\notin S_A$. Then $\Phi_{s_i}(x^{t(s_i)})$ divides $B(x)$, $r=s/s_i$ is a factor of $t(s_i)$ and, by Lemma 1.1(6) (with $s=s_i$ and $t=t(s_i)$), $\Phi_{rs_i}(x)$ divides $\Phi_{s_i}(x^{t(s_i)})$. Thus $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $B(x)$ since $rs_i=s$.
The set $B$ constructed in the proof depends only on $S=S_A$ and not on $A$. Defining $C_S=B\oplus \lcm (S)\Bbb Z$, $A \oplus C_S=\Bbb Z$ for [*all* ]{} $A$ with $S_A=S$ which satisfy (T1) and (T2). Then $C_S \subseteq p\Bbb Z$ for every prime $p
\in S$, since $p$ is a factor of $n$ and every divisor $\Phi_s(x^{t(s)})$ of $B(x)$ is a polynomial in $x^p$. For either $t(s)$ is a multiple of $p$, or $s=p^{\alpha+1}$ with $\alpha \ge 1$ and $\Phi_s(x^{t(s)})=\Phi_p\left(x^{t(s)p^\alpha}\right)$, so every divisor $\Phi_s(x^{t(s)})$ of $B(x)$ is a polynomial in $x^p$.
Let $A$ be a finite set of integers with corresponding $A(x) = \sum_{a\in A}x^a$ and let $S_A$ be the set of prime powers $s$ such that the $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. If $A$ tiles the integers, then
“[(T1)]{}” $A(1) = \prod_{s \in S_A} \Phi_s(1)$.
(T1) is not sufficient for $A$ to tile the integers. $A = \{0,1,2,4,5,6\}$ does not tile the integers, but $A(x) = \Phi_3(x)\Phi_8(x)$ satisfies (T1).
Theorem B1 follows from Lemma 2.1(1) below.
Let $A(x)$ and $B(x)$ be polynomials with $0$ and $1$, $n=A(1)B(1)$, and $R$ the set of prime power factors of $n$. If $\Phi_t(x)$ divides $A(x)$ or $B(x)$ for every factor $t > 1$ of $n$, then
$A(1)=\prod_{s\in S_A}\Phi_s(1)$ and $B(1)=\prod_{s\in S_B}\Phi_s(1)$.
$S_A$ and $S_B$ are disjoint sets whose union is $R$.
For every factor $t > 1$ of $n$, $\Phi_t(x)$ divides $A(x)$ or $B(x)$, so $R \subseteq S_A \cup S_B$. Clearly $A(1) \ge \prod_{s \in
S_A}\Phi_s(1)$ and $B(1) \ge \prod_{s \in S_B}\Phi_s(1)$. Thus $$A(1)B(1)\ge \prod_{s\in S_A}\Phi_s(1) \prod_{s\in
S_B}\Phi_s(1)\ge \prod_{t\in R}\Phi_t(1) = n,$$ the equality by Lemma 1.1(4). Hence all the inequalities and containments above are actually equalities, and $S_A$ is disjoint from $S_B$.
If a tiling $A \oplus C =\Bbb Z$ has period $n$ and $C=B \oplus n\Bbb Z$, then $n=\lcm(S_A \cup S_B)$, so the period of any tiling by $A$ is a multiple of $\lcm(S_A)$. A particular tiling by $A$ may have period larger than $\lcm(S_A)$, however when $A(x)$ satisfies (T1) and (T2), the tiling $A \oplus \left(B \oplus (\#A)(\#B)\Bbb Z\right) = \Bbb Z$ constructed in the proof of Theorem A has period $\lcm(S_A)$. In all cases known to the authors both $A(x)$ and $B(x)$ satisfy (T1) and (T2).
We leave it to the interested reader to show that for any set $A$ of integers,
“[$\bullet$]{}” $ \lcm(S_A) \le\frac{p}{p-1}\left(\max (A)-\min
(A)\right)$, where $p$ is the smallest prime factor of $\#A$.
“[$\bullet$]{}” The inequality is strict except when $A=\{j\} \oplus p^{\alpha}\{0,1,\dots,p-~1\}.$
We show in Lemma 2.3 that there is always a tiling whose period is a product of powers of the prime factors of $\#A$.
Let $A$ be a finite set of integers with corresponding $A(x) = \sum_{a\in A}x^a$ such that $\#A$ has at most two prime factors and let $S_A$ be the set of prime powers $s$ such that the $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$. If $A$ tiles the integers, then
[(T2)]{}
“[(T2)]{}” If $s_1,\dots,s_m \in S_A$ are powers of distinct primes, then $\Phi_{s_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divides $A(x)$.
The following result is crucial to our proof of Theorem B2. We give an alternate proof of it in Section 3.
Suppose that $A$ is finite, $0 \in A \cap C$, and $A \oplus C = \Bbb Z$. If $r$ and $\# A$ are relatively prime, then $rA \oplus C = \Bbb Z$.
Translating $A$ or $C$ does not affect the conclusion. Thus the condition $0 \in A \cap C$ is not needed.
If a finite set $A$ tiles the integers, then there is a tiling by $A$ whose period is a product of powers of the prime factors of $\#A$.
If $A\oplus C= \Bbb Z$ is a tiling of period $n$ and $r > 1$ is a factor of $n$ relatively prime to $\#A$, then by Lemma 2.2, $ rA \oplus C=\Bbb Z$. Therefore $ rA \oplus C_0 =r\Bbb Z$, where $C_0 = \{c \in C : c \equiv 0 \pmod{r}\}$, and hence $ A \oplus C_0/r = \Bbb Z$ is a tiling of period $n/r$.
The following result is essentially Theorem 4 of [@San]. We prove a more general result which implies it in Section 3.
[@San] Let $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ be a tiling of period $n$ such that $A$ is finite, $0 \in A \cap C$, and $n$ has one or two prime factors. Then there is a prime factor $p$ of $n$ such that either $A \subset p\Bbb Z$ or $C \subseteq p\Bbb Z$.
Sands’ result is stated in the terms of direct sum decompositions of finite cyclic groups, but it is easy to translate it into the terminology of this paper.
Suppose $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$, where $A$ is a finite set of nonnegative integers, $k>1$, and $C \subseteq k\Bbb Z$. For $i = 0,1,\dots, k-1$, let $A_i=\{a \in A : a \equiv i \pmod k\}$, $a_i=\min(A_i)$, and $\bar A_i=\{a-a_i : a \in A_i\}/k$. Then
$A(x)=x^{a_0}\bar A_0(x^k)+x^{a_1}\bar A_1(x^k)+\dots
+x^{a_{k-1}}\bar A_{k-1}(x^k)$.
Every $\bar A_i \oplus C/k=\Bbb Z$.
The elements of $A$ are equally distributed modulo $k$ — every $\#\bar A_i=(\#A)/k.$
$S_{\bar A_0}=S_{\bar A_1}=\cdots=S_{\bar A_{k-1}}$.
When $k$ is prime, $S_A=\{k\} \cup S_{k\bar A_0}$ and if every $\bar A_i(x)$ satisfies (T2), then $A(x)$ satisfies (T2).
\(1) is clear. (2) follows from $A_i \oplus C=\{i\} \oplus k\Bbb Z=\{a_i\} \oplus k\Bbb Z$. To prove (3), note that the translation set $C/k$ has some period $n$, so there is a set $\bar B$ such that $\bar A_i \oplus (\bar B \oplus n\Bbb Z)=\Bbb Z$ and every $\bar A_i \oplus \bar B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$. Thus the $\#\bar A_i$ are equal, so (3) holds. (4) also follows since by Lemma 2.1, every $S_{\bar A_i}$ is the complement of $S_{\bar B}$ in the set of prime power factors of $n$.
To prove (5), write $p$ in place of $k$. From Lemma 1.4(2), $S_{p\bar A_i} = \{s' : s \in S_{\bar A_i}\}$, where $s' = ps$ or $s$ according as $p$ is or is not a factor of $s$. The polynomial corresponding to $p\bar A_i$ is $\bar A_i(x^p)$, so from (1) and (4), $S_{p\bar A_0} \supseteq S_A$. Also $p \in S_A$, since if $\Phi_p(\omega) = 0$, then $\omega^p = 1$, $\omega^{a_i}=\omega^i$, and $A(\omega) = \sum_{i=0}^{p-1}\omega^i \bar A_i(1) = (\# A/k)
\sum_{i=0}^{p-1}\omega^i = 0$, the next-to-last equality by (3). We have thus shown that $S_A
\supseteq \{p\} \cup S_{p\bar A_0}$. Since $A_0$ and $A$ tile the integers, $A_0(x)$ and $A(x)$ satisfy (T1) and $S_A = \{p\} \cup S_{p\bar A_0}$.
Now assume that every $\bar A_i(x)$ satisfies (T2). Condition (T2) for $A(x)$ is: if $s_1,\dots ,s_m \in S_{\bar A_0}$ are powers of distinct primes, then $\Phi_{s_1'\cdots s_m'}(x)$ divides $A(x)$ and $\Phi_{ps_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divides $A(x)$. By (T2), $\Phi_{s_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divides every $\bar A_i(x)$. Hence by Lemma 1.1(7), $\Phi_{s_1'\cdots s_m'}(x)$ and $\Phi_{ps_1\cdots s_m}(x)$ divide all the $\bar A_i(x^p)$, so they divide $A(x)$ as well.
If $A$ is a finite set of integers and $C \subseteq k\Bbb Z$, then $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ if and only if $A=\bigcup_{i=0}^{k-1}\left(\{a_i\} \oplus k \bar A_i \right)$for some complete set $\{a_0,a_1,\dots,a_{k-1}\}$ of residues modulo $k$, and $k$ sets $\bar A_i$, each of which satisfies $\min(A_i)=0$ and tiles the integers with translation set $C/k$.
The decomposition is unique. We can have $\gcd(A)=1$ although this may not be true for the $\bar A_i$. If the $\bar A_i$ are equal, then the union is a direct sum, $A~=~\{a_0,a_1 \dots,a_{k-1}\} \oplus k\bar A_0$. For some simple choices of translation set $C$, every tile has this form.
From Lemma 1.4 and the comments before it there is no loss of generality in assuming that $\gcd(A)=1$ and $0\in A$.
By Lemma 2.3 there is a tiling $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ whose period $n$ is a product of powers of the prime factors of $\#A$. We complete the proof by induction on $n$. If $n=1$, then $A=\{0\}$ and $A(x)\equiv 1$ satisfies (T2) vaccuously. If $n >1$, then by Lemma 2.4, there is a prime factor $p$ of $n$ such that $C \subseteq p\Bbb Z$. Then by Lemma 2.5, $A(x)=x^{a_0}\bar A_0(x^p)+x^{a_1}\bar
A_1(x^p)+\dots +x^{a_{p-1}}\bar A_{p-1}(x^p)$ and every $\bar A_i\oplus C/p=\Bbb Z$ is a tiling of period $n/p$. By the inductive hypothesis, every $\bar A_i(x)$ satisfies (T2), so by Lemma 2.5(5), $A(x)$ satisfies (T2).
Every set known to the authors, regardless of size, which tiles the integers satisfies the tiling conditions (T1) and (T2). However, our proof of Theorem B2 cannot be extended to sets whose size has more than two prime factors because Lemma 2.4 need not hold. For $m$ a positive integer with more than two prime factors, a very general construction due to S. Szabó [@Sza] gives sets $A$ $\#A=m$, $\min(A)=0$, $\gcd(A)=1$, and $A$ tiles the integers, yet the members of $A$ are [*not* ]{} equally distributed modulo $k$ for any $k>1$. Hence, from Lemma 2.5(3), every set $C$ $0 \in C$ and $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ satisfies $\gcd(C)= 1$. All these sets $A$ satisfy (T1) and (T2).
These examples also show that both Tijdeman’s conjecture — if $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$, $0\in A \cap C$, and $\gcd(A)=1$, then $C \subseteq p\Bbb Z$ for some prime factor of $\#A$ — and the weaker conjecture — if $A$ tiles the integers, $\min(A)=0$ and $\gcd(A)=1$, then there is [*some* ]{} translation set of the desired type — are false without further conditions. Tijdeman’s conjecture would have implied an inductive characterization of all tilings $A \oplus C= \Bbb Z$. The weaker conjecture would have implied an inductive characterization of the finite sets which tile the integers. We established the weaker conjecture in Lemma 2.4 for those $A$ $\#A$ has one or two prime factors. We show how to use it in Section 4. Tijdeman [@Tij; @Theorem; @3] proved his conjecture when $\# A$ is a prime power. We do not know whether it holds when $\# A$ has exactly two prime factors.
3\. Alternate proofs of Tijdeman’s and Sands’ Theorems
Tijdeman’s Theorem (Lemma 2.2) follows from Lemma 1.3 and
Let $A$ and $B$ be finite sets of integers with corresponding s $A(x)$ and $B(x)$ and let $n = A(1)B(1)$. If $$A(x)B(x) \equiv 1+x+\dots +x^{n-1} \pmod{x^n -1}$$ and $p$ is a prime which is not a factor of $A(1)$, then $$A(x^p)B(x) \equiv 1+x+\dots +x^{n-1} \pmod{x^n -1}.$$
Since $p$ is prime, $A(x^p) \equiv \left(A(x)\right)^p \pmod p$, i.e., when the coefficients are reduced modulo $p$. Let $G_n(x) = 1+x+\dots +x^{n-1}$. Then $$A(x^p) B(x) = \left(A(x)\right)^{p-1}A(x)B(x) \equiv
\left(A(x)\right)^{p-1}G_n(x),$$ where $\equiv$ means the exponents are reduced modulo $n$ and then the s are reduced modulo $p$. Every $x^iG_n(x) \equiv G_n(x) \pmod{x^n-1}$, so $$\left(A(x)\right)^{p-1} G_n(x) \equiv \left(A(1)\right)^{p-1}G_n(x)
\pmod{x^n-1}.$$ By Fermat’s Little Theorem, $\left(A(1)\right)^{p-1} \equiv 1 \pmod{p}$. Therefore $A(x^p)B(x) \equiv G_n(x)$, where the exponents are reduced modulo $n$ and then the s are reduced modulo $p$. Both $A(x^p)B(x)$ and $G_n(x)$ have coefficients whose sum is $n$ since $A(1)B(1)=G_n(1)=n$. Consider the following reductions.
“[(R1)]{}” $A(x^p)B(x)$ is reduced modulo $x^n-1$, yielding a polynomial $G^*(x)$.
“[(R2)]{}”The coefficients of $G^*(x)$ are reduced modulo $p$, yielding $G_n(x)$. (R1) preserves the sum of the coefficients, but (R2) reduces the sum by some nonnegative multiple of $p$. Because the sum of the of both $G^*(x)$ and $G_n(x)$ is $n$, that multiple is $0$. Therefore $G^{*}(x)=G_n(x)$.
We use the following result to prove Sands’ Theorem (Lemma 2.4). Let $A-A$ be the difference set $\{a_1-a_2:a_1,a_2 \in A\}$.
Let $A$ and $B$ be finite, $A,B \ne \{0\}$, and $A \oplus B$ a complete set of residues modulo $(\#A)(\#B)$. Then at least one of the following is true.
No member of $A-A$ is relatively prime to $\#B$.
No member of $B-B$ is relatively prime to $\#A$.
Let $n = (\#A)(\#B)$. By Lemma 1.3, $$A(x)B(x) \equiv 1 + x + \dots + x^{n-1}\pmod{x^n-1}.$$ Suppose $0 < a_1-a_2 = \delta'$ is relatively prime to $\#B$ and $0 < b_1-b_2 =\delta''$ is relatively prime to $\#A$. Lemma 2.2 shows that $$A(x^{\delta''})B(x^{\delta'}) \equiv 1 + x + \dots +
x^{n-1}\pmod{x^n-1},$$ so by Lemma 1.3 again, $\delta'' A \oplus \delta' B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$. But $$(b_1-b_2)a_1 + (a_1-a_2)b_2 = (b_1-b_2)a_2 + (a_1-a_2)b_1.$$ Thus the same number can be expressed $\delta'' a + \delta' b$ in two ways, which is impossible.
[@San] Let $A \oplus C=\Bbb Z$ be a tiling of period $n$ such that $A$ is finite, $0 \in A \cap C$, and $n$ has one or two prime factors. Then there is a prime factor $p$ of $n$ such that either $A \subset p\Bbb Z$ or $C \subseteq p\Bbb Z$.
Let $C=B \oplus n\Bbb Z$ and the prime factors of $n$ be $p$ and possibly $q$. Then at least one of 3.2(1) and 3.2(2) holds.
If 3.2(1) holds, then $A \subseteq A-A \subset p\Bbb Z \cup q \Bbb Z$, the first containment because $0 \in A$. If neither $p\Bbb Z$ nor $q\Bbb Z$ contains $A$, then there exist $a_1,a_2 \in A$ such that $a_1 \in p\Bbb Z \setminus q\Bbb Z$ and $a_2 \in q\Bbb Z \setminus
p\Bbb Z$. But then $a_1-a_2$ is relatively prime to $\#B$.
If 3.2(2) holds, the same argument shows that $B \subseteq p\Bbb Z$ or $B \subseteq q\Bbb Z$. Then the same is true for $C=B \oplus n\Bbb Z$.
Suppose $A$ is finite, $0 \in A$, $A$ tiles the integers with period $n$, and $n$ has two prime factors, $p$ and $q$. If neither $\Phi_p(x)$ nor $\Phi_q(x)$ is a divisor of $A(x)$, then $A \subset p\Bbb Z$ or $A \subset q\Bbb Z$.
Let $A \oplus (B \oplus n\Bbb Z)=\Bbb Z$ be a tiling of period $n$. By Lemma 1.3(4), $\Phi_p(x)$ and $\Phi_q(x)$ are divisors of $B(x)$. From the remark after Lemma 1.4, neither $p \Bbb Z$ nor $q \Bbb Z$ contains $B$. Then the conclusion follows by Lemma 2.4.
4\. A structure theory
In this section we describe the structure of those finite sets $A$ $A$ tiles the integers and $\#A$ has at most two prime factors. Equivalently, such that the set $S_A$ of prime powers $s$ such that the $\Phi_s(x)$ divides $A(x)$ consists of powers of at most two primes. For $S$ such a set of prime powers, let $\Cal
T_S$ be the collection of all subsets $A$ of $\{0,1,\dots,\lcm(S)-1\}$ which tile the integers and satisfy $\min(A)=0$ and $S_A=S$. Note that $\Cal T_\varnothing = \{0\}$ because $\lcm(\varnothing )=1$, and that $\Cal T_{\{p^{\alpha+1}\}}$ is the set whose only member is $p^{\alpha}\{0,1,\dots ,p-1\}$. We have seen that there is no loss in requiring $\min (A)=0$. We claim that a finite set $A'$ with $\min(A')=0$ and $S_{A'}=S$ tiles the integers if and only if $A'$ is congruent modulo $\lcm(S)$ to a member of $\Cal T_S$. For if $A' \equiv A \pmod {\lcm(S)}$, then $S_{A'} = S_{A} = S$, and as noted after the proof of Lemma 1.1, $A' \oplus C_S=\Bbb Z$ if and only if $A \oplus C_S=\Bbb Z$. Recall that $C_S$ is the universal translation set corresponding to $S$: $A \oplus C_S=\Bbb Z$ for every $A$ $A$ tiles the integers and $S_A=S$.
For purposes of comparison we recall the simpler structure of [*all*]{} finite sets which tile the integers $\Bbb N_0
=\{0,1,\dots\}$, due to deBruijn [@deB-3]. Note that every such set has a unique translation set, so the unique associated tiling has a period. One such set is $A=\{0,1,2,3,4\}\oplus \{0,10,20,30\} \oplus
\{0,120,240\}$, which tiles $\Bbb N_0$ with period $360$. $A$ can be written $A=\tilde A \oplus 120\{0,1,2\}$, where $\tilde A$ tiles $\Bbb N_0$ with period $60$, and it can be written $A=\{0,1,2,3,4\} \oplus 5\bar A$, where $\bar A$ tiles $\Bbb N_0$ with period $72 =360/5$. If $A \ne \{0\}$ is any finite set which tiles $\Bbb N_0$, then there are always these two types of direct sum decompostions, $A=\tilde A \oplus (n/p)\{0,1,\dots,p-1\}$ and $A=k\{0,1,\dots,q-1\} \oplus q\bar A$, where $p$ and $q$ are prime factors of the period $n$ of the tiling, $k=\gcd (A)$, and $\tilde A$ and $\bar A$ are shorter tiles. Iterating either decomposition, every tile is a direct sum, in one or more ways, of tiles of the form $m\{0,1,\dots,p-1\}$. If the order is as above, then $\tilde A$ is the direct sum of all but the last of the summands and $q \bar A$ is the direct sum of all but the first. $A(x)$ is thus a product of terms $(x^{mp}-1)/(x^m-1)=\Phi_p(x^m)$ and can easily be shown to satisfy (T1) and (T2).
We return to $\Cal T_S$ for the case that $S$ consists of the powers of at most two primes. Both decompositions above generalize, the second more usefully than the first.
Corresponding to the first decomposition, we will see that every member of $\Cal T_S$ is a disjoint union of translates of $(n/p)\{0,1,\dots,p-1\}$ and $(n/q)\{0,1,\dots,q-1\}$, where $n=\lcm(S)$. The simplest case where both must be used is $S=\{p,p^3,q^2\}$. An important example of this with $\lcm(S)=72$ is given below. More usefully, we will show that when $S \ne \varnothing$, every tile $A \in\Cal T_S$ is, as in Lemma 2.5, a union of translates of multiples of $p$ or $q$ smaller tiles: $A=m\bigcup_{i=0}^{p-1}\left(\{a_i\}\oplus p \bar A_i\right)$, where $m=\gcd(A)$, $a_0=0$, $\{a_0,a_1,\dots,a_{p-1}\}$ is a complete set of residues modulo $p$, every $\{a_i\} \oplus p\bar A_i \subset \{0,1,\dots,\lcm(S)-1\}$, and for some smaller set $\bar S$, every $\bar A_i\in \Cal T_{\bar S}$. We need not get a direct sum, as the $\bar A_i$ need not be equal. Every $\bar A_i$ in turn is a union of $p$ or $q$ translates of multiples of even shorter tiles. Iterating the procedure until $S=\varnothing$ gives the disjoint union referred to above.
Suppose that $S$ contains powers of only $p$, so that $\lcm(S)$ is a power of $p$. If $A \in \Cal T_S$, then $A \oplus C_S=\Bbb Z$ and either $p \in S$ and $C_S \subseteq p\Bbb Z$, or $p \notin S$ and $A \subset p\Bbb Z$. Let $\bar S=\{p^{\alpha} : p^{\alpha +1} \in S\}$. If $p \notin S$, then $\#\bar S=\#S$ and, as in Lemma 1.4, $\Cal T_S = \{p\bar A :
\bar A \in \Cal T_{\bar S}\}$. If $p \in S$, then by the Corollary to Lemma 2.5, the members of $\Cal T_S$ can be constructed by taking all unions $\bigcup_{i=0}^{p-1}\left( \{a_i\} \oplus p\bar A_i\right)$ with $\bar A_i \in \Cal T_{\bar S}$, $a_0=0$, $\{a_0,a_1,\dots,a_{p-1}\}$ a complete set of residues modulo $p$, and every $\{a_i\} \oplus p\bar A_i \subset \{0,1,\dots,\lcm(S)-1\}$. This procedure gives all of $\Cal T_S$ and nothing else.
Suppose now that $S$ contains powers of both $p$ and $q$ and let $$\bar S=\{p^{\alpha} : p^{\alpha +1} \in S\} \cup
\{q^{\beta} : q^{\beta} \in S\}, \quad \bar S'=\{p^{\alpha} :
p^{\alpha}\in S\} \cup \{q^{\beta} : q^{\beta+1} \in S\}.$$ We consider the three cases: $p \in S$, $q \in S$, and $p,q \notin S$. If $p \in S$, then $C_S \subseteq p\Bbb Z$ and $\Cal T_S$ can be constructed as above by taking all unions $\bigcup_{i=0}^{p-1}\left(\{a_i\} \oplus p\bar A_i \right)$ with $\bar A_i \in \Cal T_{\bar S}$, $a_0 = 0$, $\{a_0,a_1,\dots,a_{p-1}\}$ a complete set of residues modulo $p$, and every $\{a_i\} \oplus p\bar A_i \subset \{0,1,\dots,\lcm(S)-1\}$. If $q \in S$, then the analogous procedure, with the roles of $p,\bar S$ and $q,{\bar S'}$ interchanged, gives $\Cal T_S$. If both $p$ and $q$ are in $S$, then $C_S \subseteq pq\Bbb Z$ and either procedure gives $\Cal T_S$. If neither $p$ nor $q$ is in $S$, then by Lemma 3.3, every member of $\Cal T_S$ is contained in $p \Bbb Z$ or $q \Bbb Z$. Then $\#S=\#\bar{S}=\#\bar S'$, and $\{A \in \Cal T_S : A \subset p\Bbb Z\} = \{p\bar A : \bar A \in
\Cal T_{\bar S}\}$, while $\{A \in \Cal T_S : A \subset q\Bbb Z\} =\{q\bar A : \bar A \in
\Cal T_{\bar S'}\}$. In all three cases, this procedure gives all of $\Cal T_S$ and nothing else.
We examine a few cases in more detail, including the important example of deBruijn [@deB-2].
When $S$ contains only powers of $p$, every member of $\Cal T_S$ is a union of translates of $p^{\alpha}\{0,1,\dots,p-1\}$, where $p^{\alpha+1}$ is the largest member of $S$. Hence every member of $\Cal T_S$ is a direct sum of this set and a set $\tilde A$ which also tiles the integers. Then $S_{\tilde A}=S \setminus \{p^{\alpha+1}\}$, but $\tilde A$ need not be a direct sum. An example with $S =\{2,4,32\}$ is $16\{0,1\} \oplus \{0,1,2,11\}$.
It is easy to show that if $S = {\{p^{\alpha},q^{\beta}\}}$, then every member of $ \Cal T_S$ is $$p^{\alpha-1}\left(\tilde A \oplus
pq^{\beta-1} \{0,1,\dots,q-1\}\right)$$ for $\tilde A \subseteq \{0,\dots,pq^{\beta-1}-~1\}$ a complete set of residues modulo $p$ containing $0$, or an analogous set with the roles of $p$ and $q$ interchanged. Thus $\left\{k : \Phi_k(x) \text{ divides } A(x)\right\}$ contains $\{p^\alpha\} \cup \{q^\beta,pq^\beta,p^2q^\beta,\dots,p^\alpha
q^\beta\}$ or $\{q^\beta\} \cup \{p^\alpha,p^\alpha q,p^\alpha q^2,\dots,p^\alpha
q^\beta\}$. If $\alpha>1$ and $\beta>1$, there are cyclotomic divisors of $A(x)$ in addition to the three required by (T2).
The situation when $S$ has at least three elements is different. In this case $\Cal T_S$ has members whose corresponding polynomial has only the cyclotomic divisors required by (T2). We illustrate this with the promised example. Among the members of $\Cal T_{\{4,9\}}$ are $\bar A_0=\{0,3,6,18,21,24\}$ and $\bar A_1 =\{0,2,12,14,24,26\} $. Each is a direct sum. Consider $$\align
A &= \left(\{0\}\oplus 2\bar A_0 \right)
\cup\left(\{1\} \oplus 2\bar A_1\right)\\
&= \{0,1,5,6,12,25,29,36,42,48,49,53\} \in \Cal T_{\{2,8,9\}}.
\endalign$$ The cyclotomic divisors of $A(x)=\bar A_0(x^2)+x\bar A_1(x^2)$ are $\Phi_2(x)$ and those $\Phi_k(x)$ which divide both $\bar A_0(x^2)$ and $\bar A_1(x^2)$, iė, $$\align
\left\{k : \Phi_k(x) \text{ divides } A(x)\right\}
&= \{2\} \cup \left(\{8,9,18,36,72\} \cap \{8,9,18,24,72\}\right)\\
&= \{2,8,9,18,72\},
\endalign$$ exactly the set required by (T2). Then as in Theorem A, $A \oplus (B \oplus 72\Bbb Z) = \Bbb Z$ for $B=\{0,8,16,18,26,34\}$. deBruijn’s example was actually $\left(\{12\} \oplus 2\bar A_0\right)\cup\left(\{17\}
\oplus 2\bar A_1\right)$. It was the first example where $A\oplus B$ is a complete set of residues modulo $n$ but neither $A$ nor $B$ is periodic modulo $n$. Equivalently, neither $A$ nor $B$ is a disjoint union of translates of $(n/p)\{0,1,\dots,p-1\}$ for a single prime factor $p$ of $n$.
deB-1 deBruijn, N. G. On bases for the set of integers Publ. Math. Debrecen 1 1950 232–242
deB-2 On the factorization of cyclic groups Indag. Math. 17 1955 370–377
deB-3 On number systems Nieuw Arch. Wisk. (3) 4 1956 15–17
Haj Hajós, G. Sur la factorisation des groupes abéliens Časopis Pěst. Mat. Fys. (3) 4 1950 157–162 French
L-W Lagarias, J. and Wang, Y. Tiling the line with translates of one tile Invent. Math. 124 1996 341–365
New Newman, D. J. Tesselation of integers J. Number Theory 9 1977 107–111
San Sands, A. D. On Keller’s conjecture for certain cyclic groups Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc. (2) 22 1977 17–21
Swe Swenson, C. Direct sum subset decompositions of $Z$ Pacific J. Math. 53 1974 629–633
Sza Szabó, S. A type of factorization of finite abelian groups Discrete Math. 54 1985 121–124
Tij Tijdeman, R. Decomposition of the integers as a direct sum of two subsets Number theory (Paris, 1992–1993) London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. Cambridge Univ. Press Cambridge 215 1995 261–276
[^1]: Part of this work was done while the first author was a member of the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI), where research is supported in part by NSF grant DMS-9701755. The authors thank J. Propp for putting them in touch with each other. The first author thanks J. Jungman and M. Keane for helpful conversations.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- 'R. Lopes de Oliveira'
- 'M. A. Smith'
- 'C. Motch'
date: 'Received 10 November 2008 / Accepted 6 January 2010'
title: '$\gamma$ Cassiopeiae: an X-ray Be star with personality[^1]'
---
Introduction
============
The observed properties of (B0.5Ve; m$_{V}$=2.25) in ultraviolet to infrared wavelengths have led to major discoveries related to the Be-phenomenon since its discovery as the first of what became known as “Be stars" [@Secchi67]. However, its X-ray emission is not typical of this kind of object [@W82]. The X-ray emission of is dominated by a hot plasma component ($k$T $\sim$ 10–12keV), with mildly high luminosity ($\sim$10$^{32-33}$ergs$^{-1}$) and variable flux [@Smith04 and references therein]. Be stars at large are softer X-ray emitters ($k$T $\sim$ 0.5keV) with lower luminosity ($\la$10$^{32}$ergs$^{-1}$) and little variability [e.g., @Berghofer97]. In contrast, most of the well investigated Be/X-ray binary systems are Be+neutron star systems and show a high luminosity ($\ga$ 10$^{33}$ergs$^{-1}$) and a distinctly nonthermal high energy distribution. Notably, no large X-ray outburst has been observed in . This is at variance with the behavior witnessed in many classical Be/X-ray systems. is now known to be in a 204-day binary, with an eccentricity variously determined to be near $e$ = 0 and 0.26 [@Harmanec00; @Miros02]. Little is known about the secondary, except that it is likely to have a mass in the range 0.5–2 M$_{\rm \odot}$. Recently, X-ray properties similar to those of have been observed in a small but growing number of Be stars: the -like stars [@Motch07; @Lopes06; @Lopes07T].
A conclusive explanation for the X-ray emission of and its analogs is lacking. The first suggestion to explain the hard X-ray emission of was that it is powered by accretion of matter from the Be wind or disk onto an accreting neutron star [@W82]. More recently, some have advocated the presence of an accreting white dwarf companion. This suggestion comes from several X-ray characteristics of cataclysmic variable systems [e.g., @M86; @K98], such as their thermal nature and only moderate X-ray luminosity. However, the analogy is incomplete upon further scrutiny, and X-rays would have to come from accretion onto a white dwarf representative of a new class of Be/X-ray binaries [@Lopes07] and have a high efficiency of mass accretion energy to X-ray flux.
A second proposed scenario suggests that the X-ray emission of is a consequence of magnetic interaction between its stellar surface and a Be (Keplerian decretion) circumstellar disk that entrains a magnetic field. This idea is based in part on the correlations of the UV and optical variabilities with the X-ray light curve and also indirect evidence of magnetic field observed in this star. This evidence takes the form of migrating subfeatures running blue-to-red through optical and UV line profiles [@Yang1988; @SRH98] and also the discovery of a gray, robust, 1.21581-day feature in the star’s light curve. This periodicity must be very near or identical to the star’s rotation period [@SHV06]. The inference of a disk connection is based on the cyclical aspect and reddish tinge of the optical cycles that correlate with the X-ray ones. It is also supported by patterns of variability in the CIV and SiIV lines that are occasionally seen in the X-ray light curve [@C00]. One piece of evidence for this interaction comes from the observation of highly redshifted [*absorption*]{} UV lines, suggestive of material being ejected from the circumstellar environment toward the star with enough energies to produce $\sim$ 10keV X-rays when they impact the star [@SR99].
Both the magnetic disk and accretion interpretations have important astrophysical implications. The former suggests that disk dynamos operate and also that these stars are possible proto-magnetars. The accretion interpretation would imply the presence of a neutron star in an unusual accretion regime, or a white dwarf with novel properties. The presence of a white dwarf is still speculative, but such objects are predicted to be common as secondaries in models of evolution of binaries with B primaries. The resolution of the mystery of the production of X-rays in “ stars" could lead to a breakthrough in either of these fields.
We have focused our efforts to try to understand the origin of the X-rays of and analog Be stars. In this paper we confine ourselves to the X-ray properties of from high and medium resolution spectroscopy and timing studies using data obtained by XMM-*Newton* satellite. [*Chandra*]{} HETG data are also reinvestigated.
Previous X-ray observations of $\gamma$Cas
==========================================
Several [*Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE)*]{} observations of the light curve of detailed by @SRC98 and @RS00 (hereafter “SRC98" and “RS00," respectively) have disclosed that the light curve undergoes variations on rapid (flaring), intermediate (several hours) and long (2-3 month cycles) timescales. We summarize the flaring results first as follows:
- Flares (shots) are ubiquitous, except during brief periods of very low X-ray flux. The reoccurrence of these lulls is often cyclical.
- Individual flare profiles are narrow and symmetrical in shape.
- Collectively flares show a log-normal distribution in energy.
- The flares show an approximately $1/f$ distribution down to the photon limit of the instrument (for [*RXTE*]{} about 4 seconds). Occasional groups of flares (aggregates) last as long as a few minutes, and indicate the end of this red noise dependence.
- Spectrophotometry of shots indicates that their flux is usually difficult to distinguish from that of the underlying basal flux. That is, the two components have about the same high temperature of 10–12keV.
Apparently random variations of several hours and 10’s of percent amplitude occur often in the X-ray light curve. One long simultaneous observation with the [*Goddard High Resolution Spectrograph*]{} (GHRS) on the [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{} established the correlation of small-amplitude UV continuum fluctuations [@SRC98; @SR99] and the concomitant absorptions in either lines arising from either lower or higher than expected ionization and excitation states (SR99).
Long-term variations have also been reported with cycle lengths of 50-91 days and amplitudes of a factor of three (Robinson, Smith, & Henry 2002, “RSH02"). These are so far well correlated with corresponding cycles in optical bands (Johnson $B$ and $V$). Although the optical amplitudes are 100 times smaller than the X-ray ones they are still much larger than in terms of luminosity output and therefore cannot be the result of reprocessing of X-rays. Rather, a common mechanism appears to mediate both variabilities.
Modulations with several hours timescales were suggested by previous X-ray satellites. @Frontera87 reported a modulation with timescale of $\sim$ 1.67 hr from EXOSAT observation on 1984 December 7, while @P93 argued from a reanalysis of this data that such an oscillation arise from statistical fluctuations in the red noise spectrum of the source. Also, @P93 have not found periodic oscillation in other EXOSAT data obtained on 1984 December 25-26. A $\sim$ 2.3hr oscillation was suspected by @Haberl95 from ROSAT observation on 1993 July 16-17. @O99 found weak evidence for a $\sim$ 0.6h and 2.6hr in BeppoSAX observation of carried out on 1998 July 20-21. None of these suspected detections could be found by subsequent monitorings of the star with the RXTE (e.g., Smith, Robinson, & Henry 2000).
Pre-high resolution spectroscopy of has demonstrated that its X-ray emission is dominated by a thermal component with $k$T $\sim$ 10–12keV [@M86; @P93; @K98; @O99]. These spectra exhibited FeXXV and FeXXVILy$\alpha$ K line strengths consistent with this temperature, but they are consistent only with a subsolar Fe abundance of 0.2–0.4Z$_{\odot}$.
Prior to this paper, the only high dispersion spectrum of was obtained on 2001 August 10 by the [*Chandra*]{} High Energy Transmission Grating (HTEG) discussed by @Smith04 (hereafter “S04"). This spectrum showed a complex structure caused by plasma radiating in at least 3–4 temperatures ranging from about 12keV to about 0.15keV. The hot component in turn consisted of two subcomponents with very different ($\sim$10$^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$ and 3$\times$10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$) column densities. While the FeK lines again indicated abundances of only 0.22${\pm 0.05}$Z$_{\odot}$ other Fe lines arising from the L-shell give abundances which were consistent with the solar value. The strengths of other lines were also consistent with solar abundances.
Observations and data reduction
===============================
was observed by the XMM-*Newton* X-ray observatory on 2004 February 5 during about 68ks in the revolution 762 (ObsId 0201220101). This observation was performed with the EPIC $pn$ camera running in the [*fast timing mode*]{} (timing resolution of 0.03 ms), connected to the [*thick*]{} optical filter, and with the high spectral resolution RGS1 and RGS2 cameras. The optical monitor was blocked as usual for bright optical sources, and the central CCDs in the MOS1/2 cameras were switched off in order to avoid overloading the telemetry. Data reduction has been made using the Science Analysis System (SAS) software v8.0.1. All data were reprocessed using the pipeline <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">epproc</span> (for EPIC $pn$ camera) and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">rgsproc</span> (for RGS cameras) tasks. For the timing analysis, we use the Z$^{2}_{n}$ Rayleigh [@Buccheri83] and the Scargle/Midas [@Scargle82] peridograms, and the Xronos[^2] package. For spectral fits, the XSPEC[^3] software v11.3.2 was applied. The EPIC $pn$ data obtained in the fast timing mode have a doubtful calibration and increased noise especially at softer energies [$<$ 0.5keV; @Guainazzi08] and, to be on the safe side, timing analysis was restricted to broadbands at the 0.8–10keV energy range without relevant loss of informations. For spectral studies, since we have high quality spectra from RGS1 and RGS2 cameras covering the soft X-rays (6.2–38Å; or $\sim$ 0.3–2keV), we use the EPIC $pn$ data as complementary data covering the hard part of the spectrum (1.25–4.1Å; or $\sim$ 3–10keV). We noticed that the inclusion of the low energy part of the EPIC $pn$ data produces systematic residuals that can be connected to calibration uncertainties. Because of the high count rate of , the inclusion of times with slight background flares during the XMM-[*Newton*]{} observation has little impact on its EPIC $pn$ and RGS light curves. However, we opted for excluding these times in the spectral analysis. The resulting exposure times in the flare-free good time intervals were 48ks for the RGS1 and RGS2 cameras and 51.2 ks for EPIC $pn$.
We reinvestigated the [*Chandra*]{} data of obtained on 2001 August 10 with the HETG during about 52ks (ObsID 1895) with the CIAOv4.0, reported by @Smith04. Our purpose was to compare the [*Chandra*]{} and XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectra of from the same analysis techniques and thus to insure that any differences between the derived parameters are not due to the model fitting programs. Our reanalysis of the [*Chandra*]{} spectrum with XSPEC and families of [*mekal*]{} models gives results consistent with those reported by S04, obtained from Sherpa and APEC models.
Timing studies
==============
The soft (0.8–2keV) and hard (2–10keV) light curves of are marked for strong variabilities on timescales ranging from a few to thousand of seconds (Fig. \[fig:lc\_hrd\_gcas\]). On long timescales the variation attains $\sim$80% of the mean flux. Superposed on this global modulation are ubiquitous flare-like events. We note in particular that the soft X-ray light curve responds faithfully to the rapid flares of the high energy light curve. In addition, the hardness of the source (Fig. \[fig:lc\_hrd\_gcas\]c) usually exhibits nearly the same variations as the integrated flux. For example, the formal slope of the hardness-total count rate curve from our observations (not shown) is only (5.2$\pm$2.9)$\times$10$^{-4}$.
These findings are similar to those reported by SRC98, though RS00 found that shot fluxes tended to exhibit a lower (softer) ratio.
Figure \[fig:spctpotgcas\]a exhibits the power spectrum of the EPIC $pn$ events from the combined spectral bands shown in Fig.\[fig:lc\_hrd\_gcas\]. A key point from this figure is that at frequencies above about 0.003Hz the slope of the distribution is significantly steeper than -1. This was also noted by SRC98 and RS00, who found slopes of -1.23 and -1.36 in 1996 and 1998, respectively. The difference between those values was already marginally statistically significant, and the current result is certainly even more significantly different from the 1996 result. As noted by RS00, the difference between these slopes and -1 is most likely due to a relative prevalence of strong, longer-lived flares as compared to rapid short ones in these data. RS00 reported $1/f$ slopes in their 1998 light curves that were intermediate between the 1996 slope of -1 and the present steeper one. The explanation for the knee at about 0.003Hz is again likely to be caused by the absence of discrete flares with timescales longer than a few minutes.
The break is due to the dominance of apparently random variations that often occur in the X-ray light curve on timescales of about a half hour or longer. At least some of these appear to be connected with variations in the UV continuum, which @SRC98 have associated with the partial occultation of the star by rotationally advected translucent corotating clouds.
Another interesting feature emerging from the autocorrelation analysis of a light curve obtained by the RXTE satellite (Fig.\[fig:gcas\_autocor\]) was the reappearance of periodic flux lulls. Following the procedure of @RS00 we have cross-correlated both the fluxes in our XMM-[*Newton*]{} light curve and also the reciprocals of these fluxes. The latter exercise was carried out because RS00 had found that the autocorrelation of the direct fluxes produced no distinguishable features, whereas the autocorrelation of the reciprocal fluxes produced dramatic variations with lags of spacing of 7.5 hours and higher multiples. These authors reasoned that this different behavior could come about if X-ray active centers at various latitudes of the rotating star would not produce marked features in the autocorrelation curve. However, features would be observed from the curve generated from the reciprocal fluxes if only a few longitudes of the star were not covered with X-ray activity. Our results, shown in Fig.\[fig:gcas\_autocor\] for the direct flux, produced rather similar curves for both the direct and reciprocal fluxes, indicating that the distribution of X-ray centers had rearranged themselves dramatically between the two epochs of observation. The curve itself shows evenly spaced maxima every $\sim$ 10156s (2.8 hours; Fig. \[fig:spctpotgcas\]b). On a subsequent study of six [*RXTE*]{} light curves of , @RSH02 discovered that autocorrelation peaks were most apparent in light curves associated with flare fluxes. These authors found that the features are centered at different time lags at different epochs, and occasionally did not occur at all. At various times these authors found spacings at 7.5 hours, 3.5 hours, and 5.8 hours. The 2.8 hours spacing we now find appear to be a recurrence of the same cycle length these authors found during a long RXTE observation in 2000 December. As @RSH02 found, the autocorrelation peaks seem to be caused by an absence of flux (lulls) at different times. As such, they seem to hint at the existence of X-ray relaxation cycles in the environment. In contrast, @Lopes07 found no such lulls in the light curve of .
Spectroscopic properties
========================
Comparison with previous [*Chandra*]{} HETGS spectrum
-----------------------------------------------------
We have obtained a XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectrum in order to investigate time-dependent differences and also to exploit the higher effective aperture of the system, albeit with lower resolution at higher energies. The XMM-[*Newton*]{} provides coverage over longer wavelengths ($\sim$ 1–38Å) than an [*Chandra*]{} spectrum with the high and medium energy gratings ($\sim$ 1.5–25Å).
Our XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectrum shows the same general properties as the 2001 [*Chandra*]{} spectrum (Fig. \[fig:spctgcas\_rgs12\_flux\]). Both spectra show continua consistent with a multi-component thermal model that includes a number of Lyman$\alpha$ lines of hydrogen-like ions, helium-like ions, as well as a few Lyman$\beta$ lines. Fluorescent lines from lower ion stages of Fe and Si are also visible. The high energies are dominated by the presence of the “FeK complex" (FeXXVILy$\alpha$, FeXXV, and fluorescent FeK lines) in the range 1.7–2Å. The two spectra of this aggregate look similar, except that the fluorescence feature is weaker in the XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectrum. However, our RGS spectrum reveals many more details than the [*Chandra*]{} one because of the XMM-[*Newton*]{}’s larger effective aperture as well as an extension to longer wavelengths and because in 2004 the soft X-rays of were attenuated far less than in 2001. These circumstances allowed us to probe to lower temperatures and to better judge the number of components required to fit both lines and continua in the soft X-ray region.
Selection of multi-component modeling
-------------------------------------
Our models are the results of fitting both the continua and the line strengths in a multivariable solution with either the [*mekal*]{} formulation for optically thin plasmas, or a related model, [*vmekal*]{}, in which individual elemental abundances can be determined independently. A [*Gaussian*]{} line was included to describe the fluorescence feature arising from low-ion stages of Fe at 1.94Å (6.4keV), not incorporated in the [*mekal*]{} code. In all cases we adopted the [*phabs*]{} code to describe the photoelectric absorption. When required, we assumed the Hipparcos distance of 188pc for [@Perryman97].
The high quality of our EPIC $pn$ and RGS spectra allowed us to determine in detail the thermal components required to fit the line and continuum fluxes. This was especially important in allowing us to test whether the plasma has a continuous range of temperatures. Initial explorations showed that contributions from 3 or 4 temperatures are necessary. In addition, otherwise mediocre fits to the continua (especially the soft continuum) required us to consider a two-absorption column model. We found first the same hot temperature that many other investigators have reported. We will refer to this component as $k$T$_Q$. This component has a 12keV temperature and dominates the total X-ray flux. The carbon and nitrogen line spectra are emitted by a cool plasma with a temperature $k$T$_1$ of $\sim$ 0.1keV. The unabsorbed luminosity of this component, integrated over the range 0.2–12keV, is $\sim$ 6.8–8$\times$10$^{31}$ergs$^{-1}$. One or two intermediate (warm) temperatures are likewise required to explain the presence of lines of oxygen, neon, magnesium, [*silicon,*]{} a few Fe ions with L-shell configurations (FeXVII-XXIV), and the FeXXV line (Figures \[fig:spctgcas\_rgs12\_flux\] and \[fig:fekcomplex\]).
Before refining the initial 3 and 4 component models further, we attempted to determine whether these multiple thermal components were discrete or could be part of a continuous distribution, as might be expected in a single, thermally differentiated plasma. To continue tests using this initial set of simple models, we froze all but one temperature in our 4-T model and computed models for the remaining temperature specified over graduatedsteps. We made movies of these results overplotted with the observations and determined those values of the scanned temperature which allowed us to judge the best agreement with the observations. This technique also allowed us to note whether predicted lines are not observed as well as to test whether the principal plasma components are essentially monothermal. Figure\[fig:neferegion\] demonstrates this for $k$T$_2$ in M2 (4-T), which is necessarily confined within the range 0.5 and 1keV. This plot shows the absence of FeXXIII and strong FeXXIV lines, as marked on our 10–13Å segment of our RGS2 spectrum (RGS1 shows a gap at this wavelength). These lines would be stronger visible if the temperature were in the range 0.7–0.9keV, and yet they are not seen. This fact eliminates the possibility that $k$T$_2$ is a distribution of temperatures extending to higher temperatures than 0.7keV. On the lower bound our models predict the presence of the FeXVIII 14.2Å line for temperatures $\le$0.5keV, and this is not visible either. In addition, the abrupt disappearance of components from the OVII complex in the models shows that the absence of intermediate temperature plasma extends from 0.5keV to about 0.2keV. Altogether these diagnostics indicate that the $k$T$_{2}$ component in the environment is limited to a very narrow range of temperatures centered near 0.6keV and that it is distinct from a lower or higher plasma component. This statement can probably be extended to the spatial separation of the warm and cool plasmas as well.
Proceeding with this analysis, the weak MgXII Ly$\alpha$ line hints the existence of a warm $k$T$_3$ component at $\sim$ 2keV, although some of our models have managed to achieve fits without it. The absence of yet other Fe L lines indicates that there is likely no plasma emission in the range of 2.5 to at least 5keV. Also, the presence of the FeXXVI Ly$\alpha$ feature, the main [*line*]{} diagnostic in the hard X-ray spectrum of , requires a temperature of at least 8keV. The FeXXV Ly$\alpha$ line requires a value significantly lower than this limit, and this means that it cannot be formed in the $k$T$_Q$ plasma component alone. In Figure\[fig:neferegion\] a feature due to NeX Lyman$\beta$ is present. This feature, visible in both the individual RGS1 and RGS2 spectra, cannot be easily fit with our thermal equilibrium ([*mekal*]{}) models.
It is quite possible that the $k$T$_Q$ component consists of some distribution of temperatures around a mean value of 12–13keV. This inference is supported by the occasional color variations in the high energy light curve of (SRC98), suggesting the presence of hot many separated exploding gas volumes having a small range of temperatures.
The upshot of these considerations the presence and absence of various lines in this spectrum forces the conclusion that the plasma does not exhibit a continuous Differential Emission Measure (DEM). Rather, there are gaps over the ranges of about 2.5–8keV, 0.7–1keV, and 0.2–0.5keV. S04 had suspected that a continuous DEM was inappropriate but could not state it conclusively because of the pronounced photoelectric absorption of the [*Chandra*]{} soft-energy spectrum.
[r c c c c ]{}\
\
& && hot component, 2-col.\
\
& 3-T & 4-T && 3-T\
& (M1) & (M2) && (M3)\
\
N$_\mathrm{H_{a}}$ (10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 0.22$^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ & 0.24$^{+0.04}_{-0.04}$ && 0.24$^{+0.04}_{-0.04}$\
$k$T$_{1}$ (keV) & 0.10$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & 0.11$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ && 0.11$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$\
$f_{{\rm T}_{1}}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & $\sim$ 1.6$\times$10$^{-11}$ (7.3%) & $\sim$ 1.9$\times$10$^{-11}$ (8.4%) && $\sim$ 1.8$\times$10$^{-11}$ (8.0%)\
EM$_{\rm T_{1}}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & $\sim$ 0.5 (11.5%) & $\sim$ 0.7 (15.4%) && $\sim$ 0.6 (12.9%)\
$k$T$_{2}$ (keV) & 0.64$^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & 0.64$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ && 0.62$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$\
$f_{{\rm T}_{2}}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & $\sim$ 4.0$\times$10$^{-12}$ (1.8%) & $\sim$ 4.2$\times$10$^{-12}$ (1.9%) && $\sim$ 4.0$\times$10$^{-12}$ (1.8%)\
EM$_{\rm T_{2}}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & $\sim$ 0.05 (1.1%) & $\sim$ 0.06 (1.3%) && $\sim$ 0.06 (1.3%)\
$k$T$_{3}$ (keV) & ... & 2.40$^{+0.38}_{-0.26}$ && ...\
$f_{{\rm T}_{3}}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & ... & $\sim$ 1.2$\times$10$^{-11}$ (5.3%) && ...\
EM$_{\rm T_{3}}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & ... & $\sim$ 0.2 (4.4%) && ...\
$k$T$_{Q'}$ (keV) & ... & ... && 12.38$^{+0.30}_{-0.28}$ $^{(*)}$\
$f_{{\rm T}_{Q'}}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & ... & ... && $\sim$ 3.2$\times$10$^{-11}$ (14.3%)\
EM$_{{\rm T}_{Q'}}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & ... & ... && $\sim$ 0.6 (12.9%)\
N$_\mathrm{H_{b}}$ (10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 0.029$^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$ & 0.022$^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$ && 0.019$^{+0.003}_{-0.003}$\
$k$T$_{Q}$ (keV) & 12.55$^{+0.31}_{-0.29}$ & 14.32$^{+0.59}_{-0.55}$ && 12.38 $^{(*)}$\
$f_{{\rm T}_{Q}}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & $\sim$ 2.0$\times$10$^{-10}$ (90.9%) & $\sim$ 1.9$\times$10$^{-10}$ (84.4%) && $\sim$ 1.7$\times$10$^{-10}$ (75.9%)\
EM$_{{\rm T}_{Q}}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & $\sim$ 3.8 (87.4%) & $\sim$ 3.6 (78.9%) && $\sim$ 3.4 (72.9%)\
$Z_{{\rm T}_{Q,Q'}}$ ($Z_{\odot}$) & 0.13$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & 0.10$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ && 0.12$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$\
Line (keV) & 6.4$^b$ & 6.4$^b$ && 6.4$^b$\
$\sigma_{\rm Line}$ (keV) & 0.01 & 0.01 && 0.09$^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$\
$f_{tot}$ (erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) & $\sim$ 2.2$\times$10$^{-10}$ & $\sim$ 2.2$\times$10$^{-10}$ && $\sim$ 2.3$\times$10$^{-10}$\
EM$_{tot}$ (10$^{55}$ cm$^{-3}$) & $\sim$ 4.4 & $\sim$ 4.6 && $\sim$ 4.7\
$\chi^{2}_{\nu}$/d.o.f.$^{\mathrm{a}}$ & 1.47/1532 & 1.44/1529 && 1.46/1530\
$^{\mathrm{a}}$ degrees of freedom; $^{\mathrm{b}}$ frozen parameter.
Notes: Fluxes are given unabsorbed in the 0.2–12keV energy band. In parentesis are the fluxes and EM in % of the total values. Plasmas with solar abundances, except for the \[Fe\] of the hot component. Quoted errors are at the 90% confidence level. Base model: <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">N$_{\rm H_a}*$(T$_1$+T$_2$+T$_3$+T$_{Q'}$)+N$_{\rm H_b}*$(T$_Q$)</span>; see Section \[sect:modelfit\] for details.
Model fitting {#sect:modelfit}
-------------
The above procedures allowed us to refine our initial 3-T and 4-T models, utilizing both line and continuum flux information. Further attempts to search for a continuous Differential Emission Measure from the continuum alone, such as with a cooling flow [*cemekl*]{} led to significantly degraded fits even in the continuum.[^4]
The fits converged for $k$T$_{\rm max}$ $\sim$ 42keV and $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ = 2.4. Freezing $k$T$_{\rm max}$ to 12keV produced an unacceptably high $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ = 6.4. We next tried a composite model [*cemekl + mekal*]{}. This resulted in temperatures of $k$T$_{\rm max}$ $\sim$ 12keV and $k$T $\sim$ 0.9keV for each component, respectively, and a $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ = 1.75. This model failed to describe the continuum at high energies and underpredicted the following features: the FeXXV line in the FeK$\alpha$ complex, the Fe L-shell lines, OVIIILy$\beta$, the $fir$ triplet of OVII, NVIILy$\alpha$, and NeXLy$\alpha$. Allowing the [*cemekal*]{} $\alpha$ parameter to vary did not improve the fits.
Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\] shows the results of our analysis in terms of three basic models. Columns 2, 3, and 4 list the values determined for the temperature, column density, the modeled unattenuated flux, the resulting percentage of the total X-ray flux, and emission measures for the three and four component models, and the Fe abundance derived from the FeXXV and FeXXVILy$\alpha$ ions. In all cases the high temperature component we designate as $k$T$_Q$ was found to lie near 12–14keV. Column 2 of Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\] shows the solution for a 3-T model, “(M1)," that includes a cool and warm components ($k$T$_1$ and $k$T$_2$, respectively) as well as the dominant one, $k$T$_Q$. The cool/warm component fluxes were attenuated by a column N$_{\rm H_a}$ while the hot one was attenuated by N$_{\rm H_b}$. Our 4-T model (column 3 of Table\[tbl:gcas\_4T\]; “M2") gives the solution for the addition of a warm component having $k$T$_{3}$ and also attenuated by N$_{\rm H_a}$. The final column of the table, “(M3)," is the 3-T solution again. However, this time the hot component was attenuated by both N$_{\rm H_a}$ and N$_{\rm H_b}$ columns. In this model, the dominant hot subcomponent ($k$T$_Q$), affected by the individual N$_{\rm H_b}$ column, contributes to $\sim$ 76% of the total flux. The second hot subcomponent ($k$T$_Q'$), warm ($k$T$_2$), and cool ($k$T$_1$) components were affected by a common N$_{\rm H_a}$ absorption column. Figures \[fig:unfoldspctnew\] and \[fig:unfoldspctpn\] show the unfolded spectrum for each model, allowing the reader to judge which of the various observed lines is formed in which plasma component. In our solutions we found that N$_{\rm H_a}$ $\sim$ 2$\times$10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$ and N$_{\rm H_b}$ $\sim$ 2–3$\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. By comparison, the UV and H$\alpha$ determined ISM column density to from the literature is a scant 1–2$\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, which leaves only a little room for absorption of the soft X-rays within the source.
The 4-T fit we found included components $k$T$_1$, $k$T$_2$, $k$T$_3$, and $k$T$_Q$ having values of about 14keV, 2.4keV, 0.6keV, and 0.1keV, respectively. For the 3-T models, the $k$T$_3$ component was omitted, but this omission must be compensated for in the FeXXVILy$\alpha$ strength by decreasing the temperature from 14 to 12.5keV.
It is worth noting that any of our models give us the desired $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ $\sim$ 1. The residuals are mostly in the lines, not in the continuum, and the relatively high – although even acceptable – values of $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ (Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\]) are due in part to an inadequate description of the individual line profiles.
A key point to take away from the Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\] is that although 84–90% of the total flux is radiated by the $kT_Q$ (or $kT_Q$+$kT_Q'$) component(s), almost all the lines except for the FeK complex is contributed by the cooler $k$T$_{1-3}$. The hot $kT_Q$ component therefore provides no kinematic information. However, the possibility of multiple absorption columns and the presence of the fluorescence features of Fe and Si do provide potential geometrical descriptions for the emitting volumes.
Although S04’s solution for the 2001 spectrum was similar in that it required a 4 thermal component fit, there were some small differences in detail that are significantly different. One of the clearest differences is with the precise temperature of a warm component (their “$k$T$_3$" $\sim$ 0.4keV cf. the $k$T$_2$ $\sim$ 0.6keV herein). A small increase in the OVIII/OVII Lyman$\alpha$ line ratio for the XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectrum is indicative of the higher value we find. If a warm temperature is a quasi-permanent feature of the X-ray spectrum, it has definitely shifted from 0.4keV to 0.6keV between 2001 and 2004. The hot ($\sim$ 12–14keV) and cool ($\sim$ 0.1keV) component temperatures overlap. Although we cannot be sure if $\sim$ 2keV plasma existed in 2004, its possible presence is consistent with emission powered by a similar thermal component in the 2001 spectrum in their 2001 [*Chandra*]{} observation.
As already noted, one of most important differences from earlier results is that no high absorption column was needed to fit this spectrum. S04 found that the [*Chandra*]{} spectrum required a fitting with two hot plasma absorption columns. The first contributed 10–30% of the 12keV component and was attenuated by an high absorption column of 10$^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$. The second component, which is the dominant flux contributor to the observed spectrum at high energies, was attenuated by a column of $\sim$ 3$\times$10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$. In contrast, most of the X-ray flux observed by XMM-[*Newton*]{} is affected by one dominant absorption column equivalent to N$_{\rm H}$ $\sim$ 2–3$\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, as derived from our 3-T and 4-T model with a single absorption column. However, for our models we were only able to fit the continua of our [*combined*]{} EPIC $pn$ and RGS spectra with two absorption columns. Although the absorption of the N$_{\rm H_b}$ column, at $\sim$ 2–3$\times$10$^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, is very low, it has much influence because it affects most (62–96%) of the total emission (see Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\]). The other absorption column has only a minor influence in absorbing the flux even though it is higher by a factor of 7–10 (N$_{\rm H_a}$ $\sim$ 2$\times$10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$). We note that the temperatures derived for each component in the models with one, as opposed to two, absorption columns are consistent with one another. The two column model also improved the descriptions of the lines formed at low energies, such as NeXLy$\alpha$, and OVIIILy$\alpha$. The improvement of the fit with the second column over a model with a single column is supported by the F-test statistic, stating with a probability of only 4.7$\times$10$^{-5}$ that the derived decrease in $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ associated with the second column column is due to chance. The important conclusion from this is that the absence of a high absorption column as derived from the XMM-[*Newton*]{} observation suggests a dramatic rearrangement of cold circumstellar gas in the vicinity of the X-ray sources between 2001 August and 2004 February. Contrary to what is arguable for the 2001 epoch, it cannot be said that in 2004 the circumstellar disk was in front of a significant fraction of the soft X-ray source(s).
In order to estimate the origin of the long-wavelength lines in our models, we constructed a lineless continuum by excluding of the spectral regions lines in the 10–17Å range and fit the resulting pure continuum spectrum to a bremsstrahlung model. This model gave a value a slightly hotter temperature 13.2 keV for our hot component with a $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ of 1.17. The addition of a second bremsstrahlung component did not improve the fits ($k$T $\sim$ 0.04 keV; $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ of 1.17). This result suggests that the determination of the low component temperatures, $k$T$_1$ and $k$T$_2$, is strongly driven by the lines alone.
Although all of our discussion has taken place in the context of equilibrium models, we agree with Smith et al. (2004), who suggested that the warm and/or cool plasma components could also result from nonequilibrium ionization processes, e.g. from the sudden impact of gas parcels ejected by flares into a dense stationary medium such as the Be disk. We suspect this could also be the reason why we observe Lyman$\beta$ transitions, such as the Ly$\,\beta$ transitions of NeX and OVIII, that are not easily fit with equilibrium [*mekal*]{} models. A similar explanation might be also important in understanding the FeXXVI Ly$\beta$ line at 8.3keV of HD110432, reported by @Lopes07, and which could not be fit with standard models for the ranges of temperature considered for this feature. The strong Lyman$\beta$ features hint at excitation temperatures in these plasmas that are higher than the ionization temperatures we found in Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\].
Abundances and anomalous line strengths
---------------------------------------
For the most part the line strengths are consistent with solar abundances in our 3-T and 4-T models. The first and most conspicuous exception to this general result is the finding from Table\[tbl:gcas\_4T\] that the Fe abundance from K-electron Fe ions is 0.12${\pm 0.02}$Z$_{\odot}$. This is a factor of two lower than any other studies in the literature (the S04 result was 0.24$\pm{0.02}$Z$_{\odot}$). Because K-shell ion abundances of 0.1Z$_{\odot}$ and 0.24Z$_{\odot}$ are significantly different from one another, our result clarifies in a new way that the Fe abundance derived from K-shell ions changes with time. Thus, the K-shell result may not reflect a global elemental abundance.
As also found by S04, the Fe abundance from L-shell ions is significantly higher than the Fe abundance from K-shell ions. We pursued the investigation of the Fe abundance from the Fe L-shell lines with the models M1, M2 and M3. In a new set of models we fixed other variables and solved for the Fe abundance of the soft temperature components $k$T$_1$ and $k$T$_2$. Our models suggest that the Fe L-shell abundance could be 0.4 to 1.3$\times$Z$_{\odot}$. This exercise verifies the distinctness of the Fe abundance arising from the L-shell lines on one hand and the K-shell lines on the other. For completeness note that a similar K- and L-shell Fe anomaly was reported by @Lopes07 for .
The second apparent departure from solar abundances comes from the enhanced strengths of the lines of hydrogen and helium-like ions of neon and nitrogen. The formal abundances we find from our models are Z$_{\rm N}$=3.96$^{+0.87}_{-0.69}$$\times$Z$_{\rm N,\odot}$ and Z$_{\rm Ne}$=2.63$^{+0.27}_{-0.28}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Ne,\odot}$, assuming solar abundance for the other metals in the softest plasma and allowing for line broadening and bulk velocities. However, the allowed range of Ne abundances depends on the number and nature of the parameters left free in the fit, the most important being the assumed Fe L-shell abundance and the line broadening velocity. The hottest component dominates the NeX line flux with a smaller ($\sim$ 1/3) contribution from the ${\rm T}_{2}$ thermal component. For instance, using bvapec instead of mekal and leaving Fe L-shell abundance free yields slightly lower abundances with Z$_{\rm Ne}$=1.65$^{+0.38}_{-0.29}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Ne,\odot}$ and Z$_{\rm Fe L-shell}$=0.41$^{+0.18}_{-0.11}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Fe,\odot}$. This effect is due to the presence of a FeL-shell forest around the NeXL$\alpha$ line and to the fact that the continuum level depends on the description of the FeL-shell lines. Although the limits for the abundances are not well determined, there is a clear excess above the solar values for N and Ne. The NeX line peak velocity is in the range of -110 to +230 kms$^{-1}$ and displays a broadening velocity comparable to that of other bright emission lines.
A similar analysis was applied to the Chandra spectrum in order to determine whether the Ne enhancement was present or not in 2001 – it is not possible to expand the investigation to N abundance due to the low SNR of the NVIIL$\alpha$ line. The non-velocity broadened [*mekal*]{} model yields Z$_{\rm Ne}$ = 0.75$\pm$0.19$\times$Z$_{\rm Ne,\odot}$ consistent with the value obtained by @Smith04. However, since the observed NeX line apppears significantly wider than modeled, we used the [*bvapec*]{} model to take into account such a broadening. The larger NeX EW impacts the determination of the abundance yielding Z$_{\rm Ne}$=1.52$^{+0.24}_{-0.24}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Ne,\odot}$ (or Z$_{\rm Ne}$ = 1.20$^{+0.28}_{-0.24}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Ne,\odot}$ if the oxygen and iron L-shell abundances are left free, in which case we obtain Z$_{\rm Fe L-shell}$ = 0.46$^{+0.09}_{-0.09}$$\times$Z$_{\rm Fe,\odot}$). The broadened line profile fits the observed Ne line much better, with peak velocities then in the range of -60 to 260 kms$^{-1}$ and broadening velocities of $\sim$ 500 $\pm$ 200 kms$^{-1}$. These values are consistent with those derived from the RGS spectrum.
We note carefully that whereas the fluxes in these lines scale linearly with abundance, the equivalent widths, as formally defined with respect to the neighboring continuum flux, scale far more slowly because of the contribution to the local bound-free opacities from ions in a N-Ne rich plasma. Thus, we found an increase of only 35% with respect to the equivalent width measured in the [*Chandra*]{} spectrum. Our models with XSPEC validate this mild increase in equivalent width with abundance in detail. Given this reality, we anticipate that the true abundance errors are larger than those XSPEC computes based on photon statistics. Nonetheless, the anomalous excess cannot be discounted. Moreover, the possibility that the X-ray environment could be nitrogen-rich by a factor of 3-4 is unremarkable because enhancements are already a hallmark of massive stars evolving off the main sequence, although the reasons for this are still under discussion [@Hunter]. However, the apparent neon enhancement is of much greater interest because in a stellar evolution context neon is produced by carbon burning shortly before supernova detonation or in the interiors of some white dwarfs, and dredging to the surface of such elements is possible by various mixing processes.
Suggested alternatives to the straightforward abundance interpretation of the line strengths are the following: (i) instrumental artifact or a cosmic ray; (ii) an inappropriate temperature used in the modeling; and (iii) the line is strengthened by a microturbulent like broadening. Each of these possibilities may be dismissed in turn. (i) is unlikely because separate spectrum extractions from the positive and negative detector halves show consistent profiles. Likewise, we may rule out (ii) because a temperature of 0.6keV is already ideal for NeX formation, and a stronger feature cannot be produced given a standard abundance. Possiblity (iii) would require a large optical depth and strengthening of the line. However, even though the column density is probably high enough for photons to experience more than one mean free path through their transits across the medium, they are nonetheless scattered coherently. Therefore the line widths are unaltered by these histories. With these possibilities ruled out, we are forced to conclude that the neon and nitrogen abundances in the X-ray plasmas of are high.
In considering the anomalous Fe abundance derived from Fe-K lines, but normal abundance from Fe-L lines in the spectrum, S04 suggested that this could arise from an inverse FIP (first ionization potential) effect in the environment that is similar to that found in the coronae of the Sun and other magnetically and X-ray active cool stars, such as AB Dor [@Gudel]. Although the details are still unclear, it appears that in a magnetic plasma low density environment differential ponderomotive forces, produced by wave heating and dependent on their first ionization potential, can prevent certain ions from migrating across a plasma and resulting in an altered measured chemical abundance [@Laming]. Whether such a process is actually active in the environment of , let alone whether it extends to Ne$^{9+}$ ions, must be considered speculative. Its attractiveness lies in its potential to explain the different Fe abundances derived from K-shell and L-shell ions. Similarly, now in the framework of the accretion model, it is not clear, first, how Ne could be preferentially ejected from the white dwarf atmosphere or, second, how Ne could be enhanced without enhancing at the same time C, O, and Mg abundances.
The FeK$\alpha$ complex {#sct:fekcomplex}
-----------------------
In evaluating the equivalent widths (EW) of each emission iron line of the FeK complex, we used the 5–10keV photons acquired during low background phases of the XMM-[*Newton*]{} satellite’s orbit. Our approach was to limit consideration of spectra accumulated only during low (L) and high (H) flux states observed in (defined as the lowest and highest one-third fluxes of the total distribution in our light curve) and also during some 1000 time windows in which the detector background was low (see Fig. \[fig:lc\_hrd\_gcas\]-b). Finally, we applied an absorbed bremsstrahlung model in order to describe the underlying continuum and three [*Gaussian*]{} lines to account the iron lines. Table \[tbl:EW\_FeKa\] and Fig. \[fig:fekcomplex\] show the results. The measured centroid energy of each modeled [*Gaussian*]{} line is, within the errors, in agreement with the theoretical values for the fluorescent, helium-, and hydrogen-like components of the FeK$\alpha$ complex. It is possible that there may be a slight inverse sensitivity of the fluorescence strength (relative to the FeXXVI line), though this inference is of marginal statistical significance.
[l c c c c c c c c c c c c]{}\
& $\lambda_{\rm C}$ & EW & Flux$^{\mathrm{a}}$\
& (Å) & (mÅ) & ($\times$10$^{-5}$)\
\
all observation:\
FeK (fluorescence) & 1.9312\[60\] & 10\[2\] & 4.4$^{+0.8}_{-1.0}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXV & 1.8533\[55\] & 12\[3\] & 5.3$^{+1.4}_{-0.9}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXVI Ly$\alpha$ & 1.7737\[51\] & 7\[2\] & 3.1$^{+0.7}_{-0.5}$\
\[0.2ex\]\
low state:\
FeK (fluorescence) & 1.937\[12\] & 13\[5\] & 4.1$^{+1.0}_{-1.7}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXV & 1.867\[17\] & 12\[4\] & 4.1$^{+1.5}_{-1.2}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXVI Ly$\alpha$ & 1.781\[10\] & 7\[3\] & 2.2$^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$\
\[0.2ex\]\
high state:\
FeK (fluorescence) & 1.9282\[60\] & 10\[3\] & 5.6$^{+1.0}_{-1.6}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXV & 1.8478\[83\] & 13\[4\] & 7.6$^{+2.2}_{-1.4}$\
\[0.2ex\] FeXXVI Ly$\alpha$ & 1.7737\[76\] & 8\[2\] & 4.4$^{+1.3}_{-0.9}$\
\[0.2ex\]
Total flux in line, in units of photonscm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$. Notes: Quoted errors are at 90% confidence level. The temperature of the bremsstrahlung model at 1.2–4.1 Å (3–10 keV) converges to $k$T = 13.36(+0.21/-0.25) keV.
In our EPIC $pn$ spectrum the strength of the fluorescence feature (EW $\sim$ -10mÅ) is weaker than when Chandra observed it [EW $\sim$ -19mÅ; @Smith04], in line with the fact that the attenuation of soft X-rays by cold matter is less. This suggests that the fluorescence emission feature is formed at least partially by the same medium that aborbs the soft-X ray flux.
Curiously, the analysis in the low and high-state spectra reveals that the FeK fluorescence feature may be marginally stronger in the low flux case. Although such investigation could not be expanded to a quantitative analysis of all spectral range because the relatively limited signal-to-noise in the final spectra for RGS1/2, we suspect that there is weak evidence for a weakening of the SiK feature for the low flux spectrum.
Helium-like diagnostics of electron densities
---------------------------------------------
Our spectrum covers the regions of the He-like NeIX, OVII and NVI complexes – but the NVI complex falls partially onto gaps in the CCD for RGS1 and RGS2. Each of these is comprised of a so-called $fir$ (forbidden/intercombination/resonance) line triplet (see Fig. \[fig:spctgcas\_rgs12\_flux\]), and the ratio of their intensities can indicate whether the dominant excitation process for producing this triplet is collisional or photoionization. For example, if collisions are dominant, the ratio $G = (i + f)/r$ $\sim$ 1 obtains, whereas if photoionizations dominate the exitation $G$ $\sim$ 4 [e.g. @Porquet00; @Porquet01]. From the OVII $fir$ complex in our XMM-[*Newton*]{} spectrum, we estimate G $\sim$ 0.9$\pm{0.1}$ for $\gamma$Cas. The NVI $rif$ components are poorly measured because they fall within the gaps of the RGS2 detector. Nonetheless, by computing their ratios we find nearly the same value, G $\sim$ 0.7$\pm{0.3}$. This suggests that the plasma is in the classical domain of collisional dominance. As it happens, the $fir$ ratio alone cannot distinguish between quenching of the forbidden transition by collisions or by photoexcitations by a nearby strong UV source, such as the Be star.
[l c c c c c c c c c c c c]{}\
& $\lambda_{\rm C}$ & EW &\
& (Å) & (mÅ) &\
\
NeXLy$\alpha$$^c$ & 12.131\[11\] & 125\[18\] & 2.15\[31\] & (1.26$\pm$0.16)\
\[0.2ex\] OVIIILy$\beta$$^{c}$ & 15.997\[41\] & 40\[14\] & 0.55\[20\] & (0.31$\pm$0.16)\
\[0.2ex\] OVIIILy$\alpha$$^{c}$ & 18.9796\[49\] & 360\[28\] & 3.93\[31\] & (1.71$\pm$0.26)\
\[0.2ex\] OVII$r$$^b$ & 21.60\[90\] & 163\[19\] & 1.72\[20\] & (0.77$\pm$0.28)\
\[0.2ex\] OVII$i$$^b$ & 21.78\[92\] & 149\[19\] & 1.58\[20\] & (0.79$\pm$0.40)\
\[0.2ex\] OVII$f$$^b$ & 22.097$^d$ & $<$32 & $<$0.3 & (0.13$\pm$0.16)\
\[0.2ex\] NVIILy$\alpha$$^c$ & 24.79\[99\] & 296\[17\] & 2.76\[16\] & (0.61$\pm$0.03)\
\[0.2ex\] NVI$r$$^c$ & 28.81\[90\] & $<$230 & $<$2 & ...\
\[0.2ex\] NVI$i$$^c$ & 29.09\[95\] & $<$169 & $<$1.4 & ...\
\[0.2ex\] NVI$f$$^c$ & 29.531$^d$ & $<$10 & $<$ 0.08 & ...\
\[0.2ex\] CVILy$\alpha$$^d$ & 33.736\[64\] & 201\[29\] & 1.37\[20\] & ...\
\[0.2ex\]
Total flux in line, in units of photonscm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$; in parenthesis are shown the values derived by @Smith04 from Chandra. $^{\mathrm{b}}$ From RGS1. $^{\mathrm{c}}$ From RGS2. $^{\mathrm{d}}$ Frozen parameter. Quoted errors are at 90% confidence level.
Velocity broadening and shifts in warm plasma lines
---------------------------------------------------
In Table \[tbl:plines\] we list the observed centroid wavelength, the equivalent width and the flux of lines for those lines for which meaningful measurements could be made. The best observed lines in the soft X-ray spectrum, NeXLy$\alpha$ and OVIIILy$\alpha$ profiles are noticeably broadened. We evaluate the broadening of the lines by using the [*bapec*]{} model, a velocity- and thermally-broadened emission model from collisionally-ionized diffuse gas[^5]. The [*Gaussian*]{} sigma for velocity broadening converges to $\sim$ 400 kms$^{-1}$ for a model like M1, M2 and M3 in Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\], replacing the [*mekal*]{} by the [*bapec*]{} code. The line broadening was also measured on individual lines, not only on the whole spectrum. For example, we found a velocity broadening of 300$\pm$70 kms$^{-1}$ for the OVIII line. The RGS velocity is consistent with that reported by S04 (478$\pm$50 kms$^{-1}$). We applied the same analysis to two RGS spectra of ABDor acquired in 2000 and 2006 (obsID 0126130201 and 0160363001 with up-to-date calibration) and found in each case that the broadening of the OVIII line was less than about 70 kms$^{-1}$ at the 90% confidence level, proving that the lines of are indeed broadened.
In order to check for velocity shift in the lines, we run the models in Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\] leaving the redshift parameter free. We found a overall redshift of $\sim$ 200 kms$^{-1}$ – and values for the parameters and $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$ consistent with those shown in Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\] – slightly larger than the typical error on the absolute wavelength scale of $\sim$ 7 mÅ, or $\sim$ 140 kms$^{-1}$.
Do our cool or warm plasma component arise in a radiative wind?
---------------------------------------------------------------
It has been believed for some time that X-ray emission in O and early B stars arises in sites associated with shocks distributed in the stars radiative winds [e.g. @Leutenegger06; @Cohen08]. Analyses of HETG spectra of other stars in the same general region of the H-R Diagram, for example of $\tau$Sco (B0.2V), $\beta$Cru (B0.5III), and $\zeta$Oph (O9.5V) by @Cohen03, @Cohen08, and @Waldron05, respectively, paint a complex picture. The Cohen et al. analyses show that the winds of at least some early B stars cannot be described by a standard picture of wind-shocks, and indeed wind structures of at least $\tau$Sco and $\zeta$Oph may be influenced by the effects of channeling by magnetic fields in the regions surrounding the star. The temperatures of the gas are not yet known to vary but taken as a group range from about 3 to 25MK. We note that the X-ray emission measures associated with winds in these stars have not been found to be variable so far.
$\gamma$Cas has such a wind, as evidenced by the profiles of doublets in UV resonance absorption lines of several ions, notably CIV, NV, and SiIV. These profiles exhibit Discrete Absorption features at 1000-1100 kms$^{-1}$ and edge velocites of -1800 kms$^{-1}$ [@Doazan82; @Kaper96; @SRC98; @SRH98]. Our analysis shows the presence of soft X-ray components whose temperatures, fluxes, and emission measures (Table \[tbl:gcas\_4T\]) are consistent with those of normal massive stars reported by @Walborn2009, for example. It is thus expected that at least part of such emission is emanating from the radiatively driven wind of . However, as can be seen in Fig. \[fig:unfoldspctnew\], the hottest component dominates also the soft part of the spectrum of and the contribution of a pure radiative wind is overshadowed by this hot component. Establishing the presence of a luminosity change in the soft components supporting a non-wind origin is a complicated issue because of the presence of the Be disk itself (which may shield a part of the wind) and because the characteristics of the ’ spectra in 2001 and 2004 are different from each other. It is worth noting that the X-ray 0.2–12 keV (unabsorbed) fluxes from the soft ($k$T $\sim$ 0.1 keV) component in 2001 and 2004 are consistent with each other ($<$ 1.7$\times$10$^{-11}$ ergs$^{-1}$ from Chandra and 1–2.7$\times$10$^{-11}$ ergs$^{-1}$ from XMM-[*Newton*]{}), while the flux from the $k$T $\sim$ 0.6 keV component has increased between 2001 and 2004 (from 0.7–2.2 to 2.5–6$\times$10$^{-12}$ ergs$^{-1}$). In conclusion, we cannot discard an additional contribution to the soft plasma in addition to that of a radiatively driven wind usually observed in massive stars.
Conclusions
===========
We have reported the second high dispersion analysis of the X-ray spectrum of the X-ray anomalous B0.5e star obtained by the XMM-[*Newton*]{} in 2004, and we find the following characteristics at this epoch:
[*a)*]{} The emission is due to an optically thin, thermal medium comprised of 3 to 4 discrete components but dominated by a hot component having $k$T$_Q$ $\sim$ 12–14keV. The temperature of at least one component ($k$T$_2$ $\sim$ 0.6keV) has definitely shifted since the [*Chandra*]{} HTEG observation in 2001. It is possible that a $k$T$_3$ $\sim$ 2.4keV component exists too. If so it may represent plasma with nearly the same temperature found by S04. Further, the presence of a cool component with $k$T$_1$ $\sim$ 0.1keV is consistent with a value found by S04. This may or may not have the same cause as the wind-shocked fluxes emitted from other early B and Be stars. However, if so, it is a lower temperature than expected. Only part (at most) of the $k$T$_2$ plasma could be produced in the wind, and if so the large line widths evidenced in this component indicate a larger turbulent broadening than is typical of winds in other early B stars.
[*b)*]{} The hot $k$T$_Q$ component appears stable and any distribution of temperatures of individual sites around this mean value must be small.
[*c)*]{} A subsolar abundance of iron is derived from the FeXXV and FeXXVILy$\alpha$ features, in agreement with several other determinations. As S04 also found, this Fe$_K$ abundance is significantly different of the abundance found from Fe-L ion lines. We have also discovered that \[Fe$_K$\] changes with time and was significantly higher in 2004.
[*d)*]{} The light curve of this star again shows ubiquitous, rapid flaring. This was also found by in . However, unlike , color changes occurred only seldomly, and evidently not at all on the few hour timescale noted in .
[*e)*]{} Our light curve shows a quasi-periodic lull every 2.8hours in 2004, similar to the cyclical lulls of 3.5 hours, 7-7.5 hours, and 5.8 hours noted by RSH02. These appear to occur in most epochs.
[*f)*]{} A thick absorption column affected 25% of the hot component in August 2001, but it had disappeared by February 2004.
[*g)*]{} Apparently variable FeK and perhaps SiK fluorescent features are present. These emissions correlate with an absorption column (point [*f*]{}) that attenuates soft X-rays.
[*h)*]{} Broadening of warm ($k$T$_2)$ component lines was noticeable at both epochs but may have increased marginally from 2001 ($\sim$ 0.4keV) to 2004 ($\sim$ 0.6keV).
[*i)*]{} The strengths of lines of two ions each of N and Ne are underpredicted for XSPEC models with solar abundances. Upon consideration of alternative explanations, we have interpreted these as evidence of abundance enhancements. However, we do not understand the cause of these enhancements.
[*j)*]{} Given the identification of the Lyman$\beta$ feature in a few ions formed in the warm and cool plasmas, there is more than a hint of nonequilibrium processes in the environment of . This suggests formation in an (at most) intermediate density environment, which is clearly separate from the very high density plasma in which the flares are formed (Smith, Robinson, & Corbet 1998).
[*k)*]{} The unabsorbed flux of at 0.2–12 keV in 2004 from XMM-[*Newton*]{} ($\sim$ 1.7–2.8$\times$10$^{-10}$ ergs$^{-1}$) is consistent with the value observed in 2001 from Chandra ($\sim$ 2–3.1$\times$10$^{-10}$ ergs$^{-1}$).
In several of these respects the X-ray behavior of seems different from the one other analog studied in depth, . In keeping with the differences of , and indeed even the changing properties with time, we refer to this star as having “personality" - hence the title of this paper.
Several changes we have noted are as remarkable as they were unexpected. Most especially, we have noted changes in the geometry of the circumstellar environment as reflected in the disappearance of one of the two columns, and affecting $\sim$ 25% of the hard emission. The strong attenuation of the 2001 soft X-ray spectrum was clearly evident. In addition, the strengths of the K fluorescence emission features decreased in line with the decrease of the column absorption, suggesting that the part of the emission is caused by scattering of hard photons through the attenuating column that was present at the earlier time.
The reduced attenuation of the soft X-rays partially accounts for the improved ability to study the nature of the warm and cool plasma emissions. As a result, it is finally clear that these components are almost monothermal and therefore are not part of an integral structure with a smoothly varying thermal emission measure, such as an accretion column or a cooling flow plasma. Moreover, the broadening of the lines has increased during the 2001–2004 interval, either because of an increase in a quasi-turbulence or the splitting of a former single region into two with different projected radial velocities.
In contrast to the warm component, a study of the variations in the FeK-shell lines with temperature shows that the hot plasma need not consist of a uniform $k$T$_Q$ value. Rather, we believe that small variations in the hardness that are occasionally observed in our data and those discussed by SRC98, RS00, and RSH02 can be understood as variations of the instantaneous average temperature resulting from the rapid evolution of small number of flares and nearby basal emission regions.
The unique properties of each of the thermal components, the changing absorption column geometry, and increases in line broadening all provide new hints to the mechanism responsible for the X-ray production. Although on one hand, the disappearance of the strong absorption column and the lack of correlation between the fluorescence features no longer support the argument that the gas in the Be star’s circumstellar disk strongly interact with the hard X-rays, the discreteness of the plasma components argues that they are likely to occupy distinct volumes.
Future generations of X-ray telescopes such as the International X-ray Observatory (IXO) will be important in refining our understanding of the spatial distribution of emission volumes of and its analogs. Their observations promise to address such question as whether the observed line broadening can be tied to the rotational velocity of the Be star and to resolving distinct sources, such as corotating active regions.
R.L.O. acknowledges financial support from the Brazilian agency FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo) through a Postdoctoral Research Fellow grant (number 2007/04710-1). We gratefully acknowledge the XMM-[*Newton*]{} User Support Group, in particular Nora Loiseau, Jan-Uwe Ness, and Matteo Guainazzi, for their help with problems on SASv8.0.1.
Berghöfer, T. W., Schmitt, J. H. M. M., Danner, R., & Cassinelli, J.P. 1997, A&A, 322, 167 Buccheri, R., Bennett, K., Bignami, G. F., et al. 1983, A&A, 128, 245 Cohen, D. H., de Messières, G. E., MacFarlane, J. J., et al. 2003, ApJ, 586, 495 Cohen, D. H., Kuhn, M. A., Gagne, M. et al. 2008, MNRAS, 386, 1855 Cranmer, S. R., Smith, M. A., & Robinson, R. D. 2000, ApJ, 537, 433 Doazan, V. 1982, in B Stars with and without Emission Lines, ed. A. Underhill & V. Doazan, NASA SP-456, 326 Ehle, M., de la Calle, I., Díaz Trigo, M. et al. 2008, XMM-[*Newton*]{} Users’ Handbook, Issue 2.6, 15 July 2008 Frontera, F., Dal Fiume, D., Robba, N. R., et al. 1987, ApJ, 320, L127 Guainazzi, M. 2008, XMM-SOC-CAL-TN-0018, Issue 2.7.2 (4 November 2008) Güdel, M. et al. 2003, ASP Conf. Ser. 277, p. 221 Haberl, F. 1995, A&A, 296, 685 Harmanec, P., Hadrava, P., Stefl, S. et al. 2000, A&A, 364, 85 Howk, J. C., Cassinelli, J. P., Bjorkman, J. E., et al. 2000, ApJ, 534, 348 Hunter, I., Brott, I., D. J., Lennon, et al. 2008, A&A, 676, L29 Kaper, L., Henrichs, H., Nichols, J. S., et al. 1996, A&AS, 116, 257 Kubo, S., Murakami, T., & Corbet, R. H. D. 1998, PASJ, 50, 417 Laming, J. M. 2004, ApJ, 614, 1063 Leutenegger, M. A., Paerels, F. B. S., Kahn, S. M., & Cohen, D. H. 2006, ApJ, 650, 1096 Lopes de Oliveira, R., Motch, C., Haberl, F., Negueruela, I., & Janot-Pacheco, E. 2006, A&A, 454, 265 Lopes de Oliveira, R., Motch, C., Smith, M. A., Negueruela, I., Torrejón, J. M. 2007, A&A, 474, 983 Lopes de Oliveira, R. 2007, PhD Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, and Université Louis Pasteur Strasbourg I, France Miroshnichenko, A. S., Bjorkman, K. S., & Krugov, V. D. 2002, PASP, 114, 1226 Motch, C., Lopes de Oliveira, R., Negueruela, I., Haberl, F., & Janot-Pacheco, E. 2007, in Active OB-Stars: Laboratories for Stellar and Circumstellar Physics, ASP Conference Series, Vol. 361, Proceedings of the conference held 29 August - 2 September, 2005 at Hokkai-Gakuen University, Sapporo, Japan. Edited by S. Stefl, S. P. Owocki, and A. T. Okazaki. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2007, p.117 \[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">astro-ph</span> 0512556 Murakami, T., Inoue, H., & Agrawal, P. C. 1986, ApJ, 310, L31 Owens, A., Oosterbroek, T., Parmar, A., Schultz, R., Stüwe, J. A., & Haberl, F. 1999, A&A, 348, 170 Parmar, A., Israel, G., Stella, L., & White, N. 1993, A&A, 275, 227 Perryman, M. A. C. 1997, The Hipparcos and Tycho Catalogues, ESA SP-1200 Porquet, D., & Dubau, J. 2000, A&AS, 143, 495 Porquet, D., Mewe, R., Dubau, J., Raassen, A. J. J., & Kaastra, J. S. 2001, A&A, 376, 1113 Prinja, R. K. 1989, MNRAS, 241, 721 Robinson, R. D., & Smith, M. A., 2000, ApJ, 540, 474 (RS00) Robinson, R. D., Smith, M. A., & Henry, G. W. 2002, ApJ, 575, 435 Scargle, J. D. 1982, ApJ, 263, 835 Secchi, A. 1867, Astron. Nachr., 68, 63 Smith, M. A., Cohen, D. H., Gu, M. F., et al. 2004, ApJ, 600, 972 (S04) Smith, M. A., Henry, G. W., & Vishniac, E. 2006, ApJ, 647, 1375 Smith, M. A., & Robinson, R. D. 1999, ApJ, 517, 866 Smith, M. A., Robinson, R. D., & Corbet, R. H. D. 1998, ApJ, 503, 877 (SRC98) Smith, M. A., Robinson, R. D., & Hatzes, A. P. 1998, ApJ, 507, 945 Walborn, N. R., Nichols, J. S., & Waldron, W. L. 2009, ApJ, 703, 633 Waldron, W. L. 2005, ASPC, 337, 329 White, N. E., Swank, J. H., Holt, S. S., & Parmar, A. 1982, ApJ, 263, 277 Yang, S., Ninkov, Z., & Walker, G. A. H. 1988, PASP, 100, 233
[^1]: This work is based on observations obtained with XMM-[ *Newton*]{}, an ESA science mission with instruments and contributions directly funded by ESA Member States and NASA.
[^2]: http://heasarc.nasa.gov/docs/xanadu/xronos/xronos.html
[^3]: http://heasarc.nasa.gov/docs/xanadu/xspec/index.html
[^4]: The [*cemekl/cevmkl*]{} code describes a multi-temperature plasma based on the [*mekal*]{} code, in which the emission measures of the plasma scale with their temperature as (T/T$_{\rm max}$)$^{\alpha}$; $\alpha$ = 1 corresponds to the adiabatic case.
[^5]: http://cxc.harvard.edu/atomdb/
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper we develop two models for the steady states and evolution of two dimensional isothermal self gravitating and rotating incompressible gas which are based on the hydrodynamic equations for stratified fluid. The first model is for the steady states of the gas while the second addresses the time evolution of the gas subject to some constraints. These models reduce the initial five partial differential equations that govern this system to two for the steady state model and to three for the time dependent model. Analytical and numerical solutions of the model equations are used to study the structure of the resulting steady and time dependent states of the fluid with some possible astrophysical applications.'
author:
- |
Mayer Humi and Zilu Tian\
Department of Mathematical Sciences\
Worcester Polytechnic Institute\
100 Institute Road\
Worcester, MA 01609
title: Self Gravitating Incompressible Fluid in Two Dimensions
---
Introduction
============
The steady states of self gravitating fluid in three dimensions have been studied by a long list of illustrious mathematical physicists. (For an extensive list of references see \[1,2,3\]). The motivation for this research was due to the interest in the shape, stability and evolution of celestial bodies and systems\[12\]. We now know however that many celestial objects such as galaxies and our solar system exhibit (effectively) “two dimensional structure” \[4,5,6,7\]. Furthermore recent discoveries are leading us to believe that systems similar to our solar system are “abundant” in the galaxy and their existence might be due to the collapse of a two dimensional interstellar cloud under gravitation (this is the so called the “nebular theory”) \[8,9,10,11,17\]. This data leads us to believe that there is a fundamental physical process which we do not understand fully as yet that leads to the formation of planetary systems throughout the galaxy (and beyond).
This background motivates us to investigate in this paper the steady states and time-dependent evolution of a self gravitating and rotating fluid in two dimensions. This problem has been explored by a large number of investigators using elaborate analytic methods and computer simulations which involve, in general, thermodynamic considerations, magnetohydrodynamics modeling and turbulence.(For a complete list of references see \[8,9,10,13,16\]). While these are important issues we still need, in our opinion, prototype analytic models that are able to capture the evolution of this process and lead to insights about its possible outcomes.
In this paper we attempt to develop such a model using the basic hydrodynamic equations that govern the time-dependent evolution of an isothermal, incompressible, stratified (i.e non constant density) and rotating fluid in two dimensions under gravity \[1,2,3\]. (The justification for the reduction from three to two dimensions has been discussed by many authors. A lucid treatment is given in Ref. \[12\] pp.1-12).Under these assumptions we show that the number of model equations can be reduced from five to a system of two equations for the steady states and three coupled equations for its evolution. The models contain some “parameter functions” which encode information about the asymptotic mass density distribution of the fluid and its momentum.
The steady state model was investigated by us previously.\[18,19,20\] However in this paper we consider a more general model in which the “gas cloud” is rotating also with uniform angular velocity $\omega$ and study the impact of this rotation on the matter distribution in the steady state.
To study the predictions of these models we use both analytical and numerical methods to solve their equations under a variety of conditions. In particular we consider radial solutions to these equations which represent the evolution of an interstellar cloud with isothermal equation of state \[10\].
It might be argued that the hydrodynamic assumptions we are making in this paper are not realistic from astrophysical point of view. However our main goal is to capture analytically, as far as possible, the nonlinear and time dependent aspects of the processes under consideration. Accordingly our results might be useful to provide some analytic insights and guidelines for more elaborate work on this topic.
The plan of the paper is as follows: In Sec 2 we present the basic hydrodynamic equations and show how one can reduce them to a coupled system of three equations. Sec 3 presents further simplifications of these equations. The first is for the steady states of the model. The second is for the time dependent evolution of the gas cloud under the assumption of constant vorticity. In Sec 4 we present analytical and numerical radial solutions of these equations. We end up Sec 5 with summary and conclusions.
Derivation of the Model Equations
=================================
Following the standard convention \[1,14,15\] we model the time dependent non-relativistic flow of an incompressible fluid in two dimensions $(x,y)$ by the hydrodynamic equations of inviscid and incompressible stratified fluid $$\label{2.1}
u_x + v_y = 0$$ $$\label{2.2}
\rho_t+u\rho_x + v\rho_y = 0$$ $$\label{2.3}
\rho u_t+ \rho(uu_x+vu_y) = -p_x -\rho \phi_x +\rho \omega^2 x$$ $$\label{2.4}
\rho v_t+\rho(uv_x+vv_y) = -p_y-\rho \phi_y +\rho \omega^2 y$$ $$\label{2.5}
\nabla^2 \phi = 4 \pi G \rho$$
where subscripts indicate differentiation with respect to the indicated variable, ${\bf u}=(u,v)$ is the fluid velocity, $\rho$ is its density, $p$ is the pressure, $\phi$ is the gravitational field and G is the gravitational constant. The terms $\rho \omega^2 x$, $\rho \omega^2 y$ represent the components of the apparent centrifugal force due to the rotation of the gas cloud with angular velocity $\omega$.
We can nondimensionalize these equations by introducing the following scalings $$\label{2.6}
t=\frac{L{\tilde t}}{U_0},\,\,\, x= L\tilde{x},\,\,\, y=L\tilde{y},\,\,\,
u=U_0 \tilde{u},\,\,\,v=U_0 \tilde{v},\,\,\, \rho = \rho_0 \tilde{\rho},\,\,\,
p=\rho_0 U_0^2\tilde{p},\,\,\,\phi= U_0^2 \tilde{\phi},\,\,\,
\omega=\frac{U_0}{L}\tilde{\omega}.$$ where $L,U_0,\rho_0$ are some characteristic length,velocity and mass density respectively that characterize the problem at hand. Substituting these scalings in eqs. (\[2.1\])-(\[2.5\]) and dropping the tildes these equations remain unchanged (but the quantities that appear in these equations become nondimensional) while $G$ is replaced by $\tilde{G}=\frac{G\rho_0 L^2}{U_0^2}$. (Once again we drop the tilde).
In view of eq. (\[2.1\]) we can introduce a stream function $\psi$ so that $$\label{2.7}
u = \psi_y,\;\;v = -\psi_x\;.$$
Using this stream function we can rewrite eq. (\[2.2\]) as \[13,15\] $$\label{2.8}
\rho_t+J\{\rho,\psi \}=0$$ where for any two (smooth) functions $f,g$ $$\label{2.9}
J\{f,g\}=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}\frac{\partial g}{\partial y} -
\frac{\partial f}{\partial y}\frac{\partial g}{\partial x}$$
Using $\psi$ the momentum equations (\[2.3\]),(\[2.4\]) become $$\label{2.10}
\rho(\psi_{yt}+\psi_y \psi_{yx} -\psi_x \psi_{yy}) = -p_x -\rho \phi_x
+\rho \omega^2 x$$ $$\label{2.11}
\rho(-\psi_{xt}-\psi_y \psi_{xx} +\psi_x \psi_{xy}) = -p_y -\rho \phi_y
+\rho \omega^2 y$$ To eliminate $p$ from these equations we differentiate eq. (\[2.10\]) and eq. (\[2.11\]) with respect to $y,x$ respectively and subtract. This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.12}
&&\rho_y(\psi_{yt}+\psi_y \psi_{yx} -\psi_x \psi_{yy}) +
\rho(\psi_{yyt}+\psi_y \psi_{yyx} - \psi_x \psi_{yyy}) - \\ \notag
&&\rho_x(-\psi_{xt}-\psi_y \psi_{xx} +\psi_x \psi_{xy}) -
\rho(-\psi_{xxt}-\psi_y \psi_{xxx} +\psi_x \psi_{xxy}) = -J\{\phi,\rho\}+
J\{\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 r^2,\rho\}\end{aligned}$$ where $r^2=x^2+y^2$. The sum of the second and fourth terms in this equation can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.13}
\rho(\nabla^2 \psi)_t+\rho J\{\nabla^2 \psi,\psi\}.\end{aligned}$$
To reduce the first and third terms in (\[2.12\]) we use (\[2.8\]). We obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.14}
\rho_y(\psi_{yt}+\psi_y \psi_{yx} -\psi_x \psi_{yy})-
\rho_x(-\psi_{xt}-\psi_y \psi_{xx} +\psi_x \psi_{xy})= \\ \notag
\rho_y(\psi_{yt}+\rho_y\psi_y\psi_{yx}-(\rho_t+\rho_x\psi_y)\psi_{yy}
+\rho_x\psi_{xt}+(\psi_x\rho_y-\rho_t)\psi_{xx}-\rho_x\psi_x\psi_{xy}= \\ \notag
\rho_y\psi_{yt}+\rho_y\psi_{yt}-\rho_t\nabla^2\psi+
\frac{1}{2}J\{(\psi_x)^2+(\psi_y)^2,\rho\}.\end{aligned}$$ combining the results of (\[2.13\]) and (\[2.14\]) eq. (\[2.12\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.15}
\rho_y\psi_{yt}+\rho_x\psi_{xt} -\rho_t\nabla^2\psi + \rho(\nabla^2 \psi)_t+
\rho J\{\nabla^2 \psi,\psi\}+\frac{1}{2}J\{(\psi_x)^2+(\psi_y)^2,\rho\} \\ \notag
=-J\{\phi,\rho\}+J\{\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 r^2,\rho\}\end{aligned}$$ Thus we have reduced the original five equations (\[2.1\])-(\[2.5\]) to three equations (\[2.5\]), (\[2.8\]) and (\[2.15\]). Although (\[2.15\]) is rather cumbersome in general, it can simplified further under some restrictions which are presented in the following section.
Simplification of the Model Equations
=====================================
Equation (\[2.15\]) can be simplified further in two cases. The first is when we consider only steady states of the flow and the second is when the flow vorticity is constant.
A Model for the Steady States
-----------------------------
When we consider only steady states of the flow (\[2.8\]) implies that $\psi=\psi(\rho)$ and after some algebra \[18\] (\[2.15\]) reduces to $$\label{4.1}
H(\rho)^{1/2}\nabla {\bf{\cdot}} ( H(\rho)^{1/2}\nabla \rho)
+\phi-\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 r^2 =S(\rho).$$ Where $$\label{4.1a}
H(\rho)=\rho\psi_{\rho}^2$$ and $S(\rho)$ is some function of $\rho$. Thus the equations governing the steady state are (\[4.1\]), (\[2.5\]) and $H(\rho)$ and $S(\rho)$ are “parameter functions” which determine the nature of the steady state.
### The Physical Meaning of the Functions $H(\rho)$, $S(\rho)$
The function $H(\rho)$ is a parameter function which is determined by the momentum (and angular momentum) distribution in the fluid. From a practical point of view the choice of this function determines the structure of the steady state density distribution. The corresponding flow field can be computed then aposteriori (that is after solving for $\rho$) from the following relations.\[18\] $$\label{3.1}
u=\sqrt{\frac{H(\rho)}{\rho}} \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial y}, \,\,\,
v=-\sqrt{\frac{H(\rho)}{\rho}} \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial x}.$$
The function $S(\rho)$ that appears in eq. (\[4.1\]) can be determined from the asymptotic values of $\rho$ and $\phi$ on the boundaries of the domain on which eqs (\[2.5\]),(\[4.1\]) are solved. When these asymptotic values are imposed or known one can evaluate the left hand side of eq. (\[4.1\]) on the domain boundaries and re-express it in terms of $\rho$ only to determine $S(\rho)$ on the boundary of the domain. However, the resulting functional relationship of $S$ on $\rho$ must then hold also within the domain itself since $S$ does not depend on x, y directly.
For example if we assume that on an infinite domain $h(\rho)=1$, $\omega=0$ and the asymptotic behavior of $\rho$ and $\phi$ is given by $$\label{3.2}
\displaystyle\lim_{r\rightarrow \infty} \rho(r)=e^{-\alpha r^2},\,\,\,
\displaystyle\lim_{r\rightarrow \infty} \phi(r)=4\alpha^2 r^2 e^{-\alpha r^2}$$ then (asymptotically) (\[4.1\]) evaluates to $$\label{3.3}
S(\rho)=-4\alpha e^{-\alpha r^2} = -4\alpha\rho$$
A model for the Time Evolution
------------------------------
To begin with we consider the case where the vorticity is zero and then generalize to the case where the flow vorticity is constant.
When the flow vorticity $\nabla \times {\bf u}$ is zero then $\nabla^2 \psi=0$ eq. (\[2.15\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.16}
\rho_y\psi_{yt}+\rho_x\psi_{xt}+\frac{1}{2}J\{(\psi_x)^2+(\psi_y)^2,\rho\}
=-J\{\phi,\rho\} \end{aligned}$$ However when the vorticity is zero we can introduce the velocity potential $\eta$ which satisfies $\eta_x=u$, $\eta_y=v$. Replacing $\psi$ by $\eta$ in (\[2.16\]) we obtain $$\label{2.17}
J\{\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_x)^2+(\eta_y)^2]+\phi,\rho\} =0$$ Hence $$\label{2.18}
\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_x)^2+(\eta_y)^2]+\phi =S(\rho)$$ The equations of the flow in this case are $$\label{2.19}
\rho_t+\eta_x\rho_x+\eta_y\rho_y=0$$ (which replaces (\[2.8\])), (\[2.18\]) and (\[2.5\]).
To generalize this reduction to the case where $\nabla^2 \psi =a$ (where $a$ is any constant) we define $$v_1=\psi_y,\,\,\, v_2=-\psi_x+ax$$ Therefore $$(v_1)_y-(v_2)_x=0,$$ which implies that there exists a function $\eta$ so that $$\eta_x=v_1,\,\,\, \eta_y=v_2.$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.20}
\eta_x=\psi_y,\,\,\, \eta_y=-\psi_x+ax\end{aligned}$$ Using these relations to substitute $\eta$ for $\psi$ in (\[2.23\]) leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.22}
\rho_y\eta_{xt}-\rho_x(\eta_y -ax)_t+
\left[-a\rho_t+\frac{1}{2}J\{(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2,\rho\}\right]
=-J\{\phi,\rho\}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.23}
J\{\eta_t,\rho\}
-a\rho_t+\frac{1}{2}J\{(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2,\rho\}
=-J\{\phi,\rho\}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence $$\label{2.24}
-a\rho_t+
J\{\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2]+\phi,\rho\}=0.$$ Using (\[2.8\]) we have $$\label{2.25}
-aJ\{\psi,\rho\}+
J\{\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2]+\phi,\rho\}$$ It follows then that $$\label{2.26}
-a\psi+ \eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2]+\phi = S(\rho).$$ If $a \ne 0$, $\psi$ can be eliminated from this equation if we differentiate with respect to $y$ and use (\[2.20\]) to obtain $$\label{2.27}
-a\eta_x+ \left[\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}[(\eta_y-ax)^2+(\eta_x)^2]+\phi\right]_y
=S(\rho)_y$$
Radial Solutions for the Steady State Model
===========================================
When we consider the special case where in polar coordinates $\rho=\rho(r)$ and $\phi=\phi(r)$ the system (\[4.1\]) and (\[2.5\]) with $H(\rho)=1$ reduces to $$\label{4.2}
\rho^{\prime\prime}=-\frac{\rho^{\prime}}{r}+S(\rho) -\phi +
\frac{1}{2}\omega^2 r^2$$ $$\label{4.3}
\phi^{\prime\prime}=-\frac{1}{r}\phi^{\prime}+c\rho,\,\,\, c=4\pi G$$ To solve this system of equations we let $S(\rho)=\alpha\rho$, solve (\[4.2\]) for $\phi$ and substitute the result in (\[4.3\]). This leads to the following fourth order equation for $\rho$ $$\label{4.4}
\rho''''+\frac{2}{r}\rho'''-\left(\alpha+\frac{1}{r^2}\right)\rho''+
\left(\frac{1}{r^3}-\frac{1}{r}\right)\rho'+c\rho=2\omega^2.$$ The general solution of this equation is $$\label{4.5}
\rho=\frac{2\omega^2}{c}+C_1J_0(a_1r)+C_2J_0(b_1r)+C_3Y_0(a_1r)+C_4Y_0(b_1r)$$ where $J_0$ and $Y_0$ are Bessel functions of the first and second kind of order $0$ and $$a_1=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-2\alpha+2\sqrt{\alpha^2-4c+\alpha^2}},\,\,\,
b_1=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-2\alpha-2\sqrt{\alpha^2-4c+\alpha^2}}$$ Assuming no singularity at the origin we set $C_3=C_4=0$. To assess the impact of the rotation term on the steady state we solved this system for $C_1,\,C_2$ on a circular disk using the boundary conditions $\rho(0)=1$ and $\rho(8)=0$ with $c=1$, $\alpha=-19.4$. The results of these computations for different values of $\omega$ are plotted in Fig. $1$. In this figure we see that the separation between the density peaks become more pronounced as $\omega$ increases. This might interpreted as leading to the creation of protoplanets around the central core.
A strong dependence on $\omega$ is shown in Fig. $2$ which has the same parameters as Fig. $1$ except that the boundary conditions on $\rho$ are: $\rho(0)=0.35$ and $\rho(8)=0.25$. This figure illustrate clearly the effect that rotation can have on the pattern of density fluctuations within the cloud. Furthermore in this figure the magnitude of the density fluctuations reverses itself as $\omega$ becomes larger viz. the higher density peaks are placed at larger values of $r$. (Which is reminiscent of the situation in the solar system)
Radial Solutions for the Time Evolution Model
=============================================
The system (\[2.5\]),(\[2.18\]) and (\[2.19\]) can be simplified further if we use polar coordinates and assume that $\rho,\,\eta,\,\phi$ are functions of $r$ and $t$ only. We obtain, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.28}
\rho_t+\eta_r\rho_r=0, \\ \notag
\phi_{rr}+\frac{1}{r}\phi_r-c\rho=0, \\ \notag
\eta_t+\frac{1}{2}(\eta_r)^2+\phi=S(\rho).\end{aligned}$$ where $c=4\pi G$.
Steady States
-------------
When we consider a steady state solutions of (\[2.28\]) then $\rho_t=0$ and $\eta_t=0$. If follows from the first equation in (\[2.28\]) that either $\rho_r$ or $\eta_r$ must be zero. In the first case $\rho$ is constant and we can let $\rho=1$ without loss of generality. When $\eta_r$ is zero we must have $\phi=S(\rho)$ and the second equation in (\[2.28\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.29}
S'(\rho)\left[\rho_{rr}+\frac{1}{r}\rho_r\right]+S''(\rho)(\rho_r)^2-
c\rho = 0\end{aligned}$$ where primes denote differentiation with respect to $\rho$.
We consider these two cases separately.
A. Steady state with $\rho=1$
Since $\rho=1$ the function $S(\rho)$ is a constant and the general solution for $\phi$ is $$\label{2.30}
\phi=\frac{c}{4}r^2 + C_1\ln r + C_2.$$ where $C_1$, $C_2$ are arbitrary constants. The equation for $\eta$ becomes $$\label{2.31}
\frac{1}{2}(\eta_r)^2=S-\frac{c}{4}r^2-C_1\ln(r)- C_2.$$ ($S$ can be absorbed in $C_2$ but we leave it in this form as these two constants have different physical meaning). If we let $C_1=0$ to avoid the singularity at the origin (\[2.31\]) yields $$\label{2.32}
\eta=\pm\left\{\frac{1}{4}r\sqrt{8S-8C_2-2cr^2}+\frac{(S-C_2)\sqrt{2}}
{\sqrt{c}}\arctan\left[\frac{\sqrt{2c}\,r}{\sqrt{8S-8C_2-2cr^2}}\right]\right\}
+C_3$$
B. Steady states with $\eta=1$
In this case the solution of (\[2.29\]) depends on the nature of the function $S(\rho)$. In general this equation has to be solved numerically. However we present here analytical solutions of this equation for two special cases.
1. $S(\rho)=\alpha\rho$ where $\alpha$ is a constant. The solution to (\[2.29\]) in this case is $$\label{2.33}
\rho=C_4J_0\left(\sqrt{-\frac{c}{\alpha}}\,r\right)+
C_5Y_0\left(\sqrt{-\frac{c}{\alpha}}\,r\right)$$ It follows then that the nature of the steady state is determined by the ratio $\frac{c}{\alpha}$. A sample of the resulting $\rho$ profiles is presented in $Fig.\,3$. To obtain this figure we considered a pinched disk with $\rho(0.01)=1$, $\rho'(0.01)=-10$ and $c=\alpha$. The resulting steady state has an increase in the material density towards the circumference of the disk. Similar graphs were obtained numerically for $S(\rho)=\alpha\rho^n$, $n=2,3$.
2. $S(\rho)=\alpha\ln(\rho)$
In this case we have $$\label{2.34}
\rho=\frac{1}{2C_1cr^2\cos(\theta)^2}$$ where $$\theta=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{C_1\alpha}}(\ln r-C_2)$$ Substituting $C_1=C_2=c=\alpha=1$ we obtain $Fig.\,4$ which might be interpreted as representing a binary system.
Perturbations from the steady state $\rho=1$
--------------------------------------------
We consider in this section a disk of radius $1$ with a steady state $\rho_0=1$ and $S(\rho)=0$. Letting $\phi(1)=0$ and using (\[2.30\]), (\[2.32\]) (with $C_1=0$) this yields the following equations for the steady state $$\phi_0(r)=\frac{c}{4}(r^2-1)$$ $$\eta_0=\frac{\sqrt{2c}}{4}\left[\arcsin(r)+r\sqrt(1-r^2)\right]$$
For a perturbation from this state, viz. $$\label{2.35}
\rho(t,r)=\rho_0+\epsilon \rho_1(t,r),\,\,\,
\phi(t,r)=\phi_0+\epsilon \phi_1(t,r),\,\,\,
\eta(t,r)=\eta_0+\epsilon \eta_1(t,r)$$ we obtain to first order in $\epsilon$ the following system of equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.36}
(\rho_1)_t+\frac{\sqrt{2c(1-r^2)}}{2}(\rho_1)_r=0, \\ \notag
(\phi_1)_{rr}+\frac{1}{r}(\phi_1)_r-c\rho_1=0, \\ \notag
(\eta_1)_t+\frac{\sqrt{2c(1-r^2)}}{2}(\eta_1)_r+\phi_1=0.\end{aligned}$$ The equation for $\rho_1$ in (\[2.36\]) can be solved analytically. Its general solution is $$\label{2.37}
\rho_1=F\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{c}}\arcsin(r)-t\right)$$ where $F$ is any smooth function of its variable which has to be adjusted to the initial conditions of the perturbation. The second equation in (\[2.36\]) is a (reduced) Poisson equation and its general solution can be expressed by quadratures $$\label{2.37a}
\phi_1=\int\frac{c\{\int r F\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{c}}\arcsin(r)-t\right)
\,dr+F_1(t)\}}{r}\,dr+F_2(t)$$ where $F_1(t)$, $F_2(t)$ have to be determined by the boundary conditions on $\phi_1$. Finally one can obtain also an expression for the solution for $\eta$ in terms of quadratures.
For example if the initial perturbation in $\rho$ is $\rho_1(0,r)=ar$ where $a$ is a constant then $$F(x)=a\sin\left(\sqrt{\frac{c}{2}}x\right)$$ and $$\label{2.37b}
\rho_1(t,r)=a\sin\left(\arcsin(r)-\sqrt{\frac{c}{2}}t\right)=
a\left\{r\cos\left(\sqrt{\frac{c}{2}}\,t\right)-
\sqrt{1-r^2}\sin\left(\sqrt{\frac{c}{2}}\,t\right)\right\}.$$ The evaluation of $\phi_1$ using the second equation in (\[2.36\]) and (\[2.37b\]) is straightforward. It should be obvious how one can generalize this example to other expressions for $\rho_1(0,r)$.
A second approach to the solution of the system (\[2.36\]) is to assume exponential dependence in time, viz. $$\label{2.38}
\rho_1=e^{\alpha t} R(r),\,\,\,\eta_1=e^{\alpha t} E(r),\,\,\,
\phi_1=e^{\alpha t} P(r)$$ This ansatz reduces (\[2.36\]) to a system of ordinary differential equations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.39}
\frac{\sqrt{2c(1-r^2)}}{2}R(r)'+\alpha R(r)=0, \\ \notag
P(r)''+rP(r)'-crR(r)=0, \\ \notag
\frac{\sqrt{2c(1-r^2)}}{2}E(r)'+\alpha E(r) +P(r)=0.\end{aligned}$$ As before the equation for $R(r)$ can be solved analytically, $$R(r)=C_1\exp\left(-\alpha\sqrt{\frac{2}{c}}\arcsin(r)\right)$$ while the equations for $P(r)$ and $E(r)$ can be solved by quadratures or numerically.
A numerical approach to the solution for $\phi_1$ and $\eta_1$ in (\[2.36\]) is also possible.
Perturbations from the steady state $\eta_0=1$
----------------------------------------------
As in the previous subsection we consider again a disk of radius $1$ and let $S(\rho)=\alpha\rho$. The general steady state solution for $\rho$ is given by (\[2.32\]). Assuming no singularities in $\rho$ (ie. no protostar at the origin) we must set $C_2=0$ in this equation. Furthermore since $\rho \ge 0$ it follows that we must have $\sqrt{-c/\alpha}=\beta$ where $\beta$ is the first zero of $J_0$. Thus $$\rho_0=J_0(\beta r),\,\,\,\phi_0=\alpha\rho_0$$ (where we normalized $rho_0$ at $r=0$ to be $1$).
For a perturbation from this steady state in the form given by (\[2.35\]) we obtain to first order in $\epsilon$ the following system of equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{2.40}
&&(\phi_1)_{rr}+\frac{1}{r}(\phi_1)_r-c\rho_1=0, \\ \notag
&&(\eta_1)_t-\alpha\rho_1+\phi_1=0 \\ \notag
&&(\rho_1)_t-\beta J_1(\beta r)(\eta_1)_r=0\end{aligned}$$ Where $J_1$ is Bessel function of the first kind of order $1$. The evolution of an initial perturbation $\rho_1=exp(-5r)$ with $\alpha=0.01$ from the steady state is plotted in $Fig 5$. This figure shows that as time progresses there is an accumulation of matter near the center of the disk. At the same time there is an initial separation between the core and the rest of the disk.
We computed also the solution to the system (\[2.28\]) with an initial matter distribution $\rho(0,r)=\frac{1+\sin(2\pi r)}{2}$, $c=0.01$ and $t \in [0,9]$. The results of the simulation (Fig. $6$) show that as time progresses matter is starting to build up in the vicinity of the center of the disk and around $r=1$. At the same time there is a decrease in matter density in between these two points.
Summary and Conclusions
=======================
In previous publications \[18-20\] we treated only the steady states of two dimensional self gravitating fluid. In this paper we generalized this model to include disk rotation and assessed the impact of this addition on the distribution of matter in the disk. We were able also to address the time dependent evolution of this fluid under restrictions on its vorticity. This enabled us to simplify considerably the equations which govern its evolution. While this is a highly idealized model in the context of astrophysical applications it may still provide some analytical insights for more elaborate models.
In this paper we considered only radial solutions of this model. More general solutions which are not radial will have to be explored next.
[ww]{}
Spitzer, L. Jr. 1968 Diffuse matter in space, Interscience Publishers, New-York.
Chandrasekhar S. 1987 Ellipsoidal Figures of Equilibrium , Dover, New-York
Kuiper, G.P., 1951. On the origin of the solar System. In Hynek, J.A. (Ed) Astrophysics: A topical symposium. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp.357-424
Kunzle H.P., Nester J.M., 1984 Hamiltonian formulation of gravitating perfect fluids and the Newtonian limit, J. Math. Phys 25, pp. 1009-1018
Letelier, P.S., Oliveira, S.R., 1987 Exact self-gravitating disks and rings: A solitonic approach ,J. Math. Phys. 28 pp.165-170
Smalley L.L., Krisch J. P., 1995 Fluids with spin and twist J. Math. Phys. 36, pp. 778-795
Matsumoto, T. and Hanawa T., 1999 Bar and Disk Formation in Gravitationally Collapsing Clouds. Astrophys. J., 521(2), pp.659-670
Lissauer J.J, 1993 Planet formation, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 31, pp.120-174
Perryman M., 2000 Extra-solar planets, Rep. on Progress in Phys., 63, pp. 1209-1272
Silk J., Suto Y., 1988 Stability of collapsing isothermal spheres, Astrophys. J., 335, pp. 295-300
Durisen R. H., Cai K., Meja, A.C., Pickett M. K., 2005 A hybrid scenario for gas giant planet formation in rings, Icarus, 173, p. 417-424
T. Ramming and G. Rein, 2013 Spherically Symmetric Equilibria for Self-Gravitating Kinetic or Fluid Models in the Nonrelativistic and Relativistic Case, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 45, pp.900-914
J. Touma and S. Tremaine -The statistical mechanics of self-gravitating Keplerian discs, 2014 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 47, p. 292001, doi:10.1088/1751-8113/47/29/292001
Yih C-S 1967 Equations governing steady two-dimensional large amplitude motion of a stratified fluid. J. Fluid Mech. 29 pp. 539-544.
M.L. Dubreil-Jacotin 1934 Sur la determination rigoureuse des ondes permanentes periodiques d’ampleur finie, J. Math. Pures. Appl. 13 p.217-291.
M. Ya Marov and A.V. Kolesnichenko 2013 Turbulence and Self-Organization, Modeling Astrophysical Objects, Springer, NY.
Petigura, E. A.; Howard, A. W.; Marcy, G. W., 2013, Prevalence of Earth-size planets orbiting Sun-like stars. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110 (48): 19273.
M. Humi, 2006 Steady States of self gravitating incompressible fluid. J. Math. Phys. 47, 093101 (10 pages).
M. Humi, 2009 Steady States of Self Gravitating Incompressible Fluid with Axial Symmetry, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, No. 23 pp. 4287-4303.
M. Humi, 2014 A Hydrodynamic Model for Proto-Planet Formation (submitted)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --
Fig. 1 Steady states with $\alpha=-19.4$, $c=1$ and boudary conditions $\rho(0)=1$,
$\rho(8)=0$ with different values of $\omega$
Fig. 2 Steady states with $\alpha=-19.4$, $c=1$ and boudary conditions $\rho(0)=0.35$,
$\rho(8)=0.25$ with different values of $\omega$
Fig. 3 The steady state that corresponds to (\[2.33\])
Fig. 4 The steady state that corresponds to (\[2.34\])
Fig. 5 Using (\[2.40\]) to solve for $\rho_1$ with $\alpha=-0.01$,
$c=0.0578$ and initial perturbation $\rho_1=exp(-5r)$ with a protostar at the origin.
Fig. 6 Using (\[2.28\]) to compute the evolution of $\rho$. The initial matter distribution is
$\rho(0,r)=\frac{1+\sin(2\pi r)}{2}$ and $c=0.01$. No protostar at the origin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 1\]
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 2\]
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 3\]
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 4\]
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 5\]
{height="100mm" width="120mm"}
\[Figure 6\]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'For any von Neumann algebra ${{\mathcal{M}}}$, the noncommutative Mazur map $M_{p,q}$ from $L_p({{\mathcal{M}}})$ to $L_q({{\mathcal{M}}})$ with $1{\leqslant}p,q<\infty$ is defined by $f\mapsto f|f|^{\frac {p-q}q}$. In analogy with the commutative case, we gather estimates showing that $M_{p,q}$ is $\min\{\frac pq,1\}$-Hölder on balls.'
address: 'Laboratoire de Math[é]{}matiques Nicolas Oresme, Universit[é]{} de Caen Basse-Normandie, 14032 Caen Cedex, France'
author:
- Éric Ricard
title: Hölder estimates for the noncommutative Mazur maps
---
[^1] [^2]
Introduction
============
In the integration theory, the Mazur map $M_{p,q}$ from $L_p(\Omega)$ to $L_q(\Omega)$ is defined by $f\mapsto f|f|^{\frac {p-q}q}$. It is an easy exercise to check that it is $\min\{\frac
pq,1\}$-Hölder. Theses maps also make sense in the noncommutative $L_p$-setting for which one should expect a similar behavior. We refer to [@PX] for the definitions of $L_p$-spaces for semifinite von Neumann algebras or more general ones. Having a quantitative result on Mazur maps may be useful when dealing with the structure of noncommutative $L_p$-spaces (see also [@Ray]). By the way, these maps are used implicitly in the definition of $L_p$. It is known that $M_{p,q}$ is locally uniformly continuous in full generality (Lemma 3.2 in [@Ray]). The lack of references for quantitative estimates motivates this note. When dealing with the Schatten classes (when ${{\mathcal{M}}}=B(\ell_2)$), some can be found in [@AP], more precisely $M_{p,q}$ is $\frac pq$-Hölder when $1<p<q$. The techniques developed there can be adapted to semifinite von Neumann algebras but can’t reach the case $p=1$. An estimate when $q=p'$ and $1<p<\infty$ can also be found in [@CL]. Here we aim to give to the best possible estimates especially for $p=1$.
**Theorem** *Let ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ be a von Neumann algebra, for $1{\leqslant}p,q<\infty$, $M_{p,q}$ is $\min\{\frac pq,1\}$-Hölder on the unit ball of $L_p({{\mathcal{M}}})$.*
The proofs provide a strange behaviour of the Hölder constants $c_{p,q}$ as $c_{p,q}\to \infty$ if $p<q\to 1$. This reflects the fact that the absolute value is not Lipschitz on $L_1$ or $L_\infty$ but the result may hold with an absolute constant.
We follow a basic approach, showing first the results for semifinite von Neumann algebras in section 2. We start by looking at positive elements and then use some commutator or anticommutator estimates. The ideas here are inspired by [@Bha; @Dav]. In section 3, we explain briefly how the Haagerup reduction technique from [@HJX] can be used to get the theorem in full generality.
Semifinite case
===============
In this section ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ is assumed to be semifinite with a nsf trace $\tau$. We refer to [@PX] for definitions. We denote by $L_0({{\mathcal{M}}},\tau)$ the set of $\tau$-measurable operators, and $$L_p({{\mathcal{M}}},\tau)= \Big\{ f\in L_0({{\mathcal{M}}},\tau)\;|\; \|f\|_p^p = \tau \big(|f|^p\big)<\infty\Big\}.$$ We drop the reference to $\tau$ in this section.
First we focus on the Mazur maps for positive elements using some basic inequalities. The first one can be found in [@CPPR] Lemma 1.2. An alternative proof can be obtained by adapting the arguments of [@Bha] Theorem X.1.1 to semifinite von Neumann algebras.
\[hardps\] If $p{\geqslant}1$, $0 < \theta {\leqslant}1$, for any $x,\,y\in L_{\theta p}^+({{\mathcal{M}}})$, we have $$\big\|x^\theta-y^\theta\big\|_{p}{\leqslant}\big\|x-y\big\|_{\theta p}^\theta.$$
Its proof relies on the fact that $s\mapsto s^\theta$ is operator monotone and has an integral representation $$s^\theta = c_\theta \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} \frac{t^\theta s}{s+t} \, \frac{dt}{t} \qquad \mbox{with} \qquad c_\theta = \Big( \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} \frac{u^\theta}{u(1+u)} \, du \Big)^{-1}.$$
\[hardps2\] If $p{\geqslant}1$, $0 < \theta {\leqslant}1$, for any $x,\,y\in L_{(1+\theta)p}^+({{\mathcal{M}}})$, we have : $$\big\|x^{1+\theta}-y^{1+\theta}\big\|_{p}{\leqslant}3\big\|x-y\big\|_{(1+\theta) p}
\max\Big\{\big\|x \big\|_{(1+\theta) p},\,\big\|y \big\|_{(1+\theta) p}\Big\}^\theta .$$
By standard arguments, cutting $x$ and $y$ by some of their spectral projections, we may assume that $\tau$ is finite $x$ and $y$ are bounded and invertible to avoid differentiability issues. We use $$s^{1+\theta} = c_\theta \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} \frac{t^\theta s^2}{s+t} \,
\frac{dt}{t}.$$ On bounded and invertible elements the maps $f_t:s\mapsto
\frac{s^2}{s+t}= s (s+t)^{-1}s$ are differentiable and $$D_sf_t(\delta)= \delta (s+t)^{-1}s+s(s+t)^{-1}\delta-s(s+t)^{-1}\delta (s+t)^{-1}s.$$ Hence putting $\delta=x-y$, we get the integral representation $$x^{1+\theta}-y^{1+\theta}= c_\theta \int_0^1 \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta
D_{y+u\delta} f_t(\delta) \,\frac{dt}{t} {du}.$$ We get, letting $g_t(s)=s(s+t)^{-1}$ $$x^{1+\theta}-y^{1+\theta}=\int_0^1 \Big((y+u\delta)^\theta \delta +\delta
(y+u\delta)^\theta\Big) \,du-
c_\theta \int_0^1 \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta g_t(y+u\delta) \delta g_t(y+u\delta)\,\frac{dt}{t} du.$$ The first term is easily handled by the Hölder inequality. When $u$ is fixed, note that $g_t(y+u\delta)$ is an invertible positive contraction. Put $$\gamma^2=c_\theta\int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta g_t(y+u\delta)^2 \frac{dt}{t}{\leqslant}(y+u\delta+t)^\theta,$$ and write $g_t(y+u\delta)=v_t\gamma$ so that $v_t$ and $y+u\delta$ commute and $$c_\theta\int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta v_t^2 \frac{dt}{t}=1.$$ Therefore the map defined on ${{\mathcal{M}}}$, $x\mapsto c_\theta\int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta
v_t x v_t \frac{dt}{t}=1$ is unital completely positive and trace preserving, hence it extends to a contraction on $L_q$ when $1{\leqslant}q{\leqslant}\infty$ (see [@HJX] for instance). Applying it to $x= \gamma \delta \gamma$, we deduce $$\Big\|c_\theta \int_{{{\mathbb{R}}}_+} t^\theta g_t(y+u\delta) \delta g_t(y+u\delta)\,\frac{dt}{t}\Big\|_p {\leqslant}\big\| \gamma \delta \gamma\big\|_p{\leqslant}\big\|\delta\big
\|_{(1+\theta)p}. \big\|\gamma\big\|_{\frac{2(1+\theta)p}\theta}^2{\leqslant}\big\|\delta\big
\|_{(1+\theta)p}.\big\|y+u\delta\big\|_{(1+\theta)p}^\theta.$$ thanks to the Hölder inequality again, this is enough to get the conclusion.
\[alpha\] Let $\alpha>1$, $p{\geqslant}1$, for any $x,\,y\in L_{\alpha p}^+({{\mathcal{M}}})$: $$\big\|x^{\alpha}-y^{\alpha}\big\|_{p}{\leqslant}3\alpha \big\|x-y\big\|_{\alpha p}
\max\Big\{\big\|x \big\|_{\alpha p},\,\big\|y \big\|_{\alpha p}\Big\}^{\alpha-1} .$$
When $\alpha=n\in {{\mathbb{N}}}$, the result is obvious with constant $n$. For the general case, put $n=[\alpha]$, so that $\alpha=n(1+\delta)$ with $0{\leqslant}\delta<1$, then use the result for $n$ and then Lemma \[hardps2\].
Coming back to the Mazur map $M_{p,q}$, Corollary \[alpha\] says that $M_{p,q}$ is Lipschitz on the positive unit ball of $L_p(M)$ if $q<p$. On the other hand Lemma \[hardps\] says that it is $\frac p
q$-Hölder if $q>p$. To release the positivity assumption, we will need a couple of Lemmas but we start by reducing the problem to selfadjoint elements by a well known $2\times2$-trick. .
If $x,\, y\in L_p({{\mathcal{M}}})$ are in the unit ball with polar decompositions $x=u|x|$ and $y=v|y|$, we want to prove that with $\theta= \min\{\frac pq ,1\}$ $$\label{est} \Big\| u |x|^{\frac pq} - v |y|^{\frac pq}\Big\|_q {\leqslant}c_{p,q}
\Big\| x-y\Big\|_p^\theta$$ In ${{\mathbb{M}}}_2({{\mathcal{M}}})$ equipped with the tensor trace, let $$\tilde x=\begin{pmatrix}
0&x\\
x^*&0
\end{pmatrix}\quad\textrm{and}\quad \tilde y=\begin{pmatrix}
0&y\\
y^*&0
\end{pmatrix}\,.$$ They are selfadjoint with polar decompositions $$\tilde x=\tilde u |\tilde x|=\begin{pmatrix}
0&u\\
u^*&0
\end{pmatrix}. \begin{pmatrix}
u|x|u^*& 0\\
0 & |x|
\end{pmatrix}\quad\textrm{and}\quad
\tilde y=\tilde v |\tilde y|=\begin{pmatrix}
0&v\\ v^*&0
\end{pmatrix}. \begin{pmatrix}
v|y|v^*& 0\\
0 & |y|
\end{pmatrix}.$$ The estimates for $\tilde x$ and $\tilde y$ implies that for $x$ and $y$ as $$\tilde u |\tilde x|^{\frac pq}=\begin{pmatrix}
0&u |x|^{\frac pq}\\
|x|^{\frac pq}u^*&0
\end{pmatrix}\quad\textrm{and}\quad \tilde v |\tilde y|^{\frac pq}=\begin{pmatrix}
0&v |y|^{\frac pq}\\
|y|^{\frac pq}v^*&0
\end{pmatrix},$$ we have $$\Big\| \tilde x-\tilde y\Big\|_p=2^{\frac 1p}\Big\| x-y\Big\|_p
\qquad
\Big\| \tilde u |\tilde x|^{\frac pq} - \tilde v |\tilde y|^{\frac pq}\Big\|_q
=2^{\frac 1q}\Big\| u |x|^{\frac pq} - v |y|^{\frac pq}\Big\|_q.$$
Next, we reduce the theorem to a commutator estimate by using the $2\times2$-trick again. We use the commutator notation $[x,b]=xb-bx$. Put $$\tilde x=\begin{pmatrix}
x&0\\
0&y
\end{pmatrix}\quad\textrm{and}\quad \tilde b=\begin{pmatrix}
0&1\\
0&0
\end{pmatrix}\,.$$ So that $$\big\| [M_{p,q} (\tilde x),\tilde b] \big\|_{q}= \big\| M_{p,q}(x)-M_{p,q}(y)\big\|_q \qquad\textrm{and}\qquad \big\| [\tilde x,\tilde b] \big\|_{p}=\big\| x-y\big\|_p.$$
\[com\] If $p{\geqslant}1$, $0 < \theta {\leqslant}1$ and $x\in L_{ p}^+({{\mathcal{M}}})$ and $b\in {{\mathcal{M}}}$ then $$\Big\| \big[x^\theta,b\big]\Big\|_{\frac p \theta} {\leqslant}2^{\theta}
\big\|b\big\|_\infty ^{1-\theta}\big\| [x, b] \big\|_{p}^\theta .$$ $$\big\| [x, b] \big\|_{p} {\leqslant}\frac {12} \theta
\big\|x\big\|_p ^{1-\theta}\Big\| \big[x^\theta,b\big]\Big\|_{\frac p \theta}.$$
We start by the first inequality. We may assume $\|b\|_\infty=1$ by homogeneity. Using the $2\times 2$-trick with $$\tilde x=\begin{pmatrix}
x& 0\\
0& x
\end{pmatrix}\quad\textrm{and}\quad \tilde b=\begin{pmatrix}
0&b\\
b^*&0
\end{pmatrix}\,,$$ we may assume $b=b^*$ (without loosing on the constant).
Next, as $b=b^*$, we may use the Cayley transform defined by $$u=(b-i)(b+i)^{-1} ,\qquad b=2i (1-u)^{-1}-i.$$ Clearly $u$ is unitary and functional calculus gives that $\|(1-u)^{-1}\|_\infty{\leqslant}\frac 1 {\sqrt 2}$. We have, using Lemma \[hardps\] $$\begin{aligned}
\big\| [x^\theta, b] \big\|_{\frac p \theta} &{\leqslant}& 2
\big\| x^\theta (1-u)^{-1} -(1-u)^{-1} x^\theta \big\|_{\frac p \theta}\\
& {\leqslant}& 2 \big\|(1-u)^{-1}\big\|_\infty^2 \big\| x^\theta (1-u) -(1-u) x^\theta \big\|_{\frac p \theta}\\ & {\leqslant}& \big\| u^*x^\theta u - x^\theta \big\|_{\frac p \theta}\\
& {\leqslant}& \big\| x u - ux\big\|_{p}^\theta\\
&{\leqslant}& \big\|(b+i)^{-1}\big\|_\infty^{2\theta} \big\| (b+i)x(b-i) - (b-i)x(b+i)\big\|_{p}^\theta\\
&{\leqslant}&2^{\theta}\, \big\| x b -b x \big\|_{p}^\theta.\end{aligned}$$ For the second one, we proceed similarly using Lemma \[alpha\].
\[sum\] If $p{\geqslant}1$, $0 < \theta {\leqslant}1$, there are constant $C$ and $C_t$ ($t>1$) so that for any $x,\,y\in L_{ p}^+({{\mathcal{M}}})$ and $b\in {{\mathcal{M}}}$ then $$\Big\| x^\theta b +b y^\theta \Big\|_{\frac p \theta} {\leqslant}C_{\frac p \theta}
\big\|b\big\|_\infty ^{1-\theta}\big\| x b +b y \big\|_{p}^\theta .$$ $$\big\| x b +b y \big\|_{p} {\leqslant}C
\big\|x\big\|_p ^{1-\theta}\Big\| x^\theta b +b y^\theta \Big\|_{\frac p \theta} .$$
Using the $2\times 2$-trick, we may assume $x=y$. Moreover we may assume that ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ is finite and $x$ is in ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ and invertible. Indeed, let $e_n=1_{(\frac 1n,n)}(x)$ and $e_n^\bot=1-e_n$: $$\big\| x b +b x \big\|_{p} \sim \big\| x e_nbe_n +e_nbe_n x \big\|_{p} +
\big\| e_n x b e_n^\bot \big\|_{p}+ \big\| e_n^\bot bxe_n \big\|_{p}+\big\| e_n^\bot (xb+bx) e_n^\bot \big\|_{p}$$ $$\big\| x^\theta b +b x^\theta \big\|_{\frac p\theta} \sim \big\|
x^\theta e_nbe_n +e_nbe_n x^\theta \big\|_{\frac p\theta} + \big\| e_nx^\theta
be_n^\bot \big\|_{\frac p\theta}+ \big\| e_n^\bot bx^\theta e_n \big\|_{\frac
p\theta}+ \big\| e_n^\bot (x^\theta
b+bx^\theta) e_n^\bot \big\|_{\frac p\theta}.$$ If we apply the result in $e_n{{\mathcal{M}}}e_n$ where $xe_n\in e_n{{\mathcal{M}}}e_n$ is invertible, we get control for the first terms. For the 2 middle terms this is clear by interpolation as $\big\|
e_nx^\theta be_n^\bot \big\|_{\frac p\theta}{\leqslant}\big\| e_nx be_n^\bot
\big\|_{p}^\theta \|b\|_\infty^{1-\theta}$ and $\big\| e_nx be_n^\bot
\big\|_{p}{\leqslant}\big\|
e_nx^\theta be_n^\bot \big\|_{\frac p\theta} \|e_nx\|_p^{1-\theta}$. And finally, the last two terms go to 0 with $n\to \infty$.
We will use techniques from [@RX] based on Schur multipliers estimates and interpolation. We use $M_{cb}$ for the completely bounded norm of a Schur multiplier on ${{\mathbb{B}}}(\ell_2)$. By an obvious approximation, we may also assume that $x$ has a finite spectrum. Let $(\lambda_i)_{i=1...n}$ be the spectrum of $x$ with associated projections $(p_i)_{i=1...n}$. We start by the second inequality. For any $\alpha\in[0,1]$, the matrix $\Big( \frac
{\lambda_i^\alpha\lambda_j^{1-\alpha}+\lambda_i^{1-\alpha}
\lambda_j^\alpha}{\lambda_i+\lambda_j}\Big)_{i,j}$ defines a unital completely positive Schur multiplier on ${{\mathbb{B}}}(\ell_2^n)$, see the computation in Corollary 2.5 in [@RX]. As above, this implies that $$\Big\| x^{1-\alpha} b x^\alpha + x^\alpha b
x^{1-\alpha}\Big\|_p {\leqslant}\Big\| xb+bx\Big\|_p.$$ We use$$x b+bx = x^{1-\theta} (x^\theta b+bx^\theta) + (x^\theta b+bx^\theta)x^{1-\theta} -
(x^{1-\theta} bx^\theta + x^\theta bx^{1-\theta}).$$ Assume $\theta{\geqslant}\frac 13$, by the Hölder inequality $$\Big\|x b+bx\Big\|_p {\leqslant}\big\|x\big\|_p^{1-\theta} \Big( 2\Big\| x^\theta b+bx^\theta\Big\|_{\frac p \theta} + \Big\| x^{\frac {1-\theta}2} b x^{\frac {3\theta-1}2} +x^{\frac {3\theta-1}2}bx^{\frac {1-\theta}2}\Big\|_{\frac p \theta} \Big)$$ Using the above argument with $\alpha=\frac {1-\theta}2$: $$\Big\|x b+bx\Big\|_p{\leqslant}C \big\|x\big\|_p^{1-\theta} \Big\| x^\theta b+bx^\theta\Big\|_{\frac p \theta}.$$ When $\theta <\frac 1 3$, we use $$\Big\| x^{1-\theta} bx^\theta + x^\theta bx^{1-\theta}\Big\|_p {\leqslant}2\big\|x\big\|_p^{1-\theta} \Big\|x^{\frac \theta 2} bx^{\frac \theta 2}\Big\|_{\frac p {\theta}}.$$ And one corrects with a Schur multiplier of the form $\Big( \frac
{\sqrt{\mu_i\mu_j}} {\mu_i+\mu_j}\Big)_{i,j}$ which has norm 1 (see [@RX]) to get $$\Big\| x^{1-\theta} bx^\theta + x^\theta bx^{1-\theta}\Big\|_p {\leqslant}2\big\|x\big\|_p^{1-\theta} \Big\| x^\theta b+bx^\theta\Big\|_{\frac p \theta}.$$
For the first inequality, the result is then a particular case of the main theorem of [@RX]. The latter says the Banach spaces defined by norms $\|b\|_{L_q(x^\alpha)}=\| x^\alpha b+ b x^\alpha\|_q$ interpolate, so that $L_{\frac p\theta}(x^\theta)=(L_\infty(x^0), L_p(x))_\theta$. As a corollary, $$\Big\| x^\theta b +b x^\theta \Big\|_{\frac p \theta} {\leqslant}C_{\frac p\theta}
\big\|b\big\|_\infty ^{1-\theta}\big\| x b +b x \big\|_{p}^\theta.$$
To avoid the use of [@RX] we provide an alternate proof of the latter inequality with a better constant only when $p=1$ and $\theta{\leqslant}\frac 12$. Assuming $\|b\|_\infty{\leqslant}1$, we use the Jensen’s inequality from [@BrownKos] for the convex function $x\mapsto x^{\frac 1{2\theta}}$ (for us it follows easily from the operator convexity of $x^\alpha$ for $\alpha\in [1,2]$ and an iteration argument): $$\begin{aligned}
\Big\| x^\theta b +b x^\theta \Big\|_{\frac 1 \theta}^{\frac 1 \theta } &{\leqslant}&
2^{\frac 1 \theta} \Big(\big\| x^\theta b\big\|_{\frac 1 \theta}^{\frac 1\theta} +
\big\| bx^\theta \big\|_{\frac 1 \theta}^{\frac 1\theta}\Big)\\
&{\leqslant}& 2^{\frac 1 \theta}\tau \Big( \big(b^*x^{2\theta}b\big)^{\frac 1{2\theta}}+\big(bx^{2\theta}b^*\big)^{\frac 1{2\theta}} \Big)\\
& {\leqslant}&2^{\frac 1 \theta}\tau \Big( b^*xb + bxb^*\Big)\\
&{\leqslant}& 2^{\frac 1 \theta}\big\|xb+bx \big\|_1.\end{aligned}$$
\[commaz\] There is an absolute constant $C>0$ and constants $C_t$ ($t>1$) so that :
- If $q>p{\geqslant}1$, and $x\in L_{ p}({{\mathcal{M}}})$, $x=x^*$ and $b\in {{\mathcal{M}}}$ then $$\label{maa}\Big\| \big[M_{p,q} (x),b\Big] \Big\|_{q} {\leqslant}C_q
\big\|b\big\|_\infty ^{1-\frac pq}\big\| [x, b]\big\|_{p}^{\frac pq} .$$
- If $p>q{\geqslant}1$, and $x\in L_{ p}({{\mathcal{M}}})$, $x=x^*$ and $b\in {{\mathcal{M}}}$ then $$\label{maa2}\Big\| \big[M_{p,q} (x),b\Big] \Big\|_{q} {\leqslant}C\frac p q
\big\|x\big\|_p ^{\frac pq-1}\big\| [x, b]\big\|_{p} .$$
For , write $e_+=1_{[0,\infty)}(x)$ and $e_-=1_{(-\infty,0)}(x)$ and put $b_{\pm,\pm}=e_{\pm} be_{\pm}$. So that $$\big[M_{p,q} (x),b\big]= \big[x_+^{\frac pq},b_{+,+}\big] - \,\big[x_-^{\frac pq},b_{-,-}\big]+ \,
\big( x_+^{\frac pq}b_{+,-}+b_{+,-}x_-^{\frac pq}\big) - \big( x_-^{\frac pq}b_{-,+}+b_{-,+}x_+^{\frac pq}\big).$$ We can apply either Lemma \[com\] or \[sum\] to each term. In any case, the upper bound we get is smaller than the right side of .
A similar argument works for .
\[gen\][The techniques developed here work if one replaces $M_{p,q}$ by any function $f:{{\mathbb{R}}}\to {{\mathbb{R}}}$. With such a general function $f$, $\ref{commaz}$ boils down to the boundedness of some Schur multipliers on $S_p[L_p({{\mathcal{M}}})]$ (by the discretization from [@RX]), this is the argument of [@Dav]. This also explains why the results of [@Dav; @AP; @PoSu] remain true for semifinite von Neumann algebras.]{}
General case
============
In the general case, we use the Haagerup definition of $L_p$-spaces [@terp] and the Haagerup reduction technique from [@HJX] (see [@CPPR] for extension from states to weights). As the construction is very technical, we only give a sketch to keep the paper short. Let ${{\mathcal{M}}}$ be a general von Neumann algebra with a fixed faithful normal semifinite weight ${\varphi}$ (we use the classical notation $\mathfrak n_{\varphi}$, $\mathfrak m_{\varphi}$,... for constructions associated to ${\varphi}$). As usual $\sigma^{\varphi}$ denotes the automorphisms group of ${\varphi}$. We let $\hat {{\mathcal{M}}}=M \rtimes_{\sigma^{\varphi}} {{\mathbb{R}}}$ be the core of ${{\mathcal{M}}}$. It is a semifinite von Neumann algebra with a distinguished trace $\tau$ such that $\tau\circ\hat \sigma_s=e^{-s}\tau$ where $\hat \sigma$ is the dual action of ${{\mathbb{R}}}$ on $\hat {{\mathcal{M}}}$. The definition is then $$L_p^{\varphi}({{\mathcal{M}}})= \Big\{ f\in L_0(\hat {{\mathcal{M}}},\tau)\;|\;
\hat\sigma_s(x)=e^{-\frac sp} x\Big\}.$$ Then $L_1^{\varphi}(M)$ is order isometric to $M_*$ and the evaluation at 1 is denoted by ${\rm
tr}$. The $L_p^{\varphi}$ norm is given by $\|x\|_p^p= {\rm tr} |x|^p$. We also denote by $D_{\varphi}$ the Radon-Nykodym derivative of the dual weight $\hat {\varphi}$ with respect to $\tau$.
These $L_p^{\varphi}$ spaces are disjoint and the norm topology coincide with the measure topology of $L_0(\hat M,\tau)$ (Proposition 26 in [@terp]). The construction does not depend on the choice of ${\varphi}$ up to $*$-topological isomorphisms (see below) so that we may drop the superscript ${\varphi}$ when no confusion can arise.
The Haagerup reduction theorem is (see Theorem 2.1 in [@HJX] or Theorem 7.1 in [@CPPR]):
For any $({{\mathcal{M}}},{\varphi})$ there is a bigger von Neumann algebra $({{\mathcal{R}}},\tilde {\varphi})$ where $\tilde {\varphi}$ a nfs weight extending ${\varphi}$, a family $a_n$ in the center of the centralizer of $\tilde {\varphi}$ so that
i) There is a conditional expectation ${{\mathcal{E}}}: {{\mathcal{R}}}\to {{\mathcal{M}}}$ such that $${{\varphi}} \circ {{\mathcal{E}}}= \tilde{{\varphi}} \quad \mbox{and} \quad {{\mathcal{E}}}\circ \sigma_s^{\tilde{{\varphi}}} = \sigma_s^{{{\varphi}}} \circ {{\mathcal{E}}}\quad \mbox{ for all } \quad s \in \mathbb{R}.$$
ii) The centralizer ${{\mathcal{R}}}_n$ of ${\varphi}_n(.)=\tilde {\varphi}(e^{-a_n}.)$ is semifinite for all $n{\geqslant}1$ (with trace ${\varphi}_n$).
iii) There exists conditional expectations ${{\mathcal{E}}}_n:{{\mathcal{R}}}\to {{\mathcal{R}}}_n$ such that $$\tilde{{\varphi}} \circ {{\mathcal{E}}}_n = \tilde{{\varphi}} \quad \mbox{and} \quad {{\mathcal{E}}}_n \circ \sigma_s^{\tilde{{\varphi}}} = \sigma_s^{\tilde{{\varphi}}} \circ {{\mathcal{E}}}_n \quad \mbox{ for all } \quad s \in \mathbb{R}.$$
iv) ${{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x) \to x$ $\sigma$-strongly for $x \in
\mathfrak{n}_{\tilde{{\varphi}}}$ and $\bigcup_{n {\geqslant}1} {{\mathcal{R}}}_n$ is $\sigma$-strongly dense in ${{\mathcal{R}}}$.
The modular conditions for the conditional expectations imply that we can view $L_p({{\mathcal{M}}})$ and $L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)$ as subspaces of $L_p({{\mathcal{R}}})$ and there are extensions: $${{\mathcal{E}}}^p: L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}) \rightarrow L_p({{\mathcal{M}}}) \quad \mbox{and} \quad
{{\mathcal{E}}}_n^p: L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}) \rightarrow L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n).$$ Moreover from [*iv)*]{}, for any $x\in L_p({{\mathcal{R}}})$ ($1{\leqslant}p<\infty$) we have (see Lemma 7.3 in [@CPPR] for instance): $$\lim_{n\to \infty}\big\| {{\mathcal{E}}}_n^p(x) - x\big\|_p =0.$$
Now we make explicit the independence of $L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)$ relative the choice of the weight. Considering ${{\mathcal{R}}}_n$ with ${\varphi}_n$ or $\tilde {\varphi}_n$ gives two constructions, the corresponding spaces of measurable operators $N_{{\varphi}_n}=L_0(
{{\mathcal{R}}}_n \rtimes_{\sigma^{{\varphi}_n}} {{\mathbb{R}}}, \hat {\varphi}_n)$ and $N_{\tilde {\varphi}}=L_0( {{\mathcal{R}}}_n
\rtimes_{\sigma^{\tilde {\varphi}}} {{\mathbb{R}}}, \tau)$ in which the $L_p$-spaces live. By Corollary 38 in [@terp], there is a topological $*$-homomorphism $\kappa :N_{\tilde {\varphi}}\to N_{{\varphi}_n}$ so that $\kappa(L_p^{\tilde
{\varphi}}({{\mathcal{R}}}_n))=L_p^{{\varphi}_n}({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)$ and is isometric on $L_p$.
As ${\varphi}_n$ is a trace, we know that ${{\mathcal{R}}}_n \rtimes_{\sigma^{{\varphi}_n}}
\simeq {{\mathcal{R}}}_n \otimes L_\infty({{\mathbb{R}}})$ and the identification $\iota_p :
L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n,{\varphi}_n)\to L_p^{{\varphi}_n}({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)$ is $\iota_p(x)=x\otimes
e^{\frac .p}$. Hence we get isometric isomorphisms $\kappa_p=\iota_p^{-1}\circ \kappa: L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n) \to L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n,{\varphi}_n)$ that are compatible with left and right multiplications by elements of ${{\mathcal{R}}}_n$ and powers in the sense that for $1{\leqslant}q,p< \infty$ and $x\in
L_p^+({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)$ $$\label{compow}
\kappa_p(x)^{\frac pq}= \kappa_q\big(x^{\frac pq}\big).$$ One can check that $\kappa_p$ is formally given by $\kappa_p(D^{\frac 1
{2p}}_{\tilde {\varphi}}xD^{\frac 1 {2p}}_{\tilde {\varphi}})=e^{-\frac
{a_n}{2p}} x e^{-\frac {a_n}{2p}}$ for $x\in \mathfrak
m_{{\varphi}_n}$.
Now we can conclude to the proof of the theorem in the general case. Take $x$ and $y$ in $L_p(M)$, then $$\big\| x-y\big\|_p =\lim_{n\to \infty} \big\| {{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x) -{{\mathcal{E}}}_n(y)
\big\|_{L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n)}= \lim_{n\to \infty} \big\| \kappa_p({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x))
-\kappa_p({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(y)) \big\|_{L_p({{\mathcal{R}}}_n,{\varphi}_n)}.$$ By Lemma 3.2 in [@Ray], the map $M_{p,q}$ is continuous on $N_{\tilde {\varphi}}$, thus also $L_p\to L_q$, hence $$\big\| M_{p,q}(x)-M_{p,q}(y)\big\|_q =\lim_{n\to \infty} \big\|
\kappa_q(M_{p,q}({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x)))
-\kappa_q(M_{p,q}({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(y))) \big\|_{L_q({{\mathcal{R}}}_n,{\varphi}_n)}.$$ But thanks to , $\kappa_q(M_{p,q}({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x)))=M_{p,q}(\kappa_p({{\mathcal{E}}}_n(x))$, so that we can use the estimate for semifinite von Neumann algebras to conclude.
In the same way, all inequalities from section 2 can be extended to arbitrary von Neumann algebras (except Remark \[gen\] as one can not make sense of $f(x)\in L_q$ when $x\in L_p^{sa}$ for general functions other than powers).
**Acknowledgement.** The author would like to thank Masato Mimura and Gilles Pisier for asking the question on the best Hölder exponents for the Mazur maps. The author is supported by ANR-2011-BS01-008-01.
[10]{}
A. B. Aleksandrov and V. V. Peller. Functions of operators under perturbations of class [${\bf S}_p$]{}. , 258(11):3675–3724, 2010.
Rajendra Bhatia. , volume 169 of [*Graduate Texts in Mathematics*]{}. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997.
Lawrence G. Brown and Hideki Kosaki. Jensen’s inequality in semi-finite von [N]{}eumann algebras. , 23(1):3–19, 1990.
Martijn Capers, Javier Parcet, Mathilde Perrin, and Éric Ricard. Noncommutative [D]{}e [L]{}eeuw theorems. , 2014.
Eric A. Carlen and Elliott H. Lieb. Optimal hypercontractivity for [F]{}ermi fields and related noncommutative integration inequalities. , 155(1):27–46, 1993.
E. B. Davies. Lipschitz continuity of functions of operators in the [S]{}chatten classes. , 37(1):148–157, 1988.
Uffe Haagerup, Marius Junge, and Quanhua Xu. A reduction method for noncommutative [$L_p$]{}-spaces and applications. , 362(4):2125–2165, 2010.
Gilles Pisier and Quanhua Xu. Non-commutative [$L^p$]{}-spaces. In [*Handbook of the geometry of [B]{}anach spaces, [V]{}ol. 2*]{}, pages 1459–1517. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003.
Denis Potapov and Fedor Sukochev. Operator-[L]{}ipschitz functions in [S]{}chatten-von [N]{}eumann classes. , 207(2):375–389, 2011.
Yves Raynaud. On ultrapowers of non commutative [$L_p$]{} spaces. , 48(1):41–68, 2002.
ric Ricard and Quanhua Xu. Complex interpolation of weighted noncommutative [$L_p$]{}-spaces. , 37(4):1165–1179, 2011.
Marianne Terp. $^p$ spaces associated with von neumann algebras. , 1981.
[^1]: [*2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:*]{} 46L51; 47A30.
[^2]: [*Key words:*]{} Noncommutative $L_p$-spaces, Mazur maps
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The recent progress on image recognition and language modeling is making automatic description of image content a reality. However, stylized, non-factual aspects of the written description are missing from the current systems. One such style is descriptions with emotions, which is commonplace in everyday communication, and influences decision-making and interpersonal relationships. We design a system to describe an image with emotions, and present a model that automatically generates captions with positive or negative sentiments. We propose a novel switching recurrent neural network with word-level regularization, which is able to produce emotional image captions using only 2000+ training sentences containing sentiments. We evaluate the captions with different automatic and crowd-sourcing metrics. Our model compares favourably in common quality metrics for image captioning. In 84.6% of cases the generated positive captions were judged as being at least as descriptive as the factual captions. Of these positive captions 88% were confirmed by the crowd-sourced workers as having the appropriate sentiment.'
author:
- |
Alexander Mathews$^*$, Lexing Xie$^{*\dag}$, Xuming He$^{\dag *}$\
$^*$The Australian National University, $^\dag$NICTA\
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
title: 'SentiCap: Generating Image Descriptions with Sentiments'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Automatically describing an image by generating a coherent sentence unifies two core challenges in artificial intelligence – vision and language. Despite being a difficult problem, the research community has recently made headway into this area, thanks to large labeled datasets, and progresses in learning expressive neural network models. In addition to composing a factual description about the objects, scene, and their interactions in an image, there are richer variations in language, often referred to as styles [@crystal1969investigating]. Take emotion, for example, it is such a common phenomena in our day-to-day communications that over half of text accompanying online pictures contains an emoji (a graphical alphabet for emotions) [@instagram2015emoji]. How well emotions are expressed and understood [influences]{} decision-making [@lerner2015emotion] – from the mundane (e.g., making a restaurant menu appealing) to major (e.g., choosing a political leader in elections). Recognizing [sentiment and opinions]{} from written communications has been an active research topic for the past decade [@pang2008opinion; @socherrecursive], the synthesis of text with sentiment that is relevant to a given image is still an open problem. In Figure \[fig:intro\], [each]{} image is described with a factual caption, and with positive or negative emotion[, respectively]{}. One may argue that the descriptions with sentiments are more likely to pique interest about the subject being pictured (the dog and the motocycle), or about their background settings (interaction with the dog at home, or how the motocycle came about).
![Example images with neural, positive () and negative () captions, by crowd workers in MSCOCO dataset [@chen2015microsoft] and this work (Section \[sec:mturk\]). []{data-label="fig:intro"}](fig/intro_example){width=".4\textwidth"}
In this paper, we describe a method, called SentiCap, to generate image captions with sentiments. We build upon the CNN+RNN (Convolution Neural Network + Recurrent Neural Network) recipe that has seen many recent successes [@donahue2015long; @Karpathy2015CVPR; @mao2014deep; @vinyals2015show; @xu2015show]. In particular, we propose a switching Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) model to represent sentiments. This model consists of two parallel RNNs – one represents a general background language model; another specialises in descriptions with sentiments. We design a novel word-level regularizer, so as to emphasize the sentiment words during training [and to optimally combine the two RNN streams]{} (Section \[sec:model\]). We have gathered a new dataset of several thousand captions with positive and negative sentiments by re-writing factual descriptions (Section \[sec:mturk\]). [Trained on 2000+ sentimental captions and 413K neutral captions, our switching RNN out-performs a range of heuristic and learned baselines in the number of emotional captions generated, and in a [[[variety]{}]{}]{} of subjective and human evaluation metrics. In particular SentiCap has the highest number of success in placing at least one sentiment word into the caption, 88% positive (or 72% negative) captions are perceived by crowd workers as more positive (or negative) than the factual caption, with a similar descriptiveness rating. ]{}
Related Work
============
[Recent]{} advances in visual recognition have made “an image is a thousand words” much closer to reality, [largely due to the advances in Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) [@Simonyan2015; @Szegedy_2015_CVPR]]{}. [A related topic also advancing rapidly is image captioning, where most early systems were]{} [based on similarity retrieval using objects and attributes [@farhadi2010every; @kulkarni2011baby; @hodosh2013framing; @Gupta2012a], and assembling sentence fragments such as object-action-scene [@farhadi2010every], subject-verb-object [@rohrbach2013translating], object-attribute-prepositions [@kulkarni2011baby] or global image properties such as scene and lighting [@Nwogu2011].]{} [Recent systems model richer language structure, such as formulating a integer linear program to map visual elements to the parse tree of a sentence [@kuznetsova2014treetalk], or embedding [@Xu2015] video and compositional semantics into a joint space.]{}
Word-level language models [such as RNNs [@mikolov2011strategies; @sutskever2011generating] and maximum-entropy (max-ent) language models [@mikolov2011strategies] have improved with the aid of]{} significantly larger datasets and more computing power. Several research teams independently proposed image captioning systems that combine CNN-based image representation and [such]{} language models. Fang [et al.]{} used a cascade of word detectors from images and a [max-ent]{} model. The Show and Tell [@vinyals2015show] system used an RNN as the language model, seeded by CNN image features. Xu [et al.]{} estimated spatial attention as a latent variable, to make the Show and Tell system aware of local image information. Karpathy and Li[ ]{} used an [RNN to generate a sentence from the alignment between objects and words]{}. [Other work has]{} [employed multi-layer RNNs [@Chen_2015_CVPR; @donahue2015long]]{} [for image captioning.]{} [Most]{} RNN-based multimodal language models [use]{} the Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) unit that preserves long-term information [and prevents]{} overfitting [@hochreiter1997long]. We adopt one of the competitive systems [@vinyals2015show] – CNN+RNN with LSTM units as our basic multimodal sentence generation engine, due to its simplicity and computational efficiency.
[Researchers have modeled]{} how [an]{} image is presented, and what kind of response it is likely to elicit from viewers, such as analyzing the aesthetics and emotion in images [@murray2012ava; @joshi2011aesthetics]. More recently, the Visual SentiBank [@borth2013sentibank] system constructed a catalogue of Adjective-Noun-Pairs (ANPs) that are frequently used to describe online images. We build upon Visual SentiBank to construct sentiment vocabulary, but to the best of our knowledge, no existing work tries to compose image descriptions with desired sentiments. [Identifying sentiment in text is an active area of research[ [@pang2008opinion; @socherrecursive]]{}. Several [teams]{} [@Nakagawa2010; @Mcdonald2011] [designed sentence models with latent variables representing the sentiment.]{} [Our work focuses on]{} generating sentences and not explicitly modelling sentiment using hidden variables.]{}
Describing an Image with Sentiments {#sec:model}
===================================
Given an image $I$ and its $D_x$-dimensional visual feature ${\mathbf{x}}\in{{\mathbb R}}^{D_x}$, our goal is to generate a sequence of words (i.e. a caption) ${\mathbf{Y}}=\{{\mathbf{y}}_1,\cdots,{\mathbf{y}}_T\}$ to describe the image with a specific style, such as expressing sentiment. Here ${\mathbf{y}}_t\in\{0,1\}^V$ is 1-of-V encoded indicator vector for the $t^{th}$ word; $V$ is the size of the vocabulary; and $T$ is the length of the caption.
We assume [[[that]{}]{}]{} sentence generation involves two underlying mechanisms, one of which focuses on the factual description of the image while the other describes the image content with sentiments. [We formulate such caption generation process using a switching multi-modal language model, which sequentially generates words in a sentence.]{} [Formally]{}, we introduce a binary [sentiment]{} variable $s_t\in\{0,1\}$ for every word ${\mathbf{y}}_t$ to indicate which mechanism is used. At each time step $t$, our model produces the probability of ${\mathbf{y}}_t$ and the current sentiment variable $s_t$ given the image feature ${\mathbf{x}}$ and the previous words ${\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1}$, denoted by $p({\mathbf{y}}_t,s_t|{\mathbf{x}},\mathbf{y}_{1:t-1})$. We generate the word probability by marginalizing [over]{} the sentiment variable $s_t$: $$\resizebox{0.25\columnwidth}{!}{$
p({\mathbf{y}}_t|{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})$}=\sum_{s_t}\resizebox{0.525\columnwidth}{!}{$p({\mathbf{y}}_t|s_t,{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})p(s_t|{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})
$}
\label{eq:bayesrule_s}
{\vspace{-0.mm}}$$ Here $p({\mathbf{y}}_t|s_t,\cdot)$ is the caption model conditioned on the sentiment variable and [$p(s_t|\cdot)$ is the probability of the word sentiment]{}. The rest of this section will introduce these components [and model learning]{} in detail.
Switching RNNs for Sentiment Captions {#ssec:sentimodel}
-------------------------------------
We adopt a joint CNN+RNN architecture [@vinyals2015show] in the conditional caption model. Our full model combines two CNN+RNNs running in parallel: one capturing the [factual word generation (referred to as the background language model)]{}, the other specializing in words with sentiment. [The full model is a switching RNN, in which the variable $s_t$ functions as a switching gate.]{} This model design aims to learn sentiments well, despite data sparsity – using only a small dataset [of]{} image description with sentiments (Section \[sec:mturk\]), with the help from millions of image-sentence pairs that factually describe pictures [@chen2015microsoft].
Each RNN stream [consists of]{} a series of LSTM units. Formally, we denote the $D$-dimensional hidden state of an LSTM as ${\mathbf{h}}_t \in {{\mathbb R}}^D$, its memory cell as ${\mathbf{c}}_t\in {{\mathbb R}}^D$, the input, output, forget gates as ${\mathbf{i}}_t,~{\mathbf{o}}_t,~{\mathbf{f}}_t \in {{\mathbb R}}^D$, [respectively.]{} [Let $k$ indicate which RNN stream it is,]{} the LSTM can be implemented as: $$\begin{aligned}
&\begin{pmatrix} {\mathbf{i}}_t^k \\ {\mathbf{f}}_t^k \\ {\mathbf{o}}_t^k \\ {\mathbf{g}}_t^k \end{pmatrix} =
\begin{pmatrix} \sigma \\ \sigma \\ \sigma \\\tanh \end{pmatrix} \mathlarger{{\mathbf{T}}}^k{}
\begin{pmatrix} {\mathbf{E}}^k{\mathbf{y}}_{t-1} \\ {\mathbf{h}}^k_{t-1} \end{pmatrix}
\label{eq:lstm}\\
&{\mathbf{c}}_t^k = {\mathbf{f}}_t^k \odot {\mathbf{c}}_{t-1}^k + {\mathbf{i}}_t^k \odot {\mathbf{g}}_t^k, \quad
{\mathbf{h}}_t^k = {\mathbf{o}}_t^k \odot {{\mathbf{c}}_t^k}. \nonumber
{\vspace{-0.mm}}\end{aligned}$$ Here $\sigma(\chi)$ is the sigmoid function $1/(1+e^{-\chi})$; $tanh$ is the hyperbolic tangent function; [${\mathbf{T}}^k\in{{\mathbb R}}^{4D\times2D}$]{} is a set of learned weights; ${\mathbf{g}}^k_t\in{{\mathbb R}}^D$ is the input to the memory cell; [${\mathbf{E}}^k \in {{\mathbb R}}^{D\times V}$]{} is a learned embedding matrix [in model $k$]{}, and ${\mathbf{E}}^k{\mathbf{y}}_t$ is the embedding vector of the word ${\mathbf{y}}_t$.
To incorporate image information, we use an image representation $\hat{\mathbf{x}}={\mathbf{W}}_x{\mathbf{x}}$ as the word embedding ${\mathbf{Ey}}_0$ when $t=1$, where ${\mathbf{x}}$ is a high-dimensional image feature extracted from a convolutional neural network [@Simonyan2015], and ${\mathbf{W}}_x$ is a learned embedding matrix. Note that the LSTM hidden state ${\mathbf{h}}_t^k$ summarizes ${\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1}$ and ${\mathbf{x}}$. The conditional probability of the output caption words depends on the hidden state of the corresponding LSTM, $$\begin{aligned}
p({\mathbf{y}}_t | s_t=k, {\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1}) &\propto \exp({\mathbf{W}}_y^{k} {\mathbf{h}}_t^k) {\vspace{-0.mm}}\end{aligned}$$ where ${\mathbf{W}}_y^k \in {{\mathbb R}}^{D\times V}$ is a set of learned output weights.
[The]{} sentiment switching model generates the probability of switching [between the two RNN streams]{} at each time $t$, [with]{} a single layer network taking the hidden states of both RNNs as input: $$\begin{aligned}
p(s_t=1 | {\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1}) &= \sigma({\mathbf{W}}_s[{\mathbf{h}}^0_t;{\mathbf{h}}^1_t])\label{eq:switch}
{\vspace{-0.mm}}\end{aligned}$$ where ${\mathbf{W}}_s$ is the weight matrix for the hidden states.
[An illustration of this sentiment switching model is in Figure \[fig:rnn\].]{} In summary, the parameter set for each RNN ($k=\{0,1\}$) is [$\Theta^k=\{{\mathbf{T}}^k, {\mathbf{W}}_y^k, {\mathbf{E}}^k, {\mathbf{W}}_x^k\}$]{}, and that of the switching RNN is [$\Theta=\Theta^0\cup\Theta^1\cup {\mathbf{W}}_s$]{}. We have tried including ${\mathbf{x}}$ for learning $p(s_t|{\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})$ but found no benefit.
![Illustration of the switching RNN model for captions with sentiment. Lines with diamonds denote projections with learned weights. LSTM cells are described in Eq \[eq:lstm\]. $\gamma_t^0$ and $\gamma_t^1$ are probabilities of sentiment switch defined in Eq (\[eq:switch\]) and act as gating functions for the two streams. []{data-label="fig:rnn"}](fig/parrallel_rnn){width=".35\textwidth"}
Learning the Switching RNN Model
--------------------------------
[One of the key challenges is to design a learning scheme for $p(s_t | {\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})$ and two CNN+RNN components. We take a two-stage learning approach to estimate the parameters $\Theta$ in our switching RNN model based on a large dataset with factual captions and a small set with sentiment captions.]{}
**Learning a background multi-modal RNN.** We first train a CNN+RNN with a large dataset of image and caption pairs, denoted as $\mathcal{D}^0=\{({\mathbf{x}}_0^i,{\mathbf{y}}_0^i)\}_{i=1}^N$. $\Theta^0$ are learned by minimizing the negative log-likelihood of the caption words given images, [ $$\label{eqn:baselearn}
\resizebox{0.26\columnwidth}{!}{$
L^0(\Theta^0,\mathcal{D}^0)
= -$}\sum_i\sum_t \resizebox{0.5\columnwidth}{!}{$\log p({\mathbf{y}}^i_{0,t}|s_t=0,{\mathbf{x}}^i_0,{\mathbf{y}}^i_{0,1:t-1} ).$}
{\vspace{-0.mm}}$$ ]{}
**Learning from captions with sentiments.** [Based on the pre-trained CNN+RNN in Eq , we then learn the switching RNN using a small image caption dataset with a specific sentiment polarity, denoted as $\mathcal{D}=\{({\mathbf{x}}^i,{\mathbf{y}}^i,\eta^i)\}_{i=1}^M$, $M\ll N$. Here $\eta_t^i \in [0, 1]$ is the sentiment strength of the $t^{th}$ word in the $i$-th training sentence,]{} [being either positive or negative as specified in the training data.]{}
[We design a new training objective function to use word-level sentiment information for learning $\Theta^1$ and the switching weights ${\mathbf{W}}_s$, while keeping the pre-learned $\Theta^0$ fixed. For clarity, we denote the sentiment probability as: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma^{0}_t = p(s_t = 0|{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1}), \quad\gamma^{1}_t = 1-\gamma^{0}_t; \label{eq:switch}
{\vspace{-0.mm}}\end{aligned}$$ and the log likelihood of generating a new word ${\mathbf{y}}_t$ given image and word histories $({\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})$ as $L_t(\Theta,{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}})$, which can be written as (cf. Eq ), $$\begin{aligned}
L_t&(\Theta,{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}})= \log p({\mathbf{y}}_t | {\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{y}}_{1:t-1})= \\ &\log [\gamma^0_t p({\mathbf{y}}_t|s_t=0,{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{-t} ) +
\gamma^1_t p({\mathbf{y}}_t|s_t=1,{\mathbf{x}},{\mathbf{y}}_{-t} )].\nonumber \end{aligned}$$ The overall learning objective function for incorporating word sentiment is a combination of a weighted log likelihood and the cross-entropy between $\gamma_t$ and [$\eta_t$]{}, $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}(\Theta,\mathcal{D}) &= -\sum_i\sum_t (1+ \lambda_\eta \eta^i_t )
[L_t(\Theta,{\mathbf{x}}^i,{\mathbf{y}}^i) \label{eq:giantr}
\\ &+ \lambda_\gamma (\eta_t^i \log\gamma^{1,i}_t + (1-\eta_t^i) \log\gamma^{0,i}_t) ] + R(\Theta),\nonumber\\
R(\Theta)=&\frac{\lambda_\theta}{2}\|\Theta^1 - \Theta^0\|^2
\label{eq:modreg}\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda_\eta$ and $\lambda_\gamma$ are weight parameters, and $R(\Theta)$ is the regularization term with weight parameter $\lambda_\theta$. Intuitively,]{} when $\eta_t > 0$, i.e. the training sentence encounters [a sentiment word]{}, the likelihood weighting factor $\lambda_\eta \eta^i_t$ [increases the importance of $L_t$ in the overall likelihood; at the same time, the cross-entropy term $\lambda_\gamma (\eta_t^i \log\gamma^{1,i}_t + (1-\eta_t^i) \log\gamma^{0,i}_t) $ encourage switching variable $\gamma^1_t$ to be $>0$, emphasizing the new model. The regularized training finds a trade-off between the [data]{} likelihood and L2 difference between the current and base RNN, [and is one of the most competitive approaches in domain transfer [@schweikert2008empirical]]{}.]{}
[[**[Settings for model learning.]{}**]{}]{} We use stochastic gradient descent with backpropagation on mini-batches to optimize the RNNs. We apply dropout to the input of each step, which is either the image embedding $\hat{\mathbf{x}}$ [for $t=1$]{} or the word embedding ${\mathbf{E}}^k{\mathbf{y}}_{t-1}$ and the hidden output ${\mathbf{h}}^k_{t-1}$ from time $t-1$, for both the background and sentiment streams $k=0,1$.
We learn models for positive and negative sentiments separately, due to the observation that either sentiment could be valid for the majority of images (Section \[sec:mturk\]). [We initialize $\Theta^1$ as $\Theta^0$ and use the following gradient of to minimize ${\cal L}(\Theta,\mathcal{D})$ with respect to $\Theta^1$ and ${\mathbf{W}}_s$, holding $\Theta^0$ fixed. $$\begin{aligned}
{\frac{\partial \cal L}{\partial \Theta}} = &-\sum_i\sum_t (1+ \lambda_\eta \eta^i_t ) [{\frac{\partial L_t}{\partial \Theta}} \nonumber\\&+ \lambda_\gamma ( \frac{\eta_t^i}{\gamma^{1,i}_t}{\frac{\partial \gamma^{1,i}_t}{\partial \Theta}} + \frac{1-\eta_t^i}{\gamma^{0,i}_t} {\frac{\partial \gamma^{0,i}_t}{\partial \Theta}}) ] + {\frac{\partial R(\Theta)}{\partial \Theta}}
{\vspace{-0.mm}}\end{aligned}$$ ]{}Here ${\frac{\partial L_t}{\partial \Theta}},{\frac{\partial \gamma^{0,i}_t}{\partial \Theta}},\text{ and }{\frac{\partial \gamma^{1,i}_t}{\partial \Theta}}$ are computed through differentiating across Equations (\[eq:bayesrule\_s\])–(\[eq:switch\]). During training, we set $\eta_t=1$ when word ${\mathbf{y}}_t$ is part of an ANP with the target sentiment polarity, otherwise $\eta_t=0$. We also include a default L2-norm regularization for neural network tuning $|\Theta|^2$ with a small weight ($10^{-8}$). We automatically search for the hyperparameters $\lambda_\theta$, $\lambda_\eta$ and $\lambda_\gamma$ on a validation set using Whetlab [@snoek2012practical].
An Image Caption Dataset with Sentiments {#sec:mturk}
========================================
{width=".9\textwidth"}
In order to learn the association between images and captions with sentiments, we build a novel dataset of image-caption pairs where the caption both describes an image, and also convey the desired sentiment. [We summarize the new dataset, and the crowd-sourcing task to collect image-sentiment caption data. More details of the data collection process are included in the suplementary.]{}
There are many ways a photo could evoke emotions. In this work, we focus on creating a collection and learning sentiments [*from an objective viewer*]{} who does not know the back story outside of the photo – a setting also used by recent collections of objectively descriptive image captions [@chen2015microsoft; @hodosh2013framing].
[[**[Dataset construction.]{}**]{}]{} We design a crowd-sourcing task to collect such objectively described emotional image captions. This is done in a caption re-writing task based upon objective captions from MSCOCO [@chen2015microsoft] by asking Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) workers to choose among ANPs of the desired sentiment, and incorporate one or more of them into any one of the five existing captions. Detailed design of the AMT task is in the appendix.
The set of candidate ANPs required for this task is collected from the captions for a large sets of online images. We expand the Visual SentiBank [@borth2013sentibank] vocabulary with a set of ANPs from the YFCC100M image captions [@thomee2015yfcc100m] [as]{} the overlap between the original SentiBank ANPs and the MSCOCO images is insuffcient. We keep ANPs with non-trival frequency and a clear positive or negative sentiment, when rated in the same way as SentiBank. This gives us 1,027 ANPs with a positive emotion, 436 with negative emotions. We collect at least 3 positive and 3 negative captions per image. Figure \[fig:mturk\_eval\](a) contains one example image and its respective positive and negative caption written by AMT workers. We release the list of ANPs and the captions in the online appendix.
[[**[Quality validation.]{}**]{}]{} We validate the quality of the resulting captions with another [two-question]{} AMT task as detailed in the suppliment. This validation is done on [124 images with 3 neutral captions from MSCOCO]{}, and images with 3 positive and 3 negative captions from our dataset. We first ask AMT workers to rate the descriptiveness of a caption for a given image on a four-point scale [@hodosh2013framing; @vinyals2015show]. The [*descriptiveness*]{} column in Figure \[fig:mturk\_eval\](b), shows that the measure for objective descriptiveness tend to decrease when the caption contains additional sentiment. Ratings for the positive captions ([Pos]{}) have a small decrease (by 0.08, or one-tenth of the standard deviation), while those for the negative captions ([Neg]{}) have a significant decrease (by 0.73), likely because the notion of negativity is diverse.
[We also ask whether the sentiment of the sentence matches the image. Each rating task is completed by 3 different AMT workers.]{} In the [*correct sentiment*]{} column of Figure \[fig:mturk\_eval\](b), we record the number of votes each caption received for bearing a sentiment that matches the image. We can see that the vast majority of the captions are unanimously considered emotionally appropriate ($94\%$, or 315/335 for [Pos]{}; $82\%$, or 250/305 for [Neg]{}). Among the captions with less than unanimous votes received, most of them (20 for [Pos]{} and 49 for [Neg]{}) still have majority agreement for having the correct sentiment, which is on par with the level of noise (16 for [Coco]{} captions).
Experiments {#sec:exp}
===========
[sen]{}% [B-1]{} [B-2]{} [B-3]{} [B-4]{} [Rouge]{}$_L$ [Meteor]{} [Cide]{}$_r$ [Senti]{} [Desc]{} [DescCmp]{}
-- -------------- ---------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------------- ------------ -------------- ----------- --------------- -------------
CNN+RNN 1.0 48.7 28.1 17.0 10.7 36.6 15.3 55.6 – 2.90$\pm$0.90 –
ANP-Replace 90.3 48.2 27.8 16.4 10.1 36.6 16.5 55.2 84.8% 2.89$\pm$0.92 95.0%
ANP-Scoring 90.3 48.3 27.9 16.6 10.1 36.5 16.6 55.4 84.8% 2.86$\pm$0.96 95.3%
RNN-Transfer 86.5 49.3 29.5 17.9 10.9 37.2 17.0 54.1 84.2% 2.73$\pm$0.96 76.2%
SentiCap 93.2 49.1 29.1 17.5 10.8 36.5 16.8 54.4 88.4% 2.86$\pm$0.97 84.6%
CNN+RNN 0.8 47.6 27.5 16.3 9.8 36.1 15.0 54.6 – 2.81$\pm$0.94 –
ANP-Replace 85.5 48.1 28.8 17.7 10.9 36.3 16.0 56.5 61.4% 2.51$\pm$0.93 73.7%
ANP-Scoring 85.5 47.9 28.7 17.7 11.1 36.2 16.0 57.1 64.5% 2.52$\pm$0.94 76.0%
RNN-Transfer 73.4 47.8 29.0 18.7 12.1 36.7 16.2 55.9 68.1% 2.52$\pm$0.96 70.3%
SentiCap 97.4 50.0 31.2 20.3 13.1 37.9 16.8 61.8 72.5% 2.40$\pm$0.89 65.0%
[[**[Implementation details.]{}**]{}]{} We implement RNNs with LSTM units using the Theano package [@BastienTheano2012]. Our implementation of CNN+RNN reproduces caption generation performance in recent work [@Karpathy2015CVPR]. The visual input to the switching RNN is 4096-dimensional feature vector from the second last layer of the Oxford VGG CNN [@Simonyan2015]. These features are [linearly embedded into a $D=512$ dimensional space]{}. Our word embeddings ${\mathbf{Ey}}$ are 512 dimensions and the hidden state ${\mathbf{h}}$ and memory cell ${\mathbf{c}}$ of the LSTM module also have 512 dimensions. The size of our vocabulary for generating sentences is 8,787, and becomes 8,811 after including additional sentiment words.
[We train the model using Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) with mini-batching and the momentum update rule. Mini-batches of size 128 are used with a fixed momentum of 0.99 and a fixed learning rate of 0.001. Gradients are clipped to the range $[-5, 5]$ for all weights during back-propagation. We use perplexity as our stopping criteria. The entire system has about 48 million parameters, and learning them on the sentiment dataset with our implementation takes about 20 minutes at 113 image-sentence pairs per second, while the original model on the MSCOCO dataset takes around 24 hours at 352 image-sentence pairs per second]{}. Given a new image, we predict the best caption by doing a beam-search with beam-size 5 for the best words at each position. We implementd the system on a multicore workstation with an Nvidia K40 GPU.
[[**[Dataset setup.]{}**]{}]{} The background RNN is learned on the MSCOCO training set [@chen2015microsoft] of 413K+ sentences on 82K+ images. We construct an additional set of caption with sentiments as described in Section \[sec:mturk\] using images from the MSCOCO validation partition. The [Pos]{} subset contains 2,873 positive sentences and 998 images for training, and another 2,019 sentences over 673 images for testing. The [Neg]{} subset contains 2,468 negative sentences and 997 images for training, and another 1,509 sentences over 503 images for testing. Each of the test images has three positive and/or three negative captions.
[[**[Systems for comparison.]{}**]{}]{} The starting point of our model is the RNN with LSTM units and CNN input [@vinyals2015show] learned on the MS COCO training set only, denoted as [*CNN+RNN*]{}. [Two simple baselines [*ANP-Replace*]{} and [*ANP-Scoring*]{} use sentences generated by [*CNN+RNN*]{} and then add an adjective with strong sentiment to a random noun. [*ANP-Replace*]{} adds the most common adjective, in the sentiment captions for the chosen noun. [*ANP-Scoring*]{} uses multi-class logistic regression to select the most likely adjective for the chosen noun, given the Oxford VGG features.]{} The next model, denoted as [*RNN-Transfer*]{}, learns a fine-tuned RNN [on the sentiment dataset]{} with additional regularization from [*CNN+RNN*]{} [@schweikert2008empirical], [as in $R(\Theta)$ (cf. Eq )]{}. We name the [full switching RNN system as]{} [*SentiCap*]{}, which jointly learns [the RNN and the switching probability with word-level sentiments from Equation (\[eq:giantr\]).]{}
{width=".7\textwidth"}
[[**[Evaluation metrics.]{}**]{}]{} We evaluate our system both with automatic metrics and with crowd-sourced judgements through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Automatic evaluation uses the [Bleu]{}, [Rouge]{}$_L$, [Meteor]{}, [Cide]{}$_r$ metrics from the Microsoft COCO evaluation software [@chen2015microsoft].
In our crowd-sourced evaluation task AMT workers are given an image and two automatically generated sentences displayed in a random order (example provided in supplement). One sentence is from the [*CNN+RNN*]{} model without sentiment, while the other sentence is from [[*SentiCap*]{} or one of the systems being compared]{}. AMT workers are asked to rate the descriptiveness of each image from 1-4 and select the more positive or more negative image caption. A process for filtering out noisy ratings is described in the supplement. Each pair of sentences is rated by three different AMT workers; at least two must agree that a sentence is more positive/negative for it to be counted as such. The descriptiveness score uses mean aggregation.
[[**[Results.]{}**]{}]{} Table \[tab:senticap\] summarizes the automatic and crowd-sourced evaluations. We can see that [*CNN+RNN*]{} presents almost no sentiment ANPs as it is trained only on MSCOCO. [*SentiCap*]{} contains significantly more sentences with sentiment words [than [any of the three]{} baseline methods,]{} which is expected when the word-level regularization has taken effect. [That [*SentiCap*]{} has more sentiment words than the two insertion baselines [*ANP-Replace*]{} and [*ANP-Scoring*]{} shows that [*SentiCap*]{} actively drives the flow of the sentence towards using sentimental ANPs. Sentences from [*SentiCap*]{} are, on average, judged by crowd sourced workers to have stronger sentiment than any of the three baselines. For positive [*SentiCap*]{}, 88.4% are judged to have a more positive sentiment than the [*CNN+RNN*]{} baseline. These gains are made with only a small reduction in the descriptiveness [– yet this decrease is due to a minority of failure cases, since 84.6% of captions ranked favorably in the pair-wise descriptiveness comparison.]{} [*SentiCap*]{} negative sentences are judged to have more negative sentiment 72.5% of the time. On the automatic metrics [*SentiCap*]{} generating negative captions outperforms all three baselines by a margin.]{} This improvement is likely due to negative [*SentiCap*]{} being able to learn more reliable statistics for the new words that only appear in negative ANPs.
[*SentiCap*]{} sentences with positive sentiment were judged by AMT workers as [*more interesting*]{} than those without sentiment in 66.4% of cases, which shows that our method improves the expressiveness of the image captions. On the other hand, negative sentences were judged to be [*less interesting*]{} than those without sentiment in 63.2% of cases. This is mostly due to that negativity in the sentence naturally contradicts with being [*interesting*]{}, a positive sentiment.
It has been noted by [@vinyals2015show] that RNN captioning methods tend to exactly reproduce sentences from the training set. Our [SentiCap]{} method produces a larger fraction of novel sentences than an RNN trained on a single caption domain. A sentence is novel if there is no match in the MSCOCO training set or the sentiment caption dataset. Overall, [SentiCap]{} produces 95.7% novel captions; while [CNN+RNN]{}, which was trained only on MSCOCO, produces 38.2% novel captions – higher than the 20% observed in [@vinyals2015show].
Figure \[fig:exp\] contains a number of examples with generated sentiment captions – the left half are positive, the right half negative. We can see that the switch variable captures almost all sentiment phrases, and some of the surrounding words (e.g. [*train station*]{}, [*plate*]{}). Examples in the first two rows are generally descriptive and accurate such as [*delicious piece of cake*]{} (2a), [*ugly car*]{} and [*abandoned buildings*]{} (1c). Results for the other examples contain more or less inappropriateness in either the content description or sentiment, or both. (3b) captures the [*happy*]{} spirit correctly, but the semantic of a child in playground is mistaken with that of a man on a skateboard due to very high visual resemblance. [(3d) interestingly juxtaposed the positive ANP [*clever trick*]{} and negative ANP [*dead man*]{}, creating an impossible yet amusing caption. ]{}
Conclusion
==========
\[sec:conclusion\]
We proposed SentiCap, a switching RNN model for generating image captions with sentiments. One novel feature of this model is a specialized word-level supervision scheme to effectively make use of a small amount of training data with sentiments. We also designed a crowd-sourced caption re-writing task to generate sentimental yet descriptive captions. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model using both automatic and crowd-sourced evaluations, with the SentiCap model able to generate an emotional caption for over 90% of the images, and the vast majority of the generated captions are rated as having the appropriate sentiment by crowd workers. Future work can include unified model for positive and negative sentiment; models for linguistic styles (including sentiments) beyond the word level, and designing generative models for a richer set of emotions such as pride, shame, anger.
[ [**Acknowledgments**]{} NICTA is funded by the Australian Government as represented by the Dept. of Communications and the ARC through the ICT Centre of Excellence program. This work is also supported in part by the Australian Research Council via the Discovery Project program. The Tesla K40 used for this research was donated by the NVIDIA Corporation. ]{}
Ames, M., and Naaman, M. 2007. Why we tag: Motivations for annotation in mobile and online media. .
Bastien, F.; Lamblin, P.; Pascanu, R.; Bergstra, J.; Goodfellow, I. J.; Bergeron, A.; Bouchard, N.; and Bengio, Y. 2012. Theano: new features and speed improvements. .
Borth, D.; Ji, R.; Chen, T.; Breuel, T.; and Chang, S.-F. 2013. Large-scale visual sentiment ontology and detectors using adjective noun pairs. .
Chen, X., and Zitnick, C. L. 2015. Mind’s eye: A recurrent visual representation for image caption generation. .
Chen, X.; Fang, H.; Lin, T.-Y.; Vedantam, R.; Gupta, S.; Dollar, P.; and Zitnick, C. L. 2015. . .
Crystal, D., and Davy, D. 1969. . ERIC.
Donahue, J.; Hendricks, L. A.; Guadarrama, S.; Rohrbach, M.; Venugopalan, S.; Saenko, K.; and Darrell, T. 2015. Long-term recurrent convolutional networks for visual recognition and description. .
Esuli, A., and Sebastiani, F. 2006. : A publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. .
Fang, H.; Gupta, S.; Iandola, F.; Srivastava, R. K.; Deng, L.; Dollar, P.; Gao, J.; He, X.; Mitchell, M.; Platt, J. C.; Lawrence Zitnick, C.; and Zweig, G. 2015. From captions to visual concepts and back. .
Farhadi, A.; Hejrati, M.; Sadeghi, M. A.; Young, P.; Rashtchian, C.; Hockenmaier, J.; and Forsyth, D. 2010. Every picture tells a story: Generating sentences from images. .
Gupta, A.; Verma, Y.; and Jawahar, C. V. 2012. . .
Hochreiter, S., and Schmidhuber, J. 1997. Long short-term memory. 9(8):1735–1780.
Hodosh, M.; Young, P.; and Hockenmaier, J. 2013. Framing image description as a ranking task: Data, models and evaluation metrics. .
. 2015. . [ <http://instagram-engineering.tumblr.com/post/117889701472/emojineering-part-1-machine-learning-for-emoji> ]{}, retrieved June 2015.
Joshi, D.; Datta, R.; Fedorovskaya, E.; Luong, Q.-T.; Wang, J. Z.; Li, J.; and Luo, J. 2011. Aesthetics and emotions in images. .
Karpathy, A., and Fei-Fei, L. 2015. Deep visual-semantic alignments for generating image descriptions. .
Kulkarni, G.; Premraj, V.; Dhar, S.; Li, S.; Choi, Y.; Berg, A.; and Berg, T. 2011. Baby talk: Understanding and generating simple image descriptions. .
Kuznetsova, P.; Ordonez, V.; Berg, T. L.; and Choi, Y. 2014. Treetalk: Composition and compression of trees for image descriptions. .
Lerner, J. S.; Li, Y.; Valdesolo, P.; and Kassam, K. S. 2015. Emotion and decision making. 66.
Mao, J.; Xu, W.; Yang, Y.; Wang, J.; Huangzhi, H.; and Yuille, A. 2015. . .
Mikolov, T.; Deoras, A.; Povey, D.; Burget, L.; and Cernocky, J. 2011. Strategies for training large scale neural network language models. .
Murray, N.; Marchesotti, L.; and Perronnin, F. 2012. : A large-scale database for aesthetic visual analysis. .
Nakagawa, T.; Inui, K.; and Kurohashi, S. 2010. . .
Nwogu, I.; Zhou, Y.; and Brown, C. 2011. . .
Pang, B., and Lee, L. 2008. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. .
Rohrbach, M.; Qiu, W.; Titov, I.; Thater, S.; Pinkal, M.; and Schiele, B. 2013. Translating video content to natural language descriptions. .
Schweikert, G.; R[ä]{}tsch, G.; Widmer, C.; and Sch[ö]{}lkopf, B. 2008. An empirical analysis of domain adaptation algorithms for genomic sequence analysis. .
Simonyan, K., and Zisserman, A. 2015. . .
Snoek, J.; Larochelle, H.; and Adams, R. P. 2012. Practical bayesian optimization of machine learning algorithms. .
Socher, R.; Perelygin, A.; Wu, J. Y.; Chuang, J.; Manning, C. D.; Ng, A. Y.; and Potts, C. 2013. Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. .
Sutskever, I.; Martens, J.; and Hinton, G. E. 2011. Generating text with recurrent neural networks. .
Szegedy, C.; Liu, W.; Jia, Y.; Sermanet, P.; Reed, S.; Anguelov, D.; Erhan, D.; Vanhoucke, V.; and Rabinovich, A. 2015. Going deeper with convolutions. .
T[ä]{}ckstr[ö]{}m, O., and McDonald, R. 2011. Discovering fine-grained sentiment with latent variable structured prediction models. .
Thelwall, M.; Buckley, K.; Paltoglou, G.; Cai, D.; and Kappas, A. 2010. Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. .
Thomee, B.; Shamma, D. A.; Friedland, G.; Elizalde, B.; Ni, K.; Poland, D.; Borth, D.; and Li, L.-J. 2015. The new data and new challenges in multimedia research. .
Vinyals, O.; Toshev, A.; Bengio, S.; and Erhan, D. 2015. Show and tell: A neural image caption generator. .
Xu, K.; Ba, J.; Kiros, R.; Courville, A.; Salakhutdinov, R.; Zemel, R.; and Bengio, Y. 2015a. Show, attend and tell: Neural image caption generation with visual attention. .
Xu, R.; Xiong, C.; Chen, W.; and Corso, J. 2015b. . .
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
address: 'Department of Mathematics, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095'
author:
- Dimitri Shlyakhtenko
title: A Microstates Approach to Relative Free Entropy
---
[^1]
Introduction.
=============
Let $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}\in (M,\tau ) $ be a family of non-commutative random variables in a tracial $ W^{*} $-probability space, and let $ B\subset M $ be a unital subalgebra. Voiculescu has introduced in [@dvv:entropy5] a free entropy quantity $$\chi ^{*}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:B).$$ His approach involved non-commutative Hilbert transform and is algebraic in nature. In the case that $ B=\mathbb C $, this quantity is denoted $ \chi ^{*}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $, and its properties are very similar to those of the free entropy $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ introduced by Voiculescu in [@dvv:entropy2] using microstates; in fact, it may very well be that the two quantities coinside.
Using the microstates approach to free entropy, we introduce in this paper a quantity $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ which has several properties in common $ \chi ^{*}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:B) $.
The infinitesimal change of variables formula for $ \chi $ involves conjugate variables, introduced by Voiculescu in order to define $ \chi ^{*} $. Both $ \chi $ and $ \chi ^{*} $ have the same behavior under compression by matrix units in the case that $ B=M_{n}\otimes D $, where $ M_{n} $ is the algebra of $ n\times n $ matrices. This behavior is a useful technical tool; for example, it was used to prove certain maximization results for matrices of non-commutative random variables in [@nss:entropy-micro].
If the $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are free from $ B $, we have $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}),$$ provided that $ B $ can be embedded into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor; a similar fact holds for $ \chi ^{*} $.
If $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are free from the algebra generated by $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$ and $ B $, then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)+\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}|B);$$ a similar fact holds for $ \chi ^{*} $.
We prove a maximization result for $ \chi $ (which is essentially identical to the one for $ \chi ^{*} $), namely $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ attains its maximum among all $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ with $ \sum _{i}\tau (X_{i}^{2})=n $ if and only if $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ is a free semicircular family, free from $ B $ (we need as an assumption that $ B $ can be embedded into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor). Lastly, the infinitesimal change of variables formula for $ \chi (\cdots |B) $ involves conjugate variables used to define $ \chi ^{*}(\cdots :B) $ (see [@dvv:entropy5]).
It is interesting to note that $ \chi (\cdot |B) $ has an interpretation as a relative entropy, which suggests a similar interpretation for $ \chi ^{*}(\cdot :B) $. Indeed, we show that if $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$ are generators of $ B $, then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $, where the latter entropy has properties of a relative entropy of $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ and $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$. We caution the reader that we use a definition of $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $ which may be different from the one used by Voiculescu in [@dvv:entropy2], although the two quantities are related.
Relative Free Entropy $ \chi (\cdot |B)\protect $.
==================================================
Let $ (M,\tau ) $ be a tracial non-commutative probability space, and consider self-adjoint non-commutative random variables $ X_{1},\dots ,X_{n} $, $ Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}\in M $. We denote by $ M_{k} $ the algebra of $ k\times k $ matrices, and by $ M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}} $ the set of self-adjoint $ k\times k $ matrices. Recall that the set $$\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};k,l,\epsilon )\subset (M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{n}$$ was defined by Voiculescu in [@dvv:entropy2] as the set of those $ ({x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}})\in (M^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}}_{k})^{n} $, for which $ \Vert x_{i}\Vert \leq R $ and for any $ p\leq l $, and all $ i_{1},\dots ,i_{p} $ $$|\tau _{n}(x_{i_{1}},\dots ,x_{i_{p}})-\tau (X_{i_{1}}\dots X_{i_{p}})|<\epsilon .$$ Here $ \tau _{n} $ stands for the normalized trace on the matrices (so that $ \tau _{n}(1)=1 $).
For $ y_{1},\dots ,y_{n}\in M_{k} $, define $$\begin{aligned}
{\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k ,l ,\epsilon )} & & \\
=\{{x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}}\in (M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{n}:({x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}},{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}) & & \\
\in {\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k ,l ,\epsilon )}\} & & \end{aligned}$$
\[rmq: non-empty\]Note that for this set to be nonempty, we must have that $$({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\in {\Gamma _{R}(({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}:{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};l ,k ,\epsilon )}.$$ This set would be empty if $ W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $ were not embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor.
Let $ \lambda $ denote Lebesgue measure on $ (M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{n} $ corresponding to its Hilbert space structure coming from the non-normalized trace. Define **successively *$$\begin{aligned}
\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}},l,\epsilon )= & & \label{ean:defofentropy} \\
\lim _{k\to \infty }\frac{1}{k^{2}}\sup _{\begin{array}{c}
({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\in \\
\Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )
\end{array}} & & \\
\log \lambda {\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k ,l ,\epsilon )}+\frac{n}{2}\log k & \end{aligned}$$*
$$\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=\inf _{l,\epsilon }\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,\epsilon )$$
$$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=\sup _{R}\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}).$$ The last quantity is called the relative free entropy of the $ n $-tuple $ ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ with respect to the $ m $-tuple $ ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $.
If $ \omega $ is a free ultrafilter on $ \mathbb N $, then one can also define $ \chi ^{\omega }({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $ exactly as in (\[ean:defofentropy\]), but replacing $ \limsup $ by $ \lim _{k\to \omega } $.
\[rmq:relative\]It is not clear whether our definition of $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $ coninsides with that of Voiculescu (see [@dvv:entropy2]). His definition corresponds to defining $$\begin{aligned}
\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon )= & & \\
\limsup _{k}\log \frac{\lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )}{\lambda \Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )}+\frac{n}{2}\log k. & & \end{aligned}$$ The connection to our definition can be made as follows: let $$f({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})=\lambda {\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}[{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}];k ,l ,\epsilon )}$$ Then Voiculescu’s definition corresponds to taking as $ \chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon ) $ the average of $ f $ over $ \Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon ) $. It follows that the quantity obtained in our definition is bigger than that of Voiculescu. We mention that it is possible to define, in the spirit of [@dvv:entropy2] the relative entropy as $$\chi '({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})-\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}:{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}).$$ Such a definition corresponds to defining $ \chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon ) $ as the average of $ f $ over $ \Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}:{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $. We don’t know whether $ \chi ' $ coincides with Voiculescu’s or our definition of $ \chi , $ and whether Voiculescu’s and our definitions are the same or different. Note, however, that we always have:
Let $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$, $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$ be non-commutative random variables. Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})-\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq & & \\
\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})-\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}:{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\leq & & \\
\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}). & & \end{aligned}$$ In particular, if $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty $, then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty $.
In the case that $ \chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $ is finite, the inequalities follow from the discussion in Remark \[rmq:relative\]. If $$\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty ,$$ then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty .$$ If $ \chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\neq -\infty $, then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty$$ implies that $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq -\infty +\chi ({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=-\infty .$$
We shall write $$\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon )$$ for $${\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l ,k ,\epsilon )}$$ when the $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$ are understood.
If $ p<m $, then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{p}) $, and a similar inequality holds for $ \chi _{R} $ and $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
We have the inclusion $$\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l,k,\epsilon )\subset {\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{p} [Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{p} ];l ,k ,\epsilon )}$$ for all $ ({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\in M_{k} $. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})}\lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l,k,\epsilon )\leq & & \\
\sup _{(y_{1},\dots ,y_{p})}\lambda {\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{p} [Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{p} ];l ,k ,\epsilon )} & & \end{aligned}$$ which implies the desired inequality.
$ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $.
We clearly have $$\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l,k,\epsilon )\subset \pi \Gamma _{r}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};l,k,\epsilon ),$$ where $ \pi $ denotes the projection from $ (M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{n}\times (M^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{m} $ onto $ (M_{k}^{{{\operatorname{sa}}}})^{n} $.
\[corr: max\]Let $ c^{2}=\frac{1}{n}\sum \tau (X_{i}^{2}) $. Then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \frac{n}{2}\log 2\pi ec^{2}.$$ The same estimate holds for $ \chi _{R} $ and $ \chi ^{\omega }. $
We have $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\leq \frac{n}{2}\log 2\pi ec^{2} $, the last inequality by [@dvv:entropy2].
Let $ B\subset M $ be a unital subalgebra of $ M $. We define the free entropy of $ ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ relative to $ B $ to be $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\inf _{m}\inf _{{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}\in B}\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}).$$
If $ \omega $ is a free ultrafilter on the natural numbers, then we define $ \chi ^{\omega }({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ in the obvious way.
For $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ to be finite, we must have that for all $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}\in B $, $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\neq -\infty .$$ By Remark \[rmq: non-empty\], this subsumes that $ B $ is embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor.
If $ D\subset B $ is a unital subalgebra, then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|D).$$ In particular, we have $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|\mathbb {C})=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $. The same conclusion holds for $ \chi $ replaced with $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
The first inequality is because in computing $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|D) $ we take the infimum over a smaller set. The equality between $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|\mathbb {C}) $ and $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ is left to the reader.
Let $ X_{i}^{j} $, $ i=1,\dots ,n $, $ j=1,2,\dots $ be non-commutative random variables. Assume that $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are such that as $ j\to \infty $, the joint distribution of $ (X_{1}^{j},\dots ,X_{n}^{j}) $ and $ B $ converges to the joint distribution of $ B $ and $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$. Let $ Y_{1}^{j},\dots ,Y_{m}^{j} $ be such that they converge in distribution to $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}$. Assume that there exists a finite constant $ R $, so that $ \sup _{i,j}\Vert X_{i}^{j}\Vert ,\Vert Y_{i}^{j}\Vert ,\Vert X_{i}\Vert ,\Vert Y_{i}\Vert <R $. Then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\geq \limsup _{j}\chi (X_{1}^{j},\dots ,X_{n}^{j}|B)$$ and $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\geq \limsup _{j}\chi (X_{1}^{j},\dots ,X_{n}^{j}|Y_{1}^{j},\dots ,Y_{m}^{j}).$$ The same conclusion holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $ instead of $ \chi $.
Clearly, only the second inequality needs to be proved. It follows from the following inclusion, true for sufficiently large $ j $: $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma _{R}(X_{1}^{j},\dots ,X_{n}^{j}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[Y_{1}^{j},\dots ,Y_{n}^{j}];k,l,\epsilon /2)\subset & & \\
\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon ), & & \end{aligned}$$ since it implies that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(X_{1}^{j},\dots ,X_{n}^{j}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[Y_{1}^{j},\dots ,Y_{n}^{j}];k,l,\epsilon /2)\leq & & \\
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon ), & & \end{aligned}$$ which in turn implies the desired inequality.
\[prop: generation\]Assume that $ {Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}\in W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $. Then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}),$$ and similarly for $ \chi $ replaced with $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
Fix $ \epsilon >0 $, $ l>0 $, $ R>0 $. Then there exists non-commutative polynomials $ p_{1},\dots ,p_{r} $ in $ m $ variables, such that $$\left( {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},p_{1}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}),\dots ,p_{r}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\right)$$ approximate $$({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}})$$ strongly to any desired accuracy. It follows, that for a suitable choice of such polynomials, there exist $ \epsilon >\epsilon '>0 $, $ l'>l>0 $ and $ R'>R>0 $ such that whenever $$({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\in \Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}},{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};k,l',\epsilon ')$$ we have the inclusion $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ')\subset & & \\
\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|p_{1}({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}),\dots ,p_{r}({y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ). & & \end{aligned}$$ It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ')\leq & & \\
\sup _{z_{1},\dots ,z_{r}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|z_{1},\dots ,z_{r}[{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}];k,l,\epsilon ). & & \end{aligned}$$ But this implies $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}) $.
$ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})) $.
By definition, $$\chi =\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}))=\inf _{r}\inf _{{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}\in W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})}\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}}).$$ In particular, if $ r=m $ and $ ({Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}})=({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $, we have that $$\chi \leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}).$$ But by Proposition \[prop: generation\], we also have that, for $ Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}\in W^{*}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $, $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{r}})\leq \chi ,$$ so that $ \chi =\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $.
If $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}\in B $, then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $.
We have $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}) $.
Let $ B=L^{\infty }[0,1]\subset M $ be a diffuse commutative von Neumann subalgebra. For each $ r=1,\dots ,n $ let $ \mu _{r} $ be a measure on $ [0,1]^{2} $ determined by $$\iint f(x)g(y)d\mu _{r}(x,y)=\tau (X_{r}fX_{r}g).$$ Assume that for at least one $ r\in \{1,\dots ,n\} $, Lebesgue measure on $ [0,1]^{2} $ is singular with respect to $ \mu _{r} $. Then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=-\infty $.
Let $ Y $ be a self-adjoint generator for $ B $. Then we have $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|Y)\leq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:Y)=-\infty$$ because of [@dvv:entropy3 Corollary 7.7].
Note that the analogous theorem holds for $ \chi ^{*}(\cdots :B) $, see [@shlyakht:cpentropy].
Let $ p<n $. Then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)\leq \chi (X_{1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)+\chi (X_{m+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)$$ and a similar inequality holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
We clearly have $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )\subset \Gamma _{R}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{p}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )\times & & \\
\Gamma _{R}(X_{p+1},\dots ,X_{n}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon ) & & \end{aligned}$$ so that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )\leq & & \\
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \left( \Gamma _{R}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{p}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )+\right. & & \\
\left. \log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(X_{p+1},\dots ,X_{n}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon \right) \leq & & \\
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \left( \Gamma _{R}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{p}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon )\right) + & & \\
\sup _{{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}}\log \lambda \left( \Gamma _{R}(X_{p+1},\dots ,X_{nb}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon \right) . & & \end{aligned}$$ This implies the proposition.
\[thrm: whenfreefromB\]Let $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}\in (M,\tau ) $ be self-adjoint non-commutative random variables. Assume that the family $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ is free from the von Neumann algebra generated by $ B $ and $ X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p} $, and assume that $ B $ is embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor. Then $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})+\chi (X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B).$$ In particular, $$\chi (X_{1},\dots \, X_{n}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}).$$ The same statements hold for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
It is sufficient to show that $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})+\chi (X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)\geq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B).$$ Fix $ m>0 $ and elements $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}\in B $. Let $ {y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}\in \Gamma _{R}({Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon ) $; such an $ m $-tuple exists because $ B $ can be embedded into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor. By Voiculescu’s result in [@dvv:improvedrandom], we have that the ratio $$\liminf _{k\to \infty }\frac{\lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};k,l,\epsilon )\times \Gamma _{R}(X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon )}{\lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon )}\geq 1.$$ Indeed, given a $ \delta >0 $, there is a $ k_{0} $, for all [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">$ k>k_{0} $</span>]{} and for each choice of an approximant $$(x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p})\in \Gamma _{R}(X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ),$$ there exists an open subset $$\Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}}\subset \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};k,l,\epsilon ),$$ so that $$\frac{\lambda \Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}}}{\Gamma _{R}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n};k,l,\epsilon )}>1-\delta$$ satisfying $$\Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}}\times \{(x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p})\}\subset \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\frac{\epsilon }{2}).$$ Let $ O=O(x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}) $ be an open ball of radius $ \epsilon ' $ for the operator norm on $ M_{k}^{n-p} $, centered at $ x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p} $. Then for sufficiently small $ \epsilon ' $ (depending only on $ k $ and $ l $), we have $$\Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}}\times O\subset \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ).$$
Let $$\Gamma _{k}=\bigcup _{x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{n}}\Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots \, x_{p}}\times O(x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{n}).$$ Then $ \Gamma _{k}\subset \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ), $ so that $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon )\geq \lambda \Gamma _{k} & & \\
\geq \inf _{x_{n+1,\dots \, x_{p}}}\lambda \Gamma _{k,x_{n+1},\dots ,x_{p}}\times \lambda \Gamma _{R}(X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ) & & \\
\geq (1-\delta )\cdot \lambda \Gamma _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}};k,l,\epsilon )\times \lambda \Gamma _{R}(X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon ). & & \end{aligned}$$ The statement of the theorem follows. The proof for $ \chi ^{\omega } $ is identical.
We note that the preceding theorem implies that $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ is not always $ -\infty $. For example, if $ S_{1},\dots ,S_{n} $ is a free semicircular family free from a unital von Neumann algebra $ B $, which can be embedded into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor, then $ \chi (S_{1},\dots ,S_{n}|B)=\frac{n}{2}\log 2\pi e>-\infty $.
Let $ X_{1},\dots ,X_{p} $ be random variables. Assume that $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are free from the algebra generated by $ X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p} $ and $ B $. Then $$\label{eqn:additivity}
\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)+\chi (X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B).$$
If $ B $ is embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor, we have by Theorem \[thrm: whenfreefromB\] that $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})+\chi (X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p}|B),$$ and also that $$\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}).$$ If $ B $ is not embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor, then the quantities on both sides of (\[eqn:additivity\]) are equal to $ -\infty $.
The analogy between $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ and $ \chi ^{*}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:B) $ makes it tempting to conjecture that (\[eqn:additivity\]) holds under the weaker assumption that $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ and $ X_{n+1},\dots ,X_{p} $ are free with amalgamation over $ B $; however, we were unable to prove this.
Separate change of variables formulas.
======================================
\[thrm: onechangeofvar\]Let $ f_{i}:\mathbb {R}\to \mathbb {R} $ be diffeomorphisms, and let $ \mu _{i} $ be the distribution of $ X_{i} $. Then $$\chi (f_{1}(X_{1}),\dots ,f_{n}(X_{n})|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)+\sum ^{n}_{i=1}\int \int \frac{\log |f_{i}(s)-f_{i}(t)|}{\log |s-t|}d\mu _{i}(s)d\mu _{i}(t),$$ and the same formula holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $ in place of $ \chi $.
It is sufficient to prove the statement assuming further that $ f_{i} $ are identity diffeomorphisms for $ i>1 $; we write $ f=f_{1} $. It is moreover sufficient to show that given $ {Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}\in B $ $$\begin{aligned}
\chi (f_{1}(X_{1}),\dots ,f_{n}(X_{n})|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})\geq \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}})+ & & \\
\int \int \frac{\log |f(s)-f(t)|}{\log |s-t|}d\mu _{1}(s)d\mu _{1}(t), & & \end{aligned}$$ since the reverse inequality follows by replacing $ f $ with its inverse. It is shown in [@dvv:entropy4 Proposition 3.1] that given $ \delta >0 $, $ \epsilon >0 $, $ l>0 $, $ R>0 $, there exist $ k_{0}>0 $, $ \epsilon >\epsilon _{0}>0 $, $ l_{0}>l>0 $, such that for all $ k>k_{0} $, $ 0<\epsilon '<\epsilon _{0} $ and $ l'>l_{0} $, the determinant of the map $$F:({x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}},{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\mapsto (f(x_{1}),x_{2},\dots ,x_{n},{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})$$ is bounded below by $$\exp \left( k^{2}\left[ \int \int \log \frac{|f(s)-f(t)|}{|s-t|}d\mu _{1}(s)d\mu _{1}(t)-\delta \right] \right)$$ for $$({x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}},{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}})\in \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l',\epsilon ').$$ Moreover, the image of $$\Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l',\epsilon ')$$ under this map is contained in $$\Gamma _{R}(f(X_{1}),\dots ,X_{n},{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}};k,l,\epsilon ).$$ Choose $ {y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\log \sup _{z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}}\lambda \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ')- & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l;,\epsilon ')<\delta . & & \end{aligned}$$ Then we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(f(X_{1}),X_{2},\dots ,X_{n}|z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon )\geq & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(f(X_{1}),\dots X_{n}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l,\epsilon )\geq & & \\
\log \lambda F\left( \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ')\right) \geq & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ') & & \\
+\int \int \frac{\log |f(s)-f(t)|}{\log |s-t|}d\mu _{1}(s)d\mu _{1}(t)-\delta k^{2}\geq & & \\
\log \sup _{z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}}\lambda \Gamma _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|z_{1},\dots ,z_{m}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];k,l',\epsilon ') & & \\
+\int \int \frac{\log |f(s)-f(t)|}{\log |s-t|}d\mu _{1}(s)d\mu _{1}(t)-2\delta k^{2}. & & \end{aligned}$$ Taking $ \limsup _{k\to \infty } $ gives us that $$\begin{aligned}
\chi _{R}(f(X_{1}),\dots ,X_{n}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l,\epsilon )\geq & & \\
\chi _{R'}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|{y_{1},\dots ,y_{m}}[{Y_{1},\dots ,Y_{m}}];l',\epsilon ') & & \\
+\int \int \frac{\log |f(s)-f(t)|}{\log |s-t|}d\mu _{1}(s)d\mu _{1}(t), & & \end{aligned}$$ which implies the theorem. The proof for $ \chi ^{\omega } $ is exactly the same.
If $ \Vert X_{i}\Vert <R $ for all $ i $, then $$\chi _{R}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B),$$ and similarly for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
The proof is along the lines of that of Theorem \[thrm: onechangeofvar\], using the ideas of a similar Proposition in [@dvv:entropy2], and is therefore omitted.
General change of variables formula.
=====================================
Let $ B\subset M $ be a unital subalgebra, and let $ {F_{1},\dots ,F_{n}}$ be non-commutative power series with coefficients from $ B $; i.e., $$F_{i}(t_{1},\dots ,t_{n})=\sum _{k}\sum _{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}b_{{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}}^{i,0}t_{i_{1}}b^{i,1}_{{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}}\dots t_{i_{k}}b_{{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}}^{i,k}.$$ Denote by $ B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ the set of all such power series, which have the property that if $ F\in B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ and $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are self-adjoint, then $ F({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ is also self-adjoint. Given $ F_{i}\in B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ as above, denote by $ \hat{F}_{i} $ the power series $$\hat{F}_{i}(z_{1},\dots ,z_{n})=\sum _{k}\sum _{{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}}\prod ^{k}_{j=1}\Vert b_{{i_{1},\dots ,i_{k}}}^{i,j}\Vert y_{i_{1}}\dots y_{i_{k}}.$$ We say that $ (R_{1},\dots ,R_{n}) $ is a mutiradius of convergence of $ F_{i} $, if it is the multiradius of convergence of $ \hat{F}_{i} $ (as an ordinary commutative power series).
Let $ F\in B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ be such a power series. Then by the derivative of $ F $ with respect to $ t_{i} $ we mean the formal power series $ D_{i}F\in B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n})\otimes B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $. Here $ D_{i} $ is defined by the following properties; here we think of $ B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ and $ B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n})\otimes B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $ are viewed as bimodules over the algebra generated by $ B $ and $ t_{1},\dots ,t_{n} $ using its obvious left and right actions.
1. $ D_{i} $ is bilinear over the algebra generated by $ B $ and $ t_{1},\dots ,t_{i-1},t_{i+1},\dots ,t_{n} $;
2. $ D_{i}(t_{i})=1\otimes 1 $;
3. $ D $ satisfies the Leibniz rule: $ D_{i}(FG)=(D_{i}F)G+F(D_{i}G) $.
As an example, $$D_{1}(b_{0}t_{1}b_{1}t_{2}b_{2}t_{1}b_{3}t_{4}b_{4})=b_{0}\otimes b_{1}t_{2}b_{2}t_{1}b_{3}t_{4}b_{4}+b_{0}t_{1}b_{1}t_{2}b_{2}\otimes b_{3}t_{4}b_{4}.$$
Given a family of non-commutative power series $ F_{1},\dots ,F_{n} $ with a common multiradius of convergence $ (R_{1},\dots ,R_{n}) $, we define for $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}\in M $, $ \Vert X_{i}\Vert <R_{i} $, its Jacobian at $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$, to be the matrix $ D_{B}F(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n})\in M_{n}\otimes M\otimes M $ whose $ i,j $-th entry is equal to $ D_{i}(F_{j})({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $.
Note that if $ B\subset M_{k} $ and $ {x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}}\in M_{k} $, then $ D_{B}({x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}}) $ is precisely the Jacobian of the map $$(z_{1},\dots ,z_{n})\mapsto \left( F_{1}(z_{1},\dots ,z_{n}),\dots ,F_{n}(z_{1},\dots ,z_{n})\right) ,$$ evaluated at $ {x_{1},\dots ,x_{n}}$.
The proof of the following Theorem is almost identical to the proof of the change of variables formula given in [@dvv:entropy2], together with the line of the proof of Theorem \[thrm: onechangeofvar\], and is therefore omitted.
\[thrm: genchangeofvar\]Let $ F_{i}\in B[t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}] $, $ i=1,\dots ,n $ be non-commutative power series with common multiradius of convergence $ (R_{1},\dots ,R_{n}) $. Assume that there are non-commutative power series $ G_{i} $, $ i=1,\dots ,n $ with common multiradius of convergence $ (r_{1},\dots ,r_{n}) $, such that for all $ i=1,\dots ,n $, $$\begin{aligned}
F_{i}(G_{1}(t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}),\dots ,G_{n}(t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}))=t_{i}, & & \\
G_{i}(F_{1}(t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}),\dots ,F_{n}(t_{1},\dots ,t_{n}))=t_{i},. & & \end{aligned}$$ Assume that for each $ i $, $ \Vert X_{i}\Vert <\min (r_{i},R_{i}) $. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\chi (F_{1}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}),\dots ,F_{n}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n})|B)= & & \\
\chi (X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}|B)+{{\operatorname{Tr}}}\otimes \tau \otimes \tau \left( \log |D_{B}F({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|\right) . & & \end{aligned}$$ The same formulas hold for $ \chi ^{\omega } $ in place of $ \chi $.
We deduce that “free Brownian motion” has a regularizing effect on free entropy (compare [@dvv:entropy5]). The following proposition follows also from the results of [@dvv:entropy3], but we could not find its exact statement there.
Let $ S_{1},\dots ,S_{n} $ be a free semicircular family, free from the algebra $ B=W^{*}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $. Assume that $ B $ is embeddable into the ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor. Then for all $ t>0 $, we have $$\chi (X_{1}+\sqrt{t}S_{1},\dots ,X_{n}+\sqrt{t}S_{n})\geq n\log 2\pi et>-\infty .$$ The same estimate holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
By the change of variables formula and Theorem \[thrm: whenfreefromB\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
\chi (X_{1}+\sqrt{t}S_{1},\dots ,X_{n}+\sqrt{t}S_{n})\geq \chi (X_{1}+\sqrt{t}S_{1},\dots ,X_{n}+\sqrt{t}S_{n}|B)= & & \\
\chi (\sqrt{t}S_{1},\dots ,\sqrt{t}S_{n})=\frac{n}{2}\log 2\pi et. & \end{aligned}$$
Let $ P_{1},\dots ,P_{n} $ be non-commutative polynomials in $ n $ variables with coefficients from $ B $. Assume that $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)>-\infty $. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{d\epsilon }\chi (X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}),\dots ,X_{n}+\epsilon P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|B)= & & \\
\sum _{i}\langle J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\dots ,X_{n}),P_{i}\rangle , & & \end{aligned}$$ where $ J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\dots ,X_{n})) $ is the first-order conjugate variable to $ X_{i} $ with respect to $ B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\dots ,X_{n}) $ (cf. [@dvv:entropy5]). The same equality holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
For $ \epsilon >0 $ sufficiently small, the transformation $ F^{\epsilon } $ defined by $$F_{i}^{\epsilon }(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n})=X_{i}+\epsilon P_{i}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{n})$$ is a non-commutative power series in $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ with coefficients from $ B $ and satisfies the hypothesis of Theorem \[thrm: genchangeofvar\]. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\chi (X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}),\dots ,X_{n}+P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|B)=\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) & & \\
+({{\operatorname{Tr}}}\otimes \tau \otimes \tau )\log |D_{B}F^{\epsilon }({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|. & & \end{aligned}$$ Hence the derivative in $ \epsilon $ of $ \chi (X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}),\dots ,X_{n}+P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|B) $ is equal to the derivative of $ (\tau \otimes \tau )\log |D_{B}F^{\epsilon }({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})| $. Notice that $$D_{i}F^{\epsilon }_{j}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})=\delta _{ij}+\epsilon D_{j}(P_{i})({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}),$$ so that $$D_{B}(F^{\epsilon })({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})=I+\epsilon M,$$ where $ I $ is the identity matrix and $$M_{ij}=D_{i}P_{j}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}).$$ Hence $$(D_{B}(F^{\epsilon })({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})^{*}D_{B}(F^{\epsilon })({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}))=I+\epsilon (M+M^{*}+\epsilon M^{*}M).$$ Since $ \log (1+t) $ has a power series expansion around zero, we have that $$\frac{1}{2}\log (D_{B}(F^{\epsilon })({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})^{*}D_{B}(F^{\epsilon })({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}))=I+\frac{\epsilon }{2}(M+M^{*})+O(\epsilon ^{2}).$$ It follows that the desired derivative is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
(\tau \otimes \tau )\left( \frac{1}{2}[M+M^{*}]\right) =\frac{1}{2}\sum _{i}\tau \otimes \tau ((D_{i}P_{i})({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})+(D_{i}P_{i})({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})^{*})= & & \\
\sum _{i}\tau \otimes \tau (D_{i}P_{i})({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}), & & \end{aligned}$$ since $ F_{i} $ maps self-adjoint variables to self-adjoint variables. Hence we have, by the definition of the conjugate variable, that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{d\epsilon }\chi (X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}),\dots ,X_{n}+P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})|B)= & & \\
\sum _{i}\langle J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\dots ,X_{n}),P_{i}\rangle , & \end{aligned}$$ as claimed.
Recall (see [@dvv:entropy4]) that a function $ \phi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}) $ is said to attain a local algebraic maximum at $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ on the set $ S=\{{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:\sum _{i}\tau (X_{i}^{2})=n\} $, if for all non-commutative polynomials $ P_{i}, $ with coefficients from $ B $ there exist $ \epsilon _{0}>0 $, such that for all $ 0<\epsilon <\epsilon _{0} $, $$\phi \left( \frac{X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})}{\Vert X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\Vert _{2}},\dots ,\frac{X_{n}+\epsilon P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})}{\Vert X_{n}+\epsilon P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\Vert _{2}}\right) \leq \phi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}).$$ Clearly this is a much weaker requirement than saying that $ \phi $ attains a maximum on $ S $ at $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$.
\[prop: maximality\]Let **$ B $** be a von Neumann algebra, embeddable into an ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor. Then the function $ ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\mapsto \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ attains a local algebraic maximum on the set $ \{{X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}:\sum _{i}\tau (X_{i}^{2})=n\} $ exactly when $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are $ n $ free $ (0,1) $ semicircular variables, free from $ B. $ The same statement holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
Note that by Corollary \[corr: max\], we have that a global maximum (and hence a local algebraic maximum) is attained by such a semicircular family. Assume that the maximum is attained by some family $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$. Then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ attains a local algebraic maximum at $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$. Therefore, we have that for all non-commutative polynomials $ P_{i} $ with coefficients from $ B $ $$\frac{d}{d\epsilon }\chi \left( \left. \frac{X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})}{\Vert X_{1}+\epsilon P_{1}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\Vert _{2}},\dots ,\frac{X_{n}+\epsilon P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})}{\Vert X_{n}+\epsilon P_{n}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\Vert _{2}}\right| B\right) =0.$$ But this is equal to $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{d\epsilon }\chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B)-\frac{d}{d\epsilon }\sum _{i}\log \Vert X_{i}+\epsilon P_{i}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\Vert _{2}= & & \\
\sum _{i}\langle J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},X_{n})),P_{i}\rangle & & \\
-\sum _{i}\langle X_{i},P_{i}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\rangle . & & \end{aligned}$$ It follows that for all non-commutative polynomials $ P_{i} $ with coefficients from $ B $, $$\langle J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},X_{n})),P_{i}\rangle =\langle X_{i},P_{i}({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}})\rangle ,$$ which implies that $$X_{i}=J(X_{i}:B\vee W^{*}(X_{1},\dots ,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},X_{n}))$$ for all $ i=1,\dots ,n $. But by [@dvv:entropy5] and [@shlyakht:cpentropy], this implies that $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are a free semicircular family, free from $ B $.
Assume that $ B $ is embeddable into an ultrapower of the hyperfinite II$ _{1} $ factor, and $ \sum _{i=1}^{n}\tau (X_{i}^{2})=n $. Then $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ attains its maximal value of $ n\log 2\pi e $ if and only if $ {X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}$ are a free semicircular family, which is free from $ B $. The same statement holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
The condition that $ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B) $ achieves a local algebraic maximum is weaker than the condition that it achieves its maximum, so if the maximum is achieved, the local algebraic maximum is achieved, and Proposition \[prop: maximality\] applies. Conversely, it was shown in Corollary \[corr: max\] that the given number is indeed a maximum.
We end with the following theorem, whose proof is identical to that of [@dvv:entropy4 Proposition 4.3].
If $ \chi (X|B)=\chi (X)\neq -\infty $, then $ X $ is free from $ B $. The same statement holds for $ \chi ^{\omega } $.
$ \chi ({X_{1},\dots ,X_{n}}|B\otimes M_{N})\protect $.
========================================================
Let $ X_{ij}^{k} $, $ i,j=1,\dots ,N $, $ k=1,\dots ,n $ be non-commutative random variables, such that $ X_{ij}=X_{ji}^{*} $, and let $ B $ be a unital subalgebra of $ (M,\tau ) $ . Then the joint $ * $-distribution of the family $ \{X_{ij}^{k}\}\cup B $ completely determines and is completely determined by, the joint distribution of the matrices $$Z_{k}=\left( \begin{array}{cccc}
X_{11}^{k} & X_{12}^{k} & \dots & X_{1N}^{k}\\
X^{k}_{21} & X_{22}^{k} & \dots & X_{2N}^{k}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
X_{N1}^{k} & X_{N2}^{k} & \dots & X_{NN}^{k}
\end{array}\right) ,$$ the matrix units $ E_{ij}\in M_{N} $ (matrices whose only non-zero entry is in the position $ i,j $) and the algebra $ B\otimes M_{N} $, identified with those matrices that have entries from $ B $. Therefore, it is natural to expect a relationship between the free entropy of the entries of the matrix relative to $ B $ and the free entropy of the matrix relative to the algebra $ B\otimes M_{N} $ of $ B $-valued matrices. Such a property is enjoyed by $ \chi ^{*} $ (introduced by Voiculescu in [@dvv:entropy5]; this property for $ \chi ^{*} $ was proved in [@nss:entropy]).
Let us define $$Y_{ij}^{k}=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{2}(X_{ij}^{k}+[X_{ij}^{k}]^{*}) & \textrm{if }i\geq j\\
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{-1}}(X_{ij}^{k}-[X_{ij}^{k}]^{*}) & \textrm{if }i<j.
\end{array}\right.$$ For $ \omega $ a free ultrafilter (i.e., a homomorphism $ \omega :C(\mathbb {N})\to \mathbb {C}) $, from the algebra of continuous bounded functions on $ \mathbb N $), and $ n\in \mathbb N $, define $ n\omega $ to be the free ultrafilter, which as a homomorphism from $ C(\mathbb {N}) $ is given by the composition of $ \omega $ and the map $ n\cdot f $, given by $ (n\cdot f)(m)=f(nm) $.
Let $ Y_{\{ij\}} $Let $ \omega $ be a free ultrafilter. Then $$\chi ^{N\omega }(\{Y_{ij}^{k}\}_{i,j,k}|B)=N^{2}\chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N.$$ Moreover, $$\chi (\{Y_{ij}^{k}\}_{i,j,k})\leq N^{2}\chi (Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N.$$
Let $ E_{ij} $ be as before. Then $$\chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})=\inf _{P_{1},\dots ,P_{q}\in B}\chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|P_{1},\dots ,P_{q},\{E_{ij}\}_{ij}).$$ Here $ E_{ij} $ are not self-adjoint; what we mean by the quantity on the right is the obvious extension of our quantity to such a non-selfadjoint case.
We first claim that $$\chi ^{N\omega }(\{Y_{ij}^{k}\}_{i,j,k}|B)\geq N^{2}\chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N.$$
Assume that $ k=Nk' $. Fix $ \delta >0 $. Choose $ Q_{1},\dots ,Q_{s}\in B\otimes M_{N} $ and $ R>0 $ so that $$\chi _{R}^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|Q_{1},\dots ,Q_{q},\{E_{ij}\}_{ij})\geq \chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots \, Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-\delta .$$ Let $ (e_{ij})\in \Gamma _{R}(\{E_{ij}\}:Z_{1},\dots \, Z_{n},Q_{1},\dots ,Q_{s};k,l,\epsilon ) $. Then by a suitable choice of $ l $, $ \epsilon $, $ k $ and $ R $, we can guarantee that the exists a projection $ p\leq e_{11} $ of rank $ k' $, $ [e_{11},p]=0 $. Given $ \delta $, choose $ q_{1},\dots ,q_{S} $ and $ e_{ij} $ so that $$\begin{aligned}
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{e_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon )\geq & & \\
\sup _{(f_{ij})\in \Gamma _{R}(\{E_{ij}\}:k,l,\epsilon )}\Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{f_{ij}\}[\{E_{ij}\}];k,l,\epsilon )-\delta k^{2} & & \end{aligned}$$ Let $ p $ be as before, and identify $ pM_{k}p $ with $ M_{k'} $. For $ (z_{1},\dots ,z_{n})\in M^{n}_{k} $, let $ z_{ij}^{k}=pe_{1i}z_{k}e_{j1}p $ and $ q^{r}_{ij}=pe_{1i}q_{r}e_{j1}p $. Denote by $ T=T_{\{e_{ij}\}} $the map from $ M_{k}^{n} $ to $ M_{k'}^{nN^{2}} $ given by $ T(z_{1},\dots ,z_{n})=(y^{r}_{ij})_{ijr} $, where $$y^{r}_{ij}=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{2}(z_{ij}^{r}+[z_{ij}^{r}]^{*}) & \textrm{if }i\geq j,\\
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{-1}}(z_{ij}^{r}-[z_{ij}^{r}]^{*}) & \textrm{if }i<j.
\end{array}\right.$$ It follows that for $ l $, $ k $, $ R $ sufficiently large and $ \epsilon $ sufficiently small, we can assume that the logarithm of the Jacobian of $ T $ is at least $ -\delta k^{2} $. Moreover, given $ l', $ $ R' $ and $ \epsilon ' $ there exist $ l>l' $, $ R>R' $ and $ 0<\epsilon <\epsilon ' $, such that $$T(\Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{e_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon )\subset \Gamma _{R'}(\{Y_{is}^{r}\}|\{q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}];k',l',\epsilon ').$$ It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(\{Y_{is}^{r}\}|\{q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}];k',l',\epsilon ')\geq & & \\
\log \lambda T(\Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{e_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon )\geq & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{e_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon )-\delta k^{2}\geq & & \\
\sup _{((f_{ij})_{ij},(p_{r})\in \Gamma _{R}(\{E_{ij}\},\{P_{i}\}:k,l,\epsilon )}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{f_{ij}\},\{p_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon )-2\delta k^{2}. & \end{aligned}$$ Therefore, remembering that $ k=Nk' $ and taking limits as $ k\to \omega $, we get: $$\begin{aligned}
\chi ^{N\omega }_{R'}(\{Y_{is}^{r}\}|\{q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}];l',\epsilon ')= & & \\
\lim _{k\to \omega }\frac{1}{(k')^{2}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(\{Y_{is}^{r}\}\{q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}];k',l',\epsilon ')+\frac{N^{2}n}{2}\log k'= & & \\
\lim _{k\to \omega }N^{2}\left( \frac{1}{k^{2}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(\{Y_{is}^{r}\}\{q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}_{ijr}];k',l',\epsilon ')+\frac{n}{2}\log k-\frac{n}{2}\log N\right) \geq & & \\
N^{2}\lim _{k\to \omega }\frac{1}{k^{2}}\sup _{(f_{ij})\in \Gamma _{R}(\{E_{ij}\}:k,l,\epsilon )}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{f_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];k,l,\epsilon ) & & \\
+N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log k-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N-2\delta = & & \\
N^{2}\chi _{R}^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\})-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N-2\delta \geq & & \\
N^{2}\chi _{R}^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N};l,\epsilon )-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N-3\delta . & & \end{aligned}$$ This implies the claimed inequality.
Next, we claim that $$\chi ^{N\omega }(\{Y_{ij}^{k}\}_{i,j,k}|B)\geq N^{2}\chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-N^{2}\frac{n}{2}\log N.$$
For this, choose $ Q_{1},\dots ,Q_{n}\in B\otimes M_{N} $ and $ R>0 $ in such a way that $$\chi _{R}^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|Q_{1},\dots \, Q_{n},\{E_{ij}\})\geq \chi ^{\omega }(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|B\otimes M_{N})-\delta .$$ Set $ Q_{ij}^{r}=E_{1i}Q_{r}E_{j1} $. Choose $ \{q_{ij}^{r}\}\in \Gamma _{R}(\{Q_{ij}^{r}\};m,k,\epsilon ) $. Assume that $$(y_{ij}^{r})\in \Gamma _{R}((Y_{ij}^{r})|\{q_{ij}^{r}\}[\{Q_{ij}^{r}\}];k,l,\epsilon ).$$ Then let $ x_{ij}^{r}=y_{ij}^{r}+\sqrt{-1}y_{ji}^{r} $. Set $ x_{r}\in M_{k}\otimes M_{N} $ to be $ x_{r}=\sum _{ij}x_{ij}^{r}\otimes E_{ij} $, and put $ q_{r}=\sum q_{ij}^{r}\otimes E_{ij}\in M_{k}\otimes M_{n} $. Then given $ R'>0 $, $ l'>0 $ and $ \epsilon '>0 $, there exist $ R>R'>0 $, $ l>l'>0 $ and $ 0<\epsilon <\epsilon ' $, such that $ (z_{1},\dots ,z_{r})\in \Gamma _{R'}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{E_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];nk,l',\epsilon ') $. Since the map assigning to $ (y_{ij}^{r}) $ the $ n $-tuple $ (z_{1},\dots ,z_{r}) $ is measure-preserving, we get that $$\begin{aligned}
\sup _{e_{ij},f_{i}}\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{e_{ij}\},\{f_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];nk,l',\epsilon ')\geq & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R'}(Z_{1},\dots ,Z_{n}|\{E_{ij}\},\{q_{i}\}[\{E_{ij}\},\{Q_{i}\}];nk,l',\epsilon ')\geq & & \\
\log \lambda \Gamma _{R}((Y_{ij}^{r})|\{q_{ij}^{r}\}[Q_{ij}^{r}];k,l,\epsilon ). & & \end{aligned}$$ This implies our claim.
The proof of the inequality for $ \chi $ instead of $ \chi ^{\omega } $ is along the lines of the proof of the second inequality above, and is left to the reader.
[1]{}
A. Nica, D. Shlyakhtenko, and R. Speicher, *Maximality of the microstates free entropy for $r$-diagonal elements*, Preprint, 1998.
[to3em]{}, *Some minimization problems for the free analogue of the fisher information*, Preprint, 1998.
D. Shlyakhtenko, *Free entropy with respect to a completely-positive map*, Preprint, 1998.
D.-V. Voiculescu, *The analogues of entropy and of [Fisher’s]{} information measure in free probability theory [II]{}*, Invent. Math. **118** (1994), 411–440.
[to3em]{}, *The analogues of entropy and of [Fisher]{}’s information measure in free probability theory, [III]{}*, Geometric and Functional Analysis **6** (1996), 172–199.
[to3em]{}, *The analogues of entropy and of [Fisher]{}’s information measure in free probability theory, [IV]{}: Maximum entropy and freeness*, Free Probability (D.-V. Voiculescu, ed.), American Mathematical Society, 1997, pp. 293–302.
[to3em]{}, *The analogues of entropy and of [Fisher]{}’s information measure in free probabilility, [V]{}*, Invent. Math. **132** (1998), 189–227.
[to3em]{}, *A strengthened asymptotic freeness result for random matrices with applications to free entropy*, IMRN **1** (1998), 41 – 64.
[^1]: Research supported in part by a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellowship.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We investigate the radiative transport of dust in primordial galaxies in the presence of the UV radiation field from the first metal-free stars. We find that dust created in the first supernova (SN) explosions can be driven through the interior of the SN remnant to accumulate in the SN shells, where second-generation stars may form from compressed cooling gas. This scenario requires metal-free stars to form continuously over timescales of up to 10 Myr, consistent with recent estimates. Silicate and graphite grains, as well as iron-bearing magnetites, are transported to the shells for reasonable parameter assumptions, but their relative yields from primordial SNe is an important factor in the resulting abundance ratios. We compare the results of segregated grain transport with the current nucleosynthetic data on extremely metal-poor Galactic halo stars. Fossil signatures of this process may already have been detected in those iron-poor stars with enhanced carbon and silicate elements such as magnesium, silicon and oxygen. We discuss the implications of our results for the transition from first- to second-generation star formation in primordial galaxies, and the role played by the radiative transport of dust in this process.'
author:
- 'Aparna Venkatesan, Biman B. Nath, and J. Michael Shull'
title: 'The Radiative Transport of Dust in Primordial Galaxies and Second-Generation Star Formation'
---
Introduction
============
The radiative transport of dust and grain history in galaxies have been studied by many authors, generally in the context of our Galaxy (e.g., @drainesalpeter1 [@dwekscalo; @seabshull]). Although early calculations [@pecker72] of this problem indicated that dust transport was difficult to accomplish, @ferraraetal91 found that it was possible to transport dust grains by radiation pressure to large distances from the plane of the disk in a relatively short time ($\sim 10^8$ yr). In addition, dust destruction mechanisms are important to consider [@shustov].
In general, smaller dust grains are destroyed at a faster rate while they are being transported, and they typically do not survive. Grain destruction in the interstellar medium (ISM) occurs through thermal sputtering in hot gas as well as non-thermal processes (sputtering, shattering, vaporization in grain-grain collisions). The non-thermal processes occur primarily when the grains are swept up by shock waves [@shull78; @jonesetal94]. In these situations, the original power-law grain size distribution will be modified by various processes of grain destruction [@seabshull; @jonesetal96]. Grains can also be accelerated through the gas by radiation fields. However, at a given radiation pressure, it is more difficult to drive large grains owing to their lower ratio of area to mass. The final outcome of the radiative transport of dust therefore depends on the size and composition of the grains as well as the details of the radiation field.
More recently, numerical simulations in a cosmological context have studied the radiative ejection of dust grains to the intergalactic medium (IGM) from primordial halos in the wake of the first generations of supernovae (SNe) [@aguirreetal01; @bianchi05]. Testing the predictions of such theories of cosmological dust transport has usually been in a macroscopic context, using upper limits from the cosmic microwave background to constrain IGM dust distortion [@lh97; @ferraraetal99] or to offer alternative explanations to a cosmological constant scenario of the data on Type Ia SNe at redshifts, $z \la 2$ [@aguirre99].
In this paper, we focus on more local effects of dust transport within the host galaxy related to second-generation stars that form coevally with or subsequent to primordial stars. We examine, under the conditions in typical primordial halos, whether dust can be driven effectively by the radiative pressure of metal-free stars. If so, can dust grains accumulate in the cooling shells of first-generation SN remnants (SNRs), becoming incorporated eventually into new star-forming sites? Recent work by @mackey03 and @salvaterra04 suggest that such second-generation star formation is highly likely, forming from metal-poor or even metal-free fragmenting gas in SN shells in early galaxies. The latter authors show that instabilities in the SN shell that could lead to gas fragmentation and to the eventual formation of low-mass second-generation stars set in at about 1–50 Myr after the SN explosion. This range holds for the condition that the SN shells do not sweep the baryons out of a galaxy of virial temperature 10$^4$ K. A timescale requirement of $\sim$ a few Myr to $10^8$ yr is entirely consistent with the duration of metal-free star formation calculated by both semi-analytic [@tvs04] and numerical methods [@wadavenk; @byh03]. These involve estimates of the timescales over which metals from the first SNe can enrich the gas in either the host galaxy or neighboring galaxies. We motivate this hypothesis by considering the currently available element abundance ratios of extremely metal-poor (EMP) stars in the Galactic halo. The elements comprising the dominant dust compounds from the first SNe, including C, Si, O, and Fe, in addition provide the most effective cooling channels for primordial star-forming gas [@brommloeb03; @santoroshull].
The paper is organized as follows. In § 2, we present the current nucleosynthetic data on EMP stars to motivate the consideration of a dust-transport scenario. In § 3, we describe the formalism and assumptions of the model used to solve for dust grain transport, the results of which are presented in § 4. We discuss implications of our findings and conclude in § 5.
Nucleosynthetic Data on EMP Stars
=================================
We begin by using the current data on EMP stars relevant for the problem in this paper. We highlight the trends of carbon, silicon, oxygen, nitrogen, magnesium, and aluminium as a function of iron abundance below \[Fe/H\] $\sim
-2.8$. These elements, with the exception of nitrogen, are the most relevant for dust creation from the metals from the SNe of metal-free stars [@schneideretal04; @todini]. We define \[Fe/H\] as the ratio of the measured column densities of Fe/H to the solar ratio, (Fe/H)$_\odot$ = $4.68 \times 10^{-5}$.
The nature of the primordial stellar initial mass function (IMF) is currently of great interest and debate. Some recent theoretical studies indicate that this IMF may have been top-heavy [@abeletal00; @bromm02], leading predominantly to stellar masses $\ga$ 100 $M_\odot$ up to a critical gas metallicity of $Z_{\rm cr} \approx 10^{-4 \pm 1} Z_\odot$ [@brommetal01; @schneider02], above which a present-day IMF occurs. However, other detailed studies of the current data on reionization, high-$z$ star formation and the metal abundance ratios in the IGM and EMP stars suggest that the primordial IMF, rather than being biased towards high masses, may merely lack low-mass stars [@venktruran; @tvs04; @daigne04; @qianwass05]. It is certainly possible that both IMFs were coeval in the past, given the right combination of conditions, as pointed out by these papers. In addition, the transition metallicity $Z_{\rm cr}$ may be significantly higher at low densities and could vary with metal species [@brommloeb03; @santoroshull]. These two IMFs, $\ga$ 100 $M_\odot$ and $\sim$ 10–100 $M_\odot$, represent two possibilities in the definition of a top-heavy IMF, where the IMF’s lower or upper mass limit is increased. A third option would be to flatten the slope or alter the shape of the stellar IMF.
Regardless of such IMF issues, we expect the first generations of stars to form from metal-free gas. Their composition heavily influences their structure and properties, as they rely predominantly on the p–p chain initially than on the more efficient CNO cycle for their thermonuclear fuel source [@tumshull]. Consequently, metal-free stars are hotter and emit significantly harder ionizing radiation relative to their finite-$Z$ counterparts [@bkl; @tsv; @sch02]. This will play an important role for the dust transport problem here.
Stars of masses $\sim$ 10–100 $M_\odot$ end their lives as the more familiar Type II SNe, leaving behind neutron stars and black holes, whereas metal-free stars in the mass range $\sim 140-260 M_\odot$ are thought to disrupt themselves entirely as pair-instability SNe (PISNe). We do not concern ourselves here with the exact type of SN in primordial halos, and require only that the parent metal-free stellar cluster has effective luminosities of $\sim 10^6 L_\odot$ [@tsv; @bkl; @sch02], which is easily achieved by a few tens of stars in a Salpeter IMF in the 1–100 $M_\odot$ range or a single star of mass $\ga$ 100 $M_\odot$. For the purposes of this paper, we require the former case, i.e., a stellar cluster, so that there is a hard photon source for at least a few to 10 Myr after the initial SN explosion. We also require that the SN kinetic energy is at least $10^{51}$ erg, which is true for “normal” Type II SNe. We discuss the case of hypernovae (HNe) below; the SN explosion energies for HNe and PISNe are thought to lie in the range $10^{51}$–$10^{53}$ erg [@umedanomoto; @heger02].\
=1.0
In Figure 1, we show the measured EMP stellar abundances of C, N, O, Mg, Al, and Si relative to Fe (normalized to the solar ratio), as a function of \[Fe/H\]. We limit the data to those EMP stars with \[Fe/H\] $\la -2.8$, to be consistent with the upper limit to the transition metallicity factoring in typical errors in the data of order 0.1-0.2 dex. This is also close to the upper limit in metallicity derived by @salvaterra04 for second-generation stars forming in the SN-induced scenario. We take the data of EMP giants from the study by @cayrel, and of EMP dwarfs and other stars from @cohenetal04, @aoki04, and @tvs04 and references therein. For the two most iron-poor stars, HE-0107-5240 and the newly discovered HE-1327-2326, we use the published abundances by @christlieb04 and @frebel05.
We note some relevant points of interest in Figure 1. First, although the two most iron-poor stars have greatly enhanced values of C, N and O, there is no overall clear trend of \[C/Fe\] with \[Fe/H\]. We also observe that those EMP stars with highly enhanced C (so-called C-enhanced EMPs)[^1] also have strong N overabundances relative to solar, sometimes even exceeding that of C. Oxygen, on the other hand, is usually enhanced, sometimes up to 10$^2$–$10^4$ times solar at the lowest Fe-metallicities. We note also the consistent enhancements of Mg and Si of a few to 100 times solar, and the relatively flat mild underabundance of \[Al/Fe\] with \[Fe/H\].
Several models have been proposed to explain the diversity of element abundances in low-mass EMP stars. Some interpret the abundances as reflecting the star’s gas formation conditions, while others invoke processes subsequent to its creation. The presence of Mg and heavier elements would argue for the former class of models in principle. Amongst these, the HN model [@umedanomoto] is currently the most successful at reproducing the EMP data, requiring a new class of SNe at primordial metallicities that have enhanced SN explosion energies of $10^{51} -
10^{53}$ erg and enhanced CNO element generation relative to Fe at low \[Fe/H\]. HN models can reproduce most EMP element abundances well except N and Na, but they require significant fine-tuning for each EMP star, with the appropriate ratio of mixing, fallback, asymmetry and/or jets in the SN model. The post-formation scenarios include the dredge-up of elements during the star’s giant branch phase, accretion from the interstellar medium or a companion star, and the rotation of the parent star – all of these could enhance C, N, O and sometimes Mg given enough time. The joint trend of enhanced Mg, Si and O at low \[Fe/H\] however remains unexplained. The strong variations between individual EMPs amongst the elements shown here and those related to the Fe-peak and $r$- and $s$-process elements imply that any successful scenario may require considerable tailoring for each star.
Although N is not an element of much relevance to dust, we include it here, as it is usually a good tracer of C and O, owing to its origin in the CNO cycle, and hence of the AGB scenario. We note that we have excluded stars known or thought to be in binaries, so we do not necessarily expect to see the signature from AGBs in binaries in Figure 1. Unfortunately, the data on N in this range of \[Fe/H\] is fairly scant, and no firm trend can be stated. As noted by @plezcohen, EMP stars with enhanced C usually have enhanced N as well, but the reverse is not always true. This is seen in Figure 1. It is possible that N depletion can occur through the formation of ammonia (NH$_3$) ices as mantles on grains in dense clouds, but these likely are sputtered away immediately.
In contrast, although not shown here, it is worth noting that for the few stars with measured CNO that have \[Fe/H\] $\ga -3$, \[C/Fe\] is mildly underabundant, whereas \[N/Fe\] is mildly overabundant, an anticorrelation noted by @briley in a study of Galactic globular clusters. The varied behavior of N/C and the lack of a trend with \[Fe/H\] in EMP stars is noted in @plezcohen, who point out that the SN origin is attractive owing to the additional enhancement of Na, Mg, and especially O in these stars. The increasing enhancement of N accompanied by a decline of C as the star’s evolutionary state advances would argue for self-enrichment from dredge-ups and other processes in the giant branch phase, but this is not observed.
In summary, the data on EMP stars indicate that Si, Mg, and O, and to a lesser degree C, are generally enhanced in the iron-poor stars. These elements form the composition of the dominant dust compounds created in SNe from metal-free stars of masses $\sim$ 10–260 $M_\odot$ [@todini; @nozawaetal03; @schneideretal04], which include graphites, silicates (enstatites (MgSiO$_3$), forsterites (Mg$_2$SiO$_4$), and SiO$_2$), and iron-bearing magnetites. We therefore proceed to investigate whether these elements can be selectively transported in a hot radiation field, decoupled from the background SN metals in the gas phase.
Creation and Transport of Dust Grains
=====================================
In this section, we describe the scenario in which dust is created in primordial SNe, followed by a summary of the assumptions and equations we use to solve for the transport of dust grains.
Dust Formation
--------------
As discussed earlier, the duration of metal-free star formation is thought to be $\sim$ 10–100 Myr. The lower limit of a few–10 Myr has been derived using semianalytic calculations of halo self-enrichment from SN ejecta [@tvs04], and from 3D gas hydrodynamic simulations of the chemodynamical feedback from the first SNe on parsec scales in the ISM of primordial galaxies [@wadavenk]. In both analyses, this corresponds to the intrahalo timescale for the reincorporation of metals created by the first SNe into cold starforming gas clumps up to metallicities roughly corresponding to $Z_{\rm cr}$ in primordial galaxies. The upper limit of 100 Myr corresponds to the inter-halo enrichment timescale over which metals are transported to and pollute neighboring halos at $z \sim$ 10–20 [@tvs04; @byh03].
Such estimates are consistent with the 1-50 Myr timescales needed for the instability in SN shells to set in for second-generation star formation [@salvaterra04]. Stated another way, this timescale is a requirement for the model in this work, where the dust generated in the very first SNe, presumably on timescales of order 2–5 Myr, is exposed to the hot radiation field from a zero-metallicity stellar cluster which is assumed to be within the SNR. We focus on the effects of an individual SN in a stellar cluster and assume for simplicity that it occurs at the center of its host galaxy. A Pop III cluster is likely to form with only a few stars in the densest part of the galaxy, and the massive stars in the Pop III IMF likely have not migrated too far from their birthsites at $z \gg 10$. The specific location may not matter much for this work as we are interested in relatively local rather than intergalactic transport.
A related issue is the spatial overlap and relative centers of the SNR and the background radiation field. In the scenario we propose here, the net radiation pressure within the SNR is important, and we assume that the radiation field of the cluster is not dominated by sources that are spherically symmetric external to the SNR (so as to cancel the field in the SNR interior). The Jeans length in primordial gas is of order 1 pc, a distance that the radii of SN shells in our calculations exceed early in the SNR evolution (as shown below). Therefore, we assume approximate spherical symmetry, and that the Pop III cluster is not strongly off-center relative to the SNR.
The first SNe are required in this model to occur in halos whose virial temperature is at least 10$^{3-4}$ K, for two reasons. First, this is a criterion in the model of triggered star formation that we use here [@salvaterra04]. Second, the SN kinetic energies considered here (10$^{51}$–10$^{53}$ erg) do not exceed the binding energies of such galaxies, ensuring that we are dealing with subgalactic phenomena rather than dust transport to the IGM. A single $10^{53}$ erg SN can expel gas efficiently from low-mass minihalos of virial temperatures 100 K (corresponding masses of $\sim 10^6 M_\odot$); even such small halos can, however, partly survive a $10^{51}$ erg SN [@byh03].
We assume that the dust from the first SNe is created on timescales of hundreds of days after the SN event [@todini; @nozawaetal03; @schneideretal04] and solve for the density and temperature of the SNR as detailed below. In young remnants, the dust grains presumably form in cooling, metal-rich ejecta, which are slowly decelerated by interactions with gas in the SNR interior and by the reverse shocks. After the dust grains form through nucleation of ejecta material, they are subject to destruction through thermal sputtering by plasma (H, He ions) and by passage of the reverse shock through the dense ejecta. We compute the sputtering within the SNR (Sedov-Taylor) interior, but do not compute the effects of reverse shocks. Some dust grains may survive these shocks, if a sufficient number reside in dense cold clumps. This may be indicated by observations of the Cas A SNR [@greidanus91; @hinesetal04], although whether the detected dust belongs to the SNR or to circumstellar material is controversial [@krauseetal04].
Those dust grains that survive are radiatively driven by the Pop III radiation field, and transported to varying distances as detailed below. We do not model the effects of the inhomogeneous density and radiation field arising from multiple stellar clusters, or the nonuniform density and velocity structure within the SNR. We assume that the initial velocities of all the dust grains are of order 100 km s$^{-1}$, consistent with observations of the Cas A SNR [@fesenetal87]. We discuss the effects of varying the initial velocity of the dust grains in more detail in the next section.
For metal-free Type II SNe [@todini], magnetites and ACG (graphites) in general dominate the dust mass in the stellar progenitor range 12–35 $M_\odot$, with an increasing magnetite yield with rising SN explosion energies for 22–35 $M_\odot$. For the specific case of 22 $M_\odot$, the typical grain sizes are about 0.001 $\mu$m for magnetites, slightly lower values for silicates, and about 300 Å for graphites. In contrast, the dust mass from PISNe is strongly dominated by silicates, with a small nearly constant yield of ACG and a rapidly rising yield of magnetites with increasing stellar mass over 140–260 $M_\odot$. In addition, a 149 (250) $M_\odot$ parent star generates post-SN dust grains of characteristic sizes of 0.001 (0.01) $\mu$m, 0.01–0.1 (0.001–0.01) $\mu$m, and 0.01–0.1 (0.1) $\mu$m for magnetites, silicates and graphites. These trends of grain compound and size with stellar mass from @nozawaetal03 and @schneideretal04 use predictions of element nucleosynthesis from current hydrodynamical SN models. These results combined with calculations of the chemistry, temperature and density evolution of the SN ejecta determine which and when dust compounds can condense after the SN explosion, and their subsequent growth. The temperature affects the order of grain formation which in turn influences their characteristic sizes. In the PISNe mass range, graphites condense first (at higher ejecta temperatures), and therefore tend to be larger in size relative to silicates and magnetites which condense later. Thus, not all dust grains are created equal: there is a strong dependence of grain size and net yield on the star’s mass, a point whose importance to the EMP stellar abundances is demonstrated below.
Transport of Dust Grains
------------------------
The equation of motion of nonrotating spherical grains, of mass $m_d={4 \pi \over 3} \rho_g a^3$ (with density $\rho_g$ and radius $a$), under the effect of radiation pressure, gravity and gas drag is given by, $$m_d {d v \over dt}=F_r+F_g-F_{drag} \,.
\label{eq:motion}$$ Here the force $F_r$ due to radiation pressure for a given source of luminosity $L$, acting on a grain at a distance $r$, is, $$F_r={L \over 4 \pi r^2 c} \pi a^2 \bar{Q}_{pr},,$$ where $\bar{Q}_{pr}=\bar{Q}_{abs}+Q_{sca}[1-\langle \cos \theta \rangle ]$. The averaging is done over the spectral energy distribution of the radiation field. We assume a primordial composition for the gas.
$Q_{abs}$ and $Q_{sca}$ are the absorption and scattering coefficient and $\langle \cos \theta \rangle$ characterizes the scattering property of the grain. The values of $Q_{abs}, Q_{sca}$, and $\langle \cos \theta \rangle$ for graphites and silicates are tabulated in @draine85. The values of $Q_{sca}$ are typically much smaller than $Q_{abs}$ and for our calculation we have used $Q_{sca}=0$, which makes the estimate of the radiation pressure on grains conservative. For the values of $Q_{abs}$ for silicates, we use the fit provided by @ferrdettmar, and for graphites, we use the fits provided by @nathetal99, for different ranges of incident photon energy. The radiation field is assumed to be Planckian with a radiation temperature $T_\ast$.
We have performed similar calculations for magnetites (Fe$_3$O$_4$). This compound could be produced in primordial SNe [@nozawaetal03; @schneideretal04], subject to the uncertainties in the explosion mechanism and mass cut of SNe associated with the first stars. For this work, the role of magnetites is particularly important to consider, as the differential transport of graphite and silicate dust grains relative to those in iron compounds must be accomplished if we wish to explain the origin of the ultra-iron-poor EMP stars that have highly enhanced C, O, Mg and Si relative to solar values. For magnetites, we have used the appropriate values of the absorption coefficients calculated from Mie scattering theory (S. Bianchi 2005, private communication).
The gravitational force on the grain is calculated assuming a NFW profile [@nfw97], assuming the source of radiation to be at the cluster center, as,
$$F_g=-{GM_{tot}(r) m_d \over r^2} \,,$$
where $M_{tot}(r)$ is the total mass inside the radius $r$. Following @komatsu, one can define a characteristic radius $r_s=r_{vir}/c$ for an object of total mass $M$ collapsing at a redshift $z$, and for a concentration parameter $c$, where,
$$r_{vir}^3={M \over (4 \pi /3) \Delta_c(z) \Omega_m \rho_c(z)} \,$$
and $\Delta_c(z)$ is the overdensity and $\rho_c(z)=3H^2/8\pi G$ is the critical density of the universe. The overdensity $\Delta_c(z)\approx (18 \pi^2+82x-39x^2)/
\Omega(z)$, with $x=\Omega(z)-1$ and $\Omega(z)$ as the ratio of mean matter density to critical density at redshift $z$ [@bullock01]. The density at this characteristic radius $r_s$ is given by, $\rho_s=[c^3 M/(4 \pi r_{vir}^3 m(c))]$ where $m(c)=ln(1+c)-r/(1+c)$. The total mass within a radius $r$ can then be written as,
$$M_{tot}(r)=4 \pi \rho_s r_s^3 m(r/r_s) \,.$$
To compute the drag force, we first calculate the charge on the grain as detailed further in this section, and use equation (4) from @drainesalpeter1. We refer the reader to this paper for greater detail on this calculation. The drag force on the dust grain has two components: collisional drag caused by the physical collision of grains with H and He atoms, and plasma drag arising from the long-range Coulomb forces associated with the grain charge. Additional effects for the grain charge that arise from the grain’s motion [@shull78] are relevant only when the grain’s velocity exceeds the thermal velocity of protons, and are not considered here.
Grains are charged by the photoelectric effect in the presence of the radiation field, and collisions with electrons and protons. Coulomb drag is the dominant process in this calculation and strongly effects the motion and evolution of the grains. We do not include the effects of magnetic fields in primordial galaxies in this calculation, in the absence of a compelling theory as to such a field’s structure and magnitude and the role of galactic amplification processes. The charging from the photoelectric effect depends on $Q_{abs}$, the absorption coefficient of the grain (see above) and the radiation field $J_\nu$. For a thermal gas with electron and proton densities $n_e, n_p$ and temperature $T$, the photoelectric current is given by,
$$J_{ph}=\int_{\nu_{min}} ^\infty Q_{abs} (a,\nu) y_\nu {4 \pi J_\nu \over h \nu} \, d\nu \,,$$
where $\nu_{min}=(w+eU)/h$ corresponds to the minimum energy for which electrons can escape from the surface, $w$ is the workfunction, and $y_\nu$ is the normalized photo-yield. We use the fits for $y_\nu$ provided by @bakes94.
Following @drainesalpeter2, we write the currents due to collisions with protons, as (with $x=eU/kT$, $U=Z_{\rm gr}e/a$ being the grain potential, and $Z_{\rm gr}$ the grain charge), $$J_p\approx n_p \Bigl ({kT \over 2 \pi m_p} \Bigr ) ^{1/2} \,,$$ and with electrons, as, $$J_e=-n_e \Bigl ({kT \over 2 \pi m_e} \Bigr ) ^{1/2} \,.$$ These currents are enhanced by Coulomb interactions by a factor $g(x)$. For electrons, $g_e(x)=\exp (x)$, for $x<0$, and $g_e(x)=1+x$ for $x>0$, and for protons, $g_p(x)=\exp(-Z_{\rm gr}x)$ for $x>0$, and $g_p(x)=1-Z_{\rm gr}x$ for $x<0$ [@spitzer].
The charging time scales are much smaller than the transport time scale of the grains in our calculations, and therefore the grain charge can be calculated from the equilibrium condition at each radii : $J_{ph}+J_p=J_e$.
In addition to the equation of motion (equation \[eq:motion\]), we also calculate the evolution in grain sizes due to sputtering. Grains are considered to be destroyed when they are reduced to $10^{-3}$ of their original size. For the case of magnetite grains, there are no published sputtering yields in the literature, and a detailed calculation of this quantity is beyond the scope of this work. @bianchi05 derived that graphite and olivine \[(Mg,Fe)$_2$SiO$_4$\] grains have similar sputtering rates as long as the grain velocities are at least 100 km s$^{-1}$, as we nhave assumed here. The theoretical expectation would be that the values for magnetite sputtering lie between those for silicates, which have similar binding energies per atom, and for metallic Fe (Draine 2005, private communication). The latter may be preferred if oxygen is preferentially sputtered from magnetite grains. For these reasons, we approximate the magnetite sputtering rate as that for pure Fe from @tielensetal; for consistency, we use the sputtering rates from these authors’ calcuations for graphites and silicates as well (see also equation 3 of @seabshull).
Results
=======
We present the main findings of our paper in this section in four parts in the following order: (1) the role played by a grain’s area to mass ratio in determining its response to a radiation field; (2) solving for the evolution of the densities and temperatures within primordial SNRs which will provide the background conditions for grain transport; (3) using the results from (2) and earlier sections to derive the efficient transport of graphite and silicate grains relative to magnetites within SNRs, with the associated implications for the abundance ratios of Fe-poor EMP stars and the first-stars IMF; and (4) quantifying the impact of varying a few of our model assumptions on the results in this work. At the end of each of the first three subsections, we present a brief summary of its findings in the broader context of the paper.
Radiation Pressure on Dust Grains
---------------------------------
The dynamics of dust grains are determined by a complex interplay between gas density, temperature, and grain properties like size, mass, density, and charging rate. The relevant considerations for this problem are: (1) the ratio of the grain’s effective area to mass, which is important for grain dynamics under radiation pressure and gravity; and (2) the relative values of the outward force due to radiation and gas drag, another important input to the grain’s motion.
The effective area, also frequently referred to as the absorption cross section, is determined by the geometrical area ($\pi a^2$) and the absorption coefficient $Q_{abs}$. We plot the ratio of the effective area to the mass of the grains (in units of cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$) as functions of the wavelength of the incident radiation in Figure 2 for graphites, silicates, and magnetite grains. For each species, we show two cases with grain radii $a=0.01 \, \mu $m and $a=0.01 \, \mu $m. We should note that for a Planckian radiation field with effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}=5\times
10^4$ K, the peak of the spectrum is at $\lambda \sim hc/(2.82 \, kT_{\rm
eff}) \sim 0.1 \, \mu $m. Such a hot radiation field is easily achieved in the atmospheres of metal-free stars of masses exceeding about ten solar masses [@tsv; @bkl]. The curves show that smaller grains in general have larger ratios of area to mass, and graphites have the largest ratio, followed by silicates and then magnetites, a direct consequence of their respective grain densities of 2.2, 3.2, and 5.2 g cm$^{-3}$.\
=1.0
We therefore anticipate, in the context of SNRs resulting from Pop III SNe in primordial galaxies, that graphite grains will be affected by radiation pressure more than silicate and magnetite grains, and small grains will experience greater radiation pressure than large grains.
SNR Evolution
-------------
In order to calculate the transport of dust grains with the equations described in the previous section, we need to assume approximate background gas temperatures and number densities within the SNR. Although we have not modeled the detailed density and velocity structure in this region, we assume parameter values that encapsulate the range of physical conditions expected within the SNR in the SN-induced star formation scenario. We show this in Figure 3, where the evolution of the density and temperature with interior radius in the SNR (and not the SN shell radius) is plotted for times up to 10 Myr. We use Sedov-Taylor self-similar solutions and the analytic approximations of @kahn75 and @petruk00 for the temperature and density profiles in Figure 3, assuming a typical HN/PISN explosion energy $E_{\rm SN} = 10^{52}$ erg and an ambient gas density of 10 cm$^{-3}$. These parameters represent the typical conditions under which the fragmentation instability can occur in SN shells in primordial galaxies [@salvaterra04], although densities of 10 cm$^{-3}$ may only be achieved in the cold star-forming cores of such galaxies.\
=1.0
The timescales on which SN shells form can be estimated from the equations describing the Sedov-Taylor phase of SNRs [@shullsilk]. For the above parameters, the shell radius, velocity, and post-shock temperature in the shell scale with $E_{\rm 52}$ (SN energies of 10$^{52}$ erg), ambient density $n_{10}$ (in units of 10 cm$^{-3}$) and time $t_4$ (in units of $10^4$ yr) as:
$$R_s = (12.7 \; {\rm pc}) \; E_{52}^{0.2} n_{10}^{-0.2} t_4^{0.4}$$
$$V_s = (439 \; {\rm km \; s^{-1}}) \; E_{52}^{0.2} n_{10}^{-0.2} t_4^{-0.6}$$
$$T_s = (2.58 \times 10^6 \; {\rm K}) \; E_{52}^{0.4} n_{10}^{-0.4} t_4^{-1.2}$$
Applying the cooling criterion for the onset of radiative shell-formation with free-free cooling from H$^+$ and He$^{+2}$ ions leads to shell formation at times of:
$$t_{\rm shell} \sim (2.1 \times 10^4 \; {\rm yr}) \; E_{52}^{1/8} n_{10}^{-3/4}$$
Thus, the SN shell has begun to form at about $10^4$ yr, and the temperature has dropped sufficiently to lower sputtering rates within the shell. Figure 3 shows that, under these conditions and for the SN energies considered here, the typical size of SN shells is on the order of tens to at most hundreds of pc over timescales of 10 Myr. We also investigated cases with ambient densities of 1 cm$^{-3}$, where the lines in Figure 3 simply scale towards the right. At a given time and SN shell radius, the density within the SNR is almost two orders of magnitude lower in comparison to the 10 cm$^{-3}$ case.
Figure 3 also reveals that at early times ($\la 10^5$ yr) when the SN shell has advanced to about a few to 10 pc, typical densities and temperatures in the SNR interior are respectively on the order of 0.1 cm$^{-3}$ and a few times $10^8$ K. Since the dust that survives post-SN processes such as the reverse shock is likely to be found in cooler gas, we conservatively assume ambient temperatures of $3 \times 10^7$ K (the value at about 6 pc at $10^4$ yr), and an ambient density of 0.1 cm$^{-3}$ within the SNR.
In summary, for a typical Pop III SN with $E_{\rm SN} = 10^{52}$ erg, a SN shell begins to form in primordial galaxies at $\sim 10^4$ yr after the initial explosion, and reaches distances of $\sim$ 10–100 pc in 10 Myr. The SNR interior remains hot on these timescales, and we assume background gas conditions of $3 \times 10^7$ K and 0.1 cm$^{-3}$ in solving for dust grain transport within the SNR.
Grain Dynamics
--------------
We use the results of @schneideretal04 and @todini for the formation of dust grains in SNe in primeval galaxies in order to assume the sizes of grains of different composition in our calculations. They found, as discussed earlier in this work, that for SNe with a progenitor mass of 149 $M_{\odot}$, the size distribution of magnetite grains peaked at $\sim
0.001 \, \mu$m, and those of graphites and silicates at $\sim 0.04 \,
\mu$m. For stellar masses of 22 $M_\odot$ and 250 $M_\odot$, the characteristic grain sizes for magnetites/silicates/graphites are respectively of order 0.001/0.001/0.03 $\mu$m and 0.01/0.01/0.2 $\mu$m. These three masses span the range of SN progenitors considered here. We refer the reader to these papers and to @nozawaetal03 for the detailed grain size distribution for various stellar masses.\
=1.0
We show in Figure 4 the position of dust grains under the combined forces of radiation, gas drag, gravity, and sputtering, using the above values for the initial sizes of grains of the relevant composition for the three representative stellar mass cases. We recall our model assumptions discussed earlier: that all grains are released at $r=0$ with an initial speed of $100$ km s$^{-1}$, that the luminosity of the central source is $L=10^6 \, L_{\odot}$ with a Planckian spectrum of effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}=5 \times 10^4$ K, and that the temperature and gas density within the SNR are uniform at $3 \times 10^7$ K and $10^{-1}$ cm$^{-3}$ respectively. We do not use the temperatures and densities from the self-similar solutions shown in Figure 3 for two reasons. First, strong departures from a roughly constant product of density and temperature within the SNR occur only close to the SN shell. Second, the self-similar profile would indicate extremely high temperatures ($\ga 10^{10}$ K) near the SNR center, which would destroy all dust grains promptly. Such a profile is an idealization in the very central regions, and it may not be a realistic representation of the physical conditions there.
Figure 4 shows the radiative transport of graphites, silicates and magnetites, as well as two additional curves that represent the adiabatic evolution of the SN shell for an explosion energy of $10^{52}$ erg and ambient densities of $1$ cm$^{-3}$ (upper curve) and $10$ cm$^{-3}$ (lower curve). Clearly, the SN shell advances to smaller distances for higher ambient densities, which could lead to more effective pile-up of grains. The SN shell positions are computed using the Sedov-Taylor formalism in the appendices of @shullsilk for the first $10^2$ yr, and thereafter by solving the differential equations (2) and (3) in @salvaterra04 without the radiative cooling term in eqn. 3. We note that the latter treatment accounts for the mass swept up by the shell, which is substantial by $10^4$ yr and considerably slows the forward motion of the shell. Hence the shell radii values in Figure 4 are significantly smaller than those from a simple Sedov-Taylor treatment for times exceeding $10^4$ yr, e.g., 11 versus 19 pc at $10^4$ yr for ambient densities of 1 cm$^{-3}$.
The curves in Figure 4 show that dust grains of sufficient size are driven by radiation equally effectively irrespective of grain type, and that graphites, silicates, and magnetites may pile up in the SN shell well before 1 Myr. Although smaller grains experience radiation pressure more strongly (Figure 2), they are destroyed on faster timescales owing to greater relative loss of size. This is seen clearly in Figure 4, where graphites consistently reach the SN shell owing to their relatively large size for all the displayed stellar masses, whereas the small magnetite grains are destroyed at the high SNR interior temperatures before arriving at the shell. As the temperature increases, the sputtering rates rise and compete with the decreasing Coulomb drag. Sputtering affects graphite and silicate grains as well, but given their typical grain sizes in the figure, significantly higher densities and/or temperatures ($\ga 7 \times 10^7$ K) are required to boost sputtering and prevent shell pile-up of these grains. This can also be achieved by having the SNe explode into an ISM of lower ambient densities than we have assumed here, in which case the SN shell would advance to larger distances, leading to less effective pile-up of dust grains. Transport through SNR interior temperatures that exceed $\sim$ few $\times 10^7$ K will destroy grains of similar sizes at roughly the same radii, and will not cause element segregation.
In the context of EMP stellar abundances, where silicate elements and carbon were often enhanced with respect to iron, the 149 $M_\odot$ case appears at first glance to offer the best explanation for reasonable parameter choices. The 22 $M_\odot$ case favors graphites alone, whereas a SN from a 250 $M_\odot$ star creates larger grains in general, leading to the eventual transport of graphites, silicates and magnetites to the SN shell. The magnetite grains from 22 $M_\odot$ and 149 $M_\odot$ SNe are considerably smaller ($\sim$ 0.001 $\mu$m) and are sputtered away before they can arrive at the SN shell.
To fully reconcile these results with the current EMP data presented in §2, there is an additional important factor to consider: the relative masses in these dust grains formed in primordial SNe. The survival and deposition of any compound must be considered along with its net yield. As discussed earlier, magnetites and graphites dominate the dust yield from 12–35 $M_\odot$ SNe, while PISNe from the stellar mass range 140–260 $M_\odot$ create mostly silicates, typically 1–2 orders of magnitude more by final mass than graphites or magnetites. When these trends are considered with those in Figure 4, we conclude that the mass range $\sim$ 10–150 $M_\odot$ best explains the enhancement of carbon and silicate elements in Fe-poor EMP stars, with the lower end of this range being most appropriate for C-rich Fe-poor EMP stars. High-mass PISNe, as seen in the 250 $M_\odot$ case, would predict a strong enhancement of silicates and iron relative to carbon, which is not matched by the data.
These results remain approximately true when compared with the predictions of dust grain sizes and mass yields from other works such as @nozawaetal03. These authors predict larger grain sizes and yields for silicates from a 25 $M_\odot$ star than we have assumed here for a 22 $M_\odot$ star from @todini, and a mass output of graphites that depends strongly on the degree of mixing in the SN ejecta. The trends from @nozawaetal03 would imply that more silicates from metal-free Type II SNe would reach the SN shell, and that the transport of graphites from 10–260 $M_\odot$ stars would be more variable, depending on the physical conditions in individual SNe. These outcomes will only strengthen the connection to the EMP stellar data, where the elements Mg, Si and O are typically overabundant relative to Fe at low \[Fe/H\], while this is true for C in only a fraction of the same EMP stars.
To summarize, current models indicate that primordial SNe create graphite and silicate grains of larger size and, for some stellar masses, in greater quantities than magnetites. This directly results in the more efficient transport of graphites and silicates through the SNR interior to the SN shells, where they could provide cooling that triggers second-generation star formation. A comparison with the abundance trends in Fe-poor EMP stars indicates a first-stars IMF in the mass range 10–150 $M_\odot$, [*if*]{} dust transport dominates the element ratios in these stars.
Model Assumptions and Variations
--------------------------------
We now address a few remaining issues related to our model assumptions, starting with our estimate of the magnetite sputtering rate. The calculation of this quantity has two input parameters – the density and sputtering rate of a specific grain species. We recall that currently there exists no sputtering data for magnetites; the rates for either silicates (which has a similar binding energy per atom) or for pure metallic Fe can be used as an approximation. The magnetite grain density may be set to its measured value of 5.2 g cm$^{-3}$, or to that of pure Fe (7.9 g cm$^{-3}$). There are therefore four possible combinations of these two parameters in calculating the sputtering of magnetite (recall that for magnetites in the above figures, we have assumed grain densities of 5.2 g cm$^{-3}$ and a pure Fe sputtering rate).
=1.0
We show in Figure 5 the time-dependent position of magnetite grains for these four parameter combinations for grain sizes of 0.001 $\mu$m. The curves which use silicate sputtering rates in general lie below and terminate earlier than those with pure Fe sputtering rates, as expected from the higher values of the first quantity. A perhaps less obvious result in Figure 5 is the larger distance to which the grains with higher density are transported. This reveals the complex nature of the problem of dust transport; as we emphasized earlier, individual trends of grain mass, size, and density do not combine predictably in a given problem. In this case, the difference between the trajectories of light (less dense) and heavy (more dense) particles is not simply extrapolated, as they are subjected to a position-dependent radiation field. One may have expected that heavier particles always have lower velocities than lighter particles. We calculated velocities for each of the cases in Figure 5 and find that the lighter particles do indeed move faster initially, but slow down more rapidly than do the grains with higher densities. We attribute this behavior to the effect of the decreasing values of the driving radiation field with distance. Another factor may be the increase of grain charge with decreasing grain density. This trend appears to hold for the physical conditions in the problem explored in this paper, where the charge increases from magnetites to silicates to graphites, leading to the greater slowing of lighter dust grains from gas drag. This is consistent with the results of @bianchi05 in the context of dust transport to the IGM. We emphasize that this anti-correlation between charge and grain density may be true only in the specific environment considered here, and may not apply in other astrophysical situations. Our main point which we wish to demonstrate through Figure 5 is that the curve corresponding to grain density 5.2 g cm$^{-3}$ and a pure Fe sputtering rate lies intermediate to the other cases in the figure, and justifies our earlier assumption of these values for magnetite grains.
Last, we have explored variations of the initial velocities of the dust grains. Lowering this quantity from our assumed value of 100 km s$^{-1}$ to 10 km s$^{-1}$ does not change our results appreciably, because the speed to which the grains are accelerated by radiation pressure is itself of order 100 km s$^{-1}$. However, higher initial velocities of order 1000 km s$^{-1}$ generally result in the grains being transported to greater radii. Depending on the role played by grain charge and gas drag, the grains may driven out of the galaxy (see earlier references on dust transport to the IGM), and become less relevant for the problem of seeding metals for second-generation star formation in early halos.
Conclusions
===========
We have investigated the radiative transport of dust within SNRs in primordial galaxies. We find that the differential transport of the primary dust compounds from the first SNe could be important for the problem of which metals seed the second generation of stars that form in the cooling shells of such SNe. The survivors of such second-generation star formation may be detected as the EMP stars in the Galactic halo, whose metal abundance ratios provide clues to the chemical environment in which they formed. Calculations of the motion of dust grains within SNRs under the combined forces of the hot first-stars radiation field, gas drag, gravity and sputtering reveal a complex interplay between grain size, charge, mass, density, and species. Our model requires that Pop III star formation can continue for at least a few to 10 Myr in early halos, the lower limit on the sum of the lifetimes of massive stars and of the timescale for dust grains to cross the SN shells (typically well before $10^5$ yr). In the context of this problem, our main findings are:
1. The role played by radiation pressure in the grain dynamics of different species is strongly influenced by the ratio of the grains’ area to mass, and decreases from graphites to silicates to magnetites. Within a given species, small grains are driven more effectively by radiation than are large grains.
2. We find that grain charge increases from magnetites to silicates to graphites, leading to greater Coulomb drag and loss of velocity for graphites and silicates relative to magnetites. However, a competing effect is the faster destruction of small grains, despite the stronger radiation pressure experienced by grains of decreasing size. The net result is that the generally larger graphite and silicate grains from the first SNe are more effectively driven and accumulate in the SN shells more than small magnetite grains.
3. If a dust-transport scenario in primordial SNRs were to account for the segregation of elements observed in C- and silicate-rich Fe-poor EMP stars in the Galactic halo, a metal-free stellar IMF spanning $\sim$ 10–150 $M_\odot$ offers the best explanation.
4. Higher temperatures and densities than those we have considered here will lead to increased sputtering and destruction of most grains, and a loss of selective grain transport. At lower ambient ISM densities, the SN shell would advance further, reducing the possibility of grains of any species reaching the SN shell and mixing with star-forming gas.
A detailed prediction of the contribution of dust to the metallicity of second-generation stars is beyond the scope of this paper, and is likely best studied through numerical simulations of primordial star-forming sites such as those cited earlier in this work. Clearly, dust transport can enrich such sites in elements that constitute the grains reaching the SN shell. A 200 $M_\odot$ star can produce up to 60 $M_\odot$ of dust [@schneideretal04]; if this is transported completely to the SN shell at a radius of 10 pc with an ambient density of 10 cm$^{-3}$ and diluted into the swept up mass of $\sim 10^3 M_\odot$, then supersolar metallicities of about 3 $Z_\odot$ in the shell can result. This is only an estimate of the average value. The real metallicity may be much higher or lower in cold star-forming clumps in the SN shell, depending on the efficiency of mixing processes and the role played by some of the transported elements in providing cooling pathways for primordial gas. Although it is beyond the scope of this work to fully compute how and when the transported dust grains get mixed into the SN shell gas, we may estimate it from the gravitational instability or free-fall timescale. This quantity is approximately $(G \rho)^{-1/2}$, and equals 10 Myr for hydrogen number densities of $\sim 10^2$ cm$^{-3}$. Therefore, if there is to be no significant delay from dust grain mixing prior to the onset of second-generation star formation, the gas in the SN shell has to exceed number densities of about a few $\times 10^3$ cm$^{-3}$.
There remain sizeable uncertainties in the modeling of dust transport in astrophysical environments, such as those detailed above, and factors related to the creation of dust in primordial SNe such as the role of reverse shocks. Clearly, some dust does survive in these environments, as inferred from the recent detection of dust in a $z \sim 6.2$ QSO whose extinction curve indicates a SN origin [@maiolino04]. An additional point that we have not accounted for is the binarity fraction of the first stars, which can affect the mass loss from companion stars, and reverse shock phenomena related to circumstellar material. Future spectroscopic analyses of Sloan-DSS and Hamburg/ESO survey data on EMP stars and observations of a variety of Galactic SNRs will help to address these important issues and ultimately constrain the formation sites and conditions of cosmological first- and second-generation star formation.
The authors thank Simone Bianchi and Bruce Draine for useful correspondence on the properties of magnetite, and Yuri Shchekinov for helpful discussions. We thank an anonymous referee and S. Bianchi for useful comments on the manuscript. A. V. gratefully acknowledges the support of NSF grant AST-0201670 through the NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctoral Fellowship program. B. B. N. thanks the Fellows of JILA for their hospitality. J. M. S. acknowledges support at the Colorado astrophysical theory program from NASA LTSA grant NAG5-7262 and NSF grant AST 02-06042.
[61]{}
, T., [Bryan]{}, G. L., & [Norman]{}, M. L. 2000, , 540, 39
, A. 1999, , 525, 583
, A., [Hernquist]{}, L., [Katz]{}, N., [Gardner]{}, J., & [Weinberg]{}, D. 2001, , 556, L11
, W., [Norris]{}, J. E., [Ryan]{}, S. G., [Beers]{}, T. C., [Christlieb]{}, N., [Tsangarides]{}, S., & [Ando]{}, H. 2004, , 608, 971
, E. L. O. & [Tielens]{}, A. G. G. M. 1994, , 427, 822
, S. & [Ferrara]{}, A. 2005, , 358, 379
, M. M., [Cohen]{}, J. G., & [Stetson]{}, P. B. 2004, , 127, 1579
, V., [Coppi]{}, P. S., & [Larson]{}, R. B. 2002, , 564, 23
, V., [Ferrara]{}, A., [Coppi]{}, P. S., & [Larson]{}, R. B. 2001, , 328, 969
, V., [Kudritzki]{}, R. P., & [Loeb]{}, A. 2001, , 552, 464
, V. & [Loeb]{}, A. 2003, , 425, 812
, V., [Yoshida]{}, N., & [Hernquist]{}, L. 2003, , 596, L135
, J. S., [Kolatt]{}, T. S., [Sigad]{}, Y., [Somerville]{}, R. S., [Kravtsov]{}, A. V., [Klypin]{}, A. A., [Primack]{}, J. R., & [Dekel]{}, A. 2001, , 321, 559
, R., et al. 2004, , 416, 1117
, N., [Gustafsson]{}, B., [Korn]{}, A. J., [Barklem]{}, P. S., [Beers]{}, T. C., [Bessell]{}, M. S., [Karlsson]{}, T., & [Mizuno-Wiedner]{}, M. 2004, , 603, 708
, J. G., et al. 2004, , 612, 1107
, F., [Olive]{}, K. A., [Vangioni-Flam]{}, E., [Silk]{}, J., & [Audouze]{}, J. 2004, , 617, 693
, B. T. 1985, , 57, 587
, B. T. & [Salpeter]{}, E. E. 1979, , 231, 77
—. 1979, , 231, 438
, E. & [Scalo]{}, J. M. 1980, , 239, 193
, A. & [Dettmar]{}, R.-J. 1994, , 427, 155
, A., [Ferrini]{}, F., [Barsella]{}, B., & [Franco]{}, J. 1991, , 381, 137
, A., [Nath]{}, B., [Sethi]{}, S. K., & [Shchekinov]{}, Y. 1999, , 303, 301
, R. A., [Becker]{}, R. H., & [Blair]{}, W. P. 1987, , 313, 378
, A., et al. 2005, , 434, 871
, H. & [Strom]{}, R. G. 1991, , 249, 521
, A. & [Woosley]{}, S. E. 2002, , 567, 532
, D. C., [Rieke]{}, G. H., [Gordon]{}, K. D., [Rho]{}, J., & [Misselt]{}, K. A. 2004, , 154, 290
, A. P., [Tielens]{}, A. G. G. M., & [Hollenbach]{}, D. J. 1996, , 469, 740
, A. P., [Tielens]{}, A. G. G. M., [Hollenbach]{}, D. J., & [McKee]{}, C. F. 1994, , 433, 797
, F. D. 1975, in International Cosmic Ray Conference, 3566
, E. & [Seljak]{}, U. 2001, , 327, 1353
, O., [Birkmann]{}, S. M., [Rieke]{}, G. H., [Lemke]{}, D., [Klaas]{}, U., [Hines]{}, D. C., & [Gordon]{}, K. D. 2004, , 432, 596
, A. & [Haiman]{}, Z. 1997, , 490, 571
, J., [Bromm]{}, V., & [Hernquist]{}, L. 2003, , 586, 1
, R., [Schneider]{}, R. 2004, [Oliva]{}, E., [Bianchi]{}, S., [Ferrara]{}, A., [Mannucci]{}, F., [Pedani]{}, M., & [RocaSogorb]{}, M. 2004, , 431, 533
, B. B., [Sethi]{}, S. K., & [Shchekinov]{}, Y. 1999, , 303, 1
, J. F., [Frenk]{}, C. S., & [White]{}, S. D. M. 1997, , 490, 493
, T., [Kozasa]{}, T., [Umeda]{}, H., [Maeda]{}, K., & [Nomoto]{}, K. 2003, , 598, 785
, J.-C. 1972, , 18, 253
, O. 2000, , 357, 686
, B. & [Cohen]{}, J. G. 2005, , 434, 1117
, Y.-Z. & [Wasserburg]{}, G. J. 2005, , 623, 17
, R., [Ferrara]{}, A., & [Schneider]{}, R. 2004, New Astronomy, 10, 113
, F. & [Shull]{}, J. M. 2005, , submitted (astro-ph/0509101)
, D. 2002, , 382, 28
, R., [Ferrara]{}, A., [Natarajan]{}, P., & [Omukai]{}, K. 2002, , 571, 30
, R., [Ferrara]{}, A., & [Salvaterra]{}, R. 2004, , 351, 1379
, C. G. & [Shull]{}, J. M. 1983, , 275, 652
, J. M. 1978, , 226, 858
, J. M. & [Silk]{}, J. 1979, , 234, 427
, B. M. & [Vibe]{}, D. Z. 1995, Astronomy Reports, 39, 578
, L. 1978, [Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium]{} (New York Wiley-Interscience, 1978. 333 p.)
, A. G. G. M., [McKee]{}, C. F., [Seab]{}, C. G., & [Hollenbach]{}, D. J. 1994, , 431, 321
, P. & [Ferrara]{}, A. 2001, , 325, 726
, J. & [Shull]{}, J. M. 2000, , 528, L65
, J., [Shull]{}, J. M., & [Venkatesan]{}, A. 2003, , 584, 608
, J., [Venkatesan]{}, A., & [Shull]{}, J. M. 2004, , 612, 602
, H. & [Nomoto]{}, K. 2003, , 422, 871
, A. & [Truran]{}, J. W. 2003, , 594, L1
, K. & [Venkatesan]{}, A. 2003, , 591, 38
[^1]: Selecting merely on the basis of C-enhancement is unlikely to narrow down the parent process, as many C-enhanced EMP stars show selective enhancements of $r$- and $s$-process, as well as other elements. As many authors have discussed, this great diversity of abundance ratios may indicate an equal diversity of contributing mechanisms.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'At present, the problem to steer a non-Markovian process with minimum energy between specified end-point marginal distributions remains unsolved. Herein, we consider the special case for a non-Markovian process $y(t)$ which, however, assumes a finite-dimensional stochastic realization with a Markov [*state process*]{} that is fully observable. In this setting, and over a finite time horizon $[0,T]$, we determine an optimal (least) finite-energy control law that steers the stochastic system to a final distribution that is compatible with a specified distribution for the terminal output process $y(T)$; the solution is given in closed-form. This work provides a key step towards the important problem to steer a stochastic system based on partial observations of the state (i.e., an output process) corrupted by noise, which will be the subject of forthcoming work.'
author:
- 'Daniele Alpago, Yongxin Chen, Tryphon Georgiou and Michele Pavon [^1] [^2] [^3] [^4] [^5]'
title: 'Optimal steering for non-Markovian Gaussian processes'
---
Introduction
============
Throughout we will be considering a controlled evolution of the vector Gauss-Markov process $\{x(t) \mid 0\le t\le T\}$ that obeys the linear stochastic differential equation
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{controlled}&dx^u=A(t)x^u(t)dt+B(t)u(t)+B(t)dw(t),\\\nonumber &x^u(0)=\xi \mbox{ a.s.}\end{aligned}$$
Here, as it is standard, $w$ is an $m$-dimensional Wiener process and $\xi$ is an $n$-dimensional Gaussian random vector which is independent of $w$. For simplicity we suppose that $\xi$ has zero mean, and that it has density $$\label{initial}\rho_0(x)=(2\pi)^{-n/2}\det (\Sigma^x_0)^{-1/2}\exp\left\{-\frac{1}{2}x'\left(\Sigma^x_0\right)^{-1}x\right\}.$$ As it is common, we also assume that $A(\cdot)$ and $B(\cdot)$ are continuous matrix functions taking values in ${{\mathbb R}}^{n\times n}$ and ${{\mathbb R}}^{n\times m}$, respectively.
For this setting, in recent years, there has been considerable interest in the problem of [*minimum-energy steering*]{} of the (Gaussian) distribution of $x(t)$ to a target distribution $\mathcal N(0,\Sigma_T^x)$ at time $t=T$, [@CGP1; @CGP3; @HW; @GT; @bakolas]. Important extensions include [@CGP3] the more challenging case when the control process $u$ and the noise $w$ enter through different channels (i.e., having different “input matrices” $B$ in ), and the infinite-horizon case where the goal is to achieve with minimum power a specified stationary state [@CGP3]; the latter generalizes the classical work on covariance control of Skelton [et al.]{} [@HS; @GS]. Motivation for such problems is manifold: they represents a most natural relaxation of classical LQR steering problems and have important applications in quality control and industrial manufacturing, vehicle path planning [@OT], statistical physics as in [*cooling*]{} and control of nano-to-meter scale resonators, atomic force microscopy and so forth, see e.g., [@FilHonStr08; @CGPcooling].
Historically, the origin of the steering problem stems from a [*Gedankenexperiment*]{} formulated by Schrödinger in the early thirties [@S1; @S2], seeking the most likely flow of particle distributions between observed end-point marginals. Schrödinger’s problem amounted to a problem in the theory of large deviations (which was unavailable at that time). Indeed, thanks to Sanov’s theorem [@SANOV], the Schrödinger’s problem amounts to seeking a probability distribution on particle trajectories having maximum entropy andwhich is in agreement with the end-point specified marginal distributions [@For; @Beu; @Jam2; @F2; @Wak]. Then, in the late eighties and early nineties, following work of Jamison, Föllmer, Nagasawa, Wakolbinger, Fleming, Holland, Mitter and others, a clear connection was made with stochastic control [@DP; @DPP; @PavWak91]. The distribution on paths, corresponding to the uncontrolled evolution, plays the role of the “prior" measure in the maximum entropy problem which generalizes Schrödinger’s original one. At about the same time, Blaquiere [@blaquiere1992controllability] studied the control of the Fokker-Planck equation and later Brockett studied the Louiville equation [@brockett2012notes] along a similar spirit, to steer distributions to a target one. This circle of control problems for uncertain system has recently been linked to yet another fast developing topic, Optimal Mass Transport (OMT) problem [@Vil], when it was realized that [*Schrödinger’s bridge problem*]{} (SBP, as it seeks to “bridge” the two end-point marginals) may be viewed as a regularization of OMT and provides an effective computational approach to the latter [@Mik; @mt; @MT; @leo; @CGP5].
Extending the Schrödinger problem to the case of non-Markov processes is a tantalizing one and a natural next step. While the general case is currently wide open, in the present paper we work out the special of steering the output of a Gauss-Markov model. More specifically, in conjunction with , we consider the output process $$\label{output}
y(t)=C(t) x^u(t),$$
where $C(\cdot)$ is continuous and takes values in ${{\mathbb R}}^{p\times n}$ for $p<n$. For instance, this case arises when we consider steering only some components of the state to a prescribed terminal distribution (see \[examples\]). Clearly, $y$ by itself is not a Markov process. Thus, this seemingly innocuous problem falls into the category of Schrödinger bridge problems with non-Markov prior for which the form of the optimal control is, in general, unknown[^6]. Problems where only a portion of the state needs to be specified arise, for instance, in thickness control (film extrusion) [@astrom; @bakolas] where the remaining components of the state vector might either not be of interest or may be difficult/expensive to measure. In Section \[examples\] we discuss a case where it is of interest to regulate only the distribution of the momentum of stochastic oscillators.
The outline of the paper is as follows. In Section \[background\], we recall some central results from [@CGP1] in the case of a Markovian prior. In Section \[formulation\], we give a precise formulation of our stochastic control problem. In Section \[sec:finitehorizon\], we provide a closed-form solution to our problem by finding the terminal time state covariance which can be reached with minimum energy among those complying with the assigned covariance of $y(T)$. Finally, Section \[examples\] illustrates the results in a problem of steering the momentum distribution of a stochastic oscillator to a desired one.
Background
==========
Let $\mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^x_T)$ be the family of [*adapted[^7], finite energy*]{} control functions such that (\[controlled\]) has a strong solution on $[0,T]$ and $x(T)$ has distribution $\mathcal N(0,\Sigma_T^x)$. The optimal steering problem reads
\[pro:steering\] Determine $$u^*:= {\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}_{u\in \mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^y_T)} \,J(u):={{\mathbb E}}\left\{\int_0^Tu(t)' u(t) \,dt\right\}.$$
In [@CGP1 Theorem 8], it was shown that, under controllability of the pair $(A(\cdot),B(\cdot))$ on the given time interval, $\mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^x_T)$ is nonempty and the (unique) optimal control is a linear feedback of the state given by $$\label{optcontr}
u^\star(t)=-B(t)'Q(t)^{-1}x(t),$$ where $P(t)$ and $Q(t)$, taking values in the set of symmetric, $n\times n$ matrices, are the unique [*nonsingular*]{} solutions on $[0,T]$ of the system of linear matrix equations
\[system\_Lyap\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{system_Lyap_P}
\dot{P}(t)&=A(t)P(t)+P(t)A(t)'+B(t)B(t)',\\ \label{system_Lyap_Q}
\dot{Q}(t)&=A(t)Q(t)+Q(t)A(t)'-B(t)B(t)',\end{aligned}$$
nonlinearly coupled through the boundary conditions
\[boundary\_Lyap\] $$\begin{aligned}
(\Sigma^x_0)^{-1}&=P(0)^{-1}+ Q(0)^{-1},\\
(\Sigma^x_T)^{-1}&=P(T)^{-1}+Q(T)^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$
The solutions to these equations can actually be provided in closed form as a function of $(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^x_T)$, see [@CGP1 Section III] for further details.
Let $P_0$ and $P_u$ be the probability measures on $C(0,T;{{\mathbb R}}^n)$, the $n$-dimensional continuous functions corresponding to the solutions of (\[controlled\]) with control $0$, and $u\in\mathcal U$, respectively. Also let $\pi_0(x_0,x_T)$ and $\pi_u(x_0,x_T)$ be their initial-final joint density, respectively. In [@CGP1 Section IV], a well known decomposition of the relative entropy [@F2] was extended to the case of degenerate diffusions, to show that the Schrödinger bridge problem with marginals densities $\rho_0=\mathcal N(0,\Sigma_0^x)$ and $\rho_T=\mathcal N(0,\Sigma_T^x)$ can be reduced to the following maximum entropy problem for distributions on a finite-dimensional space:
\[static\] Minimize over densities $\pi_u$ on ${{\mathbb R}}^n\times{{\mathbb R}}^n$ the Kullback-Leibler index $$\label{staticindex}
{{\mathbb D}}(\pi_u\|\pi_0):=\int\int\left[\log\frac{\pi_u(x,y)}{\pi_0(x,y)}\right]\pi_u(x,y)dxdy$$ subject to the (linear) constraints $$\label{constraint} \int \pi_u(x,y)dy=\rho_0(x),\quad \int \pi_u(x,y)dx=\rho_T(y).$$
Let $\Sigma^u_{0,T}$ be the covariance of $\pi_u(x_0,x_T)$. Since $u\in\mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^x_T)$, $\Sigma^u_{0,T}$ has necessarily the structure $$\label{structure}\Sigma^u_{0,T}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}\Sigma^x_0 &Y^u \\ (Y^u)' & \Sigma^x_T\end{array}\right]$$ for some $Y^u$. Let $S_{0,T}$ instead be the covariance corresponding to $\pi_0(x_0,x_T)$. Then, it has the form $$\label{eq:S}
S_{0,T}=\left[\begin{matrix}\Sigma^x_0&\Sigma^x_0\Phi(T,0)'\\
\Phi(T,0)\Sigma_0^x&S_T\end{matrix}\right]$$ where $$S_T=\Phi(T,0)\Sigma^x_0\Phi(T,0)'+\int_0^T\Phi(T,\tau)B(\tau)B(\tau)'\Phi(T,\tau)'d\tau,$$ with $\Phi(t,s)$ denoting the state-transition of $A(\cdot)$ determined by $$\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\Phi(t,s)=A(t)\Phi(t,s), \quad \Phi(t,t)=I.$$ Thanks to the explicit form of relative entropy (Kullback-Leibler index) for Gaussian distributions [@COVER_THOMAS], Problem \[static\] can be expressed in terms of covariances as follows: $$\label{eq:remx}
{\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}_{(Y^u)\in{{\mathcal Q}}^x} \quad -\log\det\Sigma^u_{0,T} + {\operatorname{trace}}(S_{0,T}^{-1}\,\Sigma^u_{0,T})$$ where $\Sigma^u_{0,T}$ is as in (\[structure\]) and $${{\mathcal Q}}^x:=\left\{Y\in{{\mathbb R}}^{n\times n}:\,\Sigma^x_T-Y'(\Sigma^x_0)^{-1}Y>0 \right\},$$ see [@CGP1 Section IV] for the details.
Problem formulation {#formulation}
===================
We consider the output process in and assume that the state $x(t)$ is fully observable. The finite-dimensional [*Markovian representation*]{} ([*stochastic realization*]{}) for $y$ provided by (\[controlled\])-(\[output\]) is available. Such a representation, as is well-known, constitutes the starting point of Kalman filtering and much of optimal control theory, and the construction of such a model with minimal state vector dimension has been the subject of intense study [@LP]. This too is our starting point.
Let us denote by $\mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^y_T)$ be the family of adapted control functions such that (\[controlled\]) has a strong solution on $[0,T]$ and $y(T)$ has distribution $\mathcal N(0,\Sigma_T^y)$. We formulate the following [*Schrödinger Bridge Problem*]{} with non-Markov prior:
\[formalization\] Determine $$u^*:= {\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}_{u\in \mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^y_T)} \,J(u):={{\mathbb E}}\left\{\int_0^Tu(t)' u(t) \,dt\right\}.$$
Notice that on one side, at $t=0$, the boundary constraint requires matching the covariance for the state vector (which can be relaxed) while on the other end, at $t=T$, requires matching the covariance of the output $$\label{terminalcondition}\Sigma^y_T=C(T)\Sigma^x_TC(T)'.$$ The value of $\Sigma_T^x$ is a parameter and there are in general several values for it such that (\[terminalcondition\]) is satisfied[^8]. Corresponding to each one of them, there is a feedback control in $\mathcal U(\Sigma^x_0,\Sigma^x_T)$ optimally performing the transfer of distributions according to [@CGP1]. Thus, the problem may be also viewed as that of determining the one final covariance $\Sigma_T^x$, among those compatible with $\Sigma_T^y$, whose corresponding optimal control (\[optcontr\]) has minimum energy.
Inspired by the reduction of the classical case leading to Problem \[static\], we proceed in the next section to derive a closed-form solution of Problem \[formalization\].
Solution to the non-Markovian steering problem {#sec:finitehorizon}
==============================================
In view of in Section \[background\], Problem \[formalization\] can be rewritten as $$\label{eq:soc}
\begin{aligned}
{\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}_{u\in\mathcal{U}} &\quad {{\mathbb E}}\left\{\int_0^T\,u(t)'u(t)\,dt\right\}\\
\text{subject to } &\quad x(0)\sim{{\mathcal N}}(0,\Sigma^x_0),\quad x(T)\sim{{\mathcal N}}(0,X),\\
&\quad CXC'=\Sigma_T^y,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\Sigma^x_0$, $\Sigma_T^y$ constitute the given data while $X$ is a parameter. This can be further recast as
\[relentropyformul\] Given $\Sigma^x_0$, $\Sigma_T^y$, and $S=S_{0,T}$ as in (\[eq:S\]), determine $$\label{eq:rem}
\begin{aligned}
{\operatornamewithlimits{argmin}}_{(X,Y)\in{{\mathcal Q}}} &\quad -\log\det\Sigma + {\operatorname{trace}}(S^{-1}\,\Sigma)
\end{aligned}$$ subject to $\Sigma=\begin{bmatrix}\Sigma^x_0 & Y\\Y' & X\end{bmatrix}>0$ and $CXC'=\Sigma_T^y$.
Now, let $$S^{-1}=
\begin{bmatrix}
N & V\\
V' & P
\end{bmatrix},$$ and $${{\mathcal Q}}:=\left\{(X,Y)\in{{\mathcal S}}_+\times{{\mathbb R}}^{n\times n}:\,X-Y'(\Sigma^x_0)^{-1}Y>0 \right\}$$ where ${{\mathcal S}}_+$ is the set of $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrices.
We construct below the Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}$ introducing a Lagrange multiplier and consider the unconstrained minimization $$\label{eq:inflag}
\inf_{(X,Y)\in{{\mathcal Q}}} \mathcal{L}(X,Y,M).$$ The Lagrangian is given by (we write, for simplicity, $\Sigma_0$ instead of $\Sigma_0^x$) $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(X,Y,M) &=-\log\det\left(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y\right)+{\operatorname{trace}}(PX)\\&+{\operatorname{trace}}\left[M(CXC' - \Sigma_T^y)\right]+2{\operatorname{trace}}(V' Y)+c, \end{aligned}$$ where $M=M'$ is a Lagrange multiplier and $c\in{{\mathbb R}}$ is a constant term. We first check the convexity of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to $(X,Y)$.
$\mathcal{L}$ is jointly convex in $(X,Y)$ over ${{\mathcal Q}}$.
Let $\delta\mathcal{L}:=\delta\mathcal{L}(X,Y,M;\delta X, \delta Y)$ denoting the first variation of $\mathcal{L}$ in the direction $(\delta X, \delta Y)$. Applying the chain rule, $$\begin{aligned}
\delta\mathcal{L}=&-{\operatorname{trace}}[(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}\,\delta\left(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y;\delta X, \delta Y\right)]\\
&+{\operatorname{trace}}\left[(P+C' M C)\delta X + 2V'\delta Y\right]\\
=&-{\operatorname{trace}}[(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}(\delta X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}\delta Y - \delta Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)]\\
&+{\operatorname{trace}}\left[(P+C' M C)\delta X+2V' \delta Y\right].\end{aligned}$$ To check the convexity it is sufficient look at the diagonal of the “Hessian" of $\mathcal{L}$ $$\delta^2\mathcal{L}:=\delta\mathcal{L}(X,Y,M;\delta X, \delta X, \delta Y, \delta Y).$$ We have $$\begin{aligned}
\delta^2\mathcal{L} =&{\operatorname{trace}}\left[ \left((X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}(\delta X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}\delta Y - \delta Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)\right)^2\right]\\
&+ 2{\operatorname{trace}}\left[(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}(\delta Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}\delta Y)\right].\end{aligned}$$ which is clearly non-negative on ${{\mathcal Q}}$.
To find the minimum of $\mathcal{L}$ in ${{\mathcal Q}}$ is therefore sufficient to solve $$\delta\mathcal{L}(X,Y,M;\delta X, \delta Y) = 0,\,\qquad \forall\,(\delta X,\delta Y)\in{{\mathcal S}}\times{{\mathbb R}}^{n\times n},$$ from which we get the two equations $$\begin{aligned}
&P+C' MC-(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}=0, \label{eq:varX}\\
&V+\Sigma_0^{-1}Y(X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y)^{-1}=0. \label{eq:varY}\end{aligned}$$ To compute the optimal $(X,Y)$, we use these equations in the Lagrangian and then proceed to maximize the resulting (concave) functional with respect to $M$. Accordingly, the last equation we need is given by $$\delta\mathcal{L}(X,Y,M;\delta M) = 0,\;\forall\,\delta M\in{{\mathcal S}}\;\iff\; CXC'=\Sigma_T^y. \label{eq:varM}$$
Let $Z:=X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y$ and note that $Z=Z'>0$. We immediately get $X=Z+Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y$ and $$\begin{aligned}
&\eqref{eq:varX} \quad\iff\quad Z^{-1} = P+C' M C, \label{eq:forZ1}\\
&\eqref{eq:varY} \quad\iff\quad Y = -\Sigma_0VZ \notag.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $X=Z+ZV'\Sigma_0VZ$ and $$\label{eq:forZ2}
\eqref{eq:varM} \quad\iff\quad CZC' + CZV'\Sigma_0VZC' =\Sigma_T^y.$$ At this point we only need to find $Z$ from equations , . Since we can always find a state space transformation $\mathcal{T}$ such that $C\,\mathcal{T}=[I\,|\,0]$ (or a change of basis in the outputs’ space), without loss of generality, we can always assume that $C=[I\,|\,0]$. Let $$Z=\begin{bmatrix}
Z_{11} & Z_{12}\\
Z_{21} & Z_{22}
\end{bmatrix},
\quad
V=\begin{bmatrix}
V_{11} & V_{12}\\
V_{21} & V_{22}
\end{bmatrix},
\quad
P=\begin{bmatrix}
P_{11} & P_{12}\\
P_{21} & P_{22}
\end{bmatrix}.$$ Equation becomes $$\label{eq:forZ11}
Z_{11}+\begin{bmatrix}Z_{11} & Z_{12}\end{bmatrix}
\underbrace{\begin{bmatrix}
K_{11} & K_{12}\\
K_{21} & K_{22}
\end{bmatrix}}_{V'\Sigma_0V\,>\,0}
\begin{bmatrix}Z_{11} \\ Z_{12}\end{bmatrix} = \Sigma_T^y,$$ while equation can be equivalently written as $$\label{eq:forM}
\begin{bmatrix}
I & 0\\
0 & I
\end{bmatrix}
=
\begin{bmatrix}
Z_{11}(M+P_{11})+Z_{12}P_{12} & Z_{11}P_{12}+Z_{12}P_{22}\\
Z_{21}(M+P_{11})+Z_{22}P_{21} & Z_{21}P_{12}+Z_{22}P_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$ which reduces to the system of equations $$\label{eq:sysZ}
\left\{
\begin{split}
&Z_{11}P_{12}+Z_{12}P_{22}=0\\
&Z_{21}P_{12}+Z_{22}P_{22}=I\\
&Z_{12} = Z_{21}'
\end{split}
\right.
\iff
\left\{
\begin{split}
&Z_{21}=-P_{22}^{-1}P_{21}Z_{11}\\
&Z_{12} = Z_{21}'\\
&Z_{22}=P_{22}^{-1}-Z_{21}P_{12}P_{22}^{-1}
\end{split}
\right.$$ Plugging $Z_{12}$, $Z_{21}$ and $Z_{22}$ into , we get $$\label{eq:quadZ11}
Z_{11}+Z_{11}\,A\,Z_{11} = \Sigma_T^y,$$ where $$A:=\begin{bmatrix}I & -P_{12}P_{22}^{-1}\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
K_{11} & K_{12}\\
K_{21} & K_{22}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}I \\ -P_{22}P_{21}\end{bmatrix}>0.$$ Equation is a quadratic equation with two solutions $$\label{eq:Z}
Z_{11}^{\pm} = A^{-\frac{1}{2}}\left[\pm\left(\frac{1}{4}I+A^\frac{1}{2}\Sigma_T^yA^\frac{1}{2}\right)^\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2}I\right]A^{-\frac{1}{2}}.$$ Clearly, $Z=X-Y'\Sigma_0^{-1}Y>0$ by Schur complement, which implies $Z_{11}>0$. This singles out the solution $Z_{11}^+$. We can now recover $Z$ from and then $X=Z+ZV'\Sigma_0VZ$ and $Y = -\Sigma_0VZ$. Finally, from , one can find the multiplier $M$: $$M = (Z^+_{11})^{-1}-P_{11}-(Z_{11}^+)^{-1}Z_{12}P_{12}.$$ The above results can be summarized as follows.
Let $Z_{11}^{+}$ be as in and $Z, X, Y$ be derived accordingly, then $(X, Y)$ solves Problem \[relentropyformul\]. Furthermore, the solution to Problem \[formalization\] coincides with the solution to Problem \[pro:steering\] with $\Sigma_T^x = X$.
Example {#examples}
=======
Consider controlling the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model of physical Brownian motion $$\label{eq:BMexu}
\begin{split}
dq^u(t) &= p^u(t)\\
dp^u(t) &= -\beta\,p^u(t)dt - Kdt + u(t)dt + dw(t)
\end{split}$$ corresponding to a given quadratic potential $V(q)=\frac{1}{2}q'Kq$ with $K$ symmetric, positive-definite, and $u(\cdot)$ is the control force. By setting $$x=\begin{pmatrix}
q\\p
\end{pmatrix},\quad
A=\begin{pmatrix}
0 & I\\
-K & -\beta I
\end{pmatrix},\quad
B=\begin{pmatrix}
0\\
I
\end{pmatrix},$$ model becomes $$\begin{aligned}
&dx^u(t) = A\,x^u(t) + B\,u(t) + B\,dw(t)\\
&x^u(0) = \xi \text{ a.s.}\end{aligned}$$ where $\xi$ is zero-mean Gaussian with $\Sigma_0^x=I/2$, and the pair $(A,B)$ is controllable. We consider a state dimension of $n=2$ and we assume for simplicity that the units are such that $K=I$ and $\beta=1$.
We would like to steer the Gaussian distribution of the momentum equal to a final distribution at time $T=1$ with $\Sigma_1^p=1/16$ minimizing the quadratic control energy under the controlled dynamics . In other words, we are prescribing only the final covariance matrix of $y(t)=C\,x(t)$ with $C=\left[0\,|\,I\right]$. Figure \[fig:phctrvv\] shows the trajectories of the state variables in the phase space (left) and the corresponding control efforts (right), i.e. the intersections of the phase plot with the slice planes $p$ and $q$ respectively.
![Realizations on the phase space (left) and relative control efforts (right). Control on the momentum.[]{data-label="fig:phctrvv"}](phsp_ctrvv)
Figure \[fig:xvsecvv\] highlights instead the trajectories of position (left) and momentum (right) with the corresponding confidence interval.
![Position’s trajectories (left) and momentum’s trajectories (right). Control on the momentum.[]{data-label="fig:xvsecvv"}](xvsecvv)
In all the figures, the transparent blue tube represent the “$3\sigma$” confidence interval, i.e. its intersection with the slice plane $t$ is given by $$\left\{ (q,p)\in{{\mathbb R}}^2\,\bigg|\,
\begin{bmatrix}
q & p
\end{bmatrix}
\Sigma_t^{-1}
\begin{bmatrix}
q\\p
\end{bmatrix}
\le 3^2
\right\}.$$The figures highlight the reduction of the variance of the momentum process as time increases to $T=1$.
[99]{} K. J. Åström, [*Introduction to Stochastic Control Theorey*]{}, Academic Press, 1970. Efstathios Bakolas, Finite-horizon covariance control for discrete-time stochastic linear systems subject to input constraints, [*Automatica*]{}, [**91**]{}, pp. 61-68, 2018. A. Beurling, An automorphism of product measures, [*Ann. Math.*]{} [**72**]{} (1960), 189-200. A. Blaquière, “Controllability of a [F]{}okker-[P]{}lanck equation, the [S]{}chr[ö]{}dinger system, and a related stochastic optimal control (revised version),” *Dynamics and Control*, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 235–253, 1992.
R. Brockett, “Notes on the control of the [L]{}iouville equation,” in *Control of Partial Differential Equations*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emSpringer, 2012, pp. 101–129.
Y. Chen, T.T. Georgiou and M. Pavon, “Optimal steering of a linear stochastic system to a final probability distribution, Part I”, [*IEEE Trans. Aut. Control*]{}, [**61**]{}, Issue 5, 1158-1169, 2016. Y. Chen, T.T. Georgiou and M. Pavon, “Optimal steering of a linear stochastic system to a final probability distribution, Part II”, [*IEEE Trans. Aut. Control*]{}, [**61**]{}, Issue 5, 1170-1180, 2016. Y. Chen, T.T. Georgiou and M. Pavon, “Fast cooling for a system of stochastic oscillators”, [*J. Math. Phys.*]{}, [**56**]{}, n.11, 113302, 2015. Y. Chen, T.T. Georgiou and M. Pavon, On the relation between optimal transport and Schrödinger bridges: A stochastic control viewpoint, [*J. Optim. Theory and Applic.*]{}, [**169**]{} (2), 671-691, 2016. Y. Chen, T.T. Georgiou and M. Pavon, Optimal transport over a linear dynamical system, [*IEEE Trans. Aut. Control*]{}, [**62**]{}, n. 5, 2137-2152, 2017. T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, [*[E]{}lements of [I]{}nformation [T]{}heory*]{}, Wiley, New York, 1991.
P. Dai Pra, A stochastic control approach to reciprocal diffusion processes, [*Appl. Math. and Optimiz.*]{}, [**23**]{} (1), 1991, 313-329.
P.Dai Pra and M.Pavon, On the Markov processes of Schroedinger, the Feynman-Kac formula and stochastic control, in [*Realization and Modeling in System Theory*]{} - Proc. 1989 MTNS Conf., M.A.Kaashoek, J.H. van Schuppen, A.C.M. Ran Eds., Birkäuser, Boston, 1990, 497- 504. R. Filliger, M.-O. Hongler, and L. Streit, “Connection between an exactly solvable stochastic optimal control problem and a nonlinear reaction-diffusion equation,” *Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications*, vol. 137, no. 3, pp. 497–505, 2008.
H. Föllmer, Random fields and diffusion processes, in: [*Ècole d’Ètè de Probabilitès de Saint-Flour XV-XVII*]{}, edited by P. L. Hennequin, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988, vol.1362,102-203.
R. Fortet, Résolution d’un système d’equations de M. Schrödinger, [*J. Math. Pure Appl.*]{} IX (1940), 83-105. M. Goldshtein and P. Tsiotras, Finite-horizon covariance control of linear time-varying systems, in [*IEEE Conference on Decision andControl*]{}, Melbourne, Australia, Dec. 12-15, 2017, pp. 3606-3611.
K. M. Grigoriadis and R. E. Skelton, Minimum-energy covariance controllers, [*Automatica*]{}, [**33**]{}, no. 4, pp. 569-578, 1997.
A. Halder and E. D. Wendel, Finite horizon linear quadratic Gaussian density regulator with Wasserstein terminal cost, in [*American Control Conference (ACC)*]{}, 2016. IEEE, 2016, pp. 7249-7254.
A. Hotz and R. E. Skelton, Covariance control theory, [*International Journal of Control*]{}, [**46**]{}, (1):13-32, 1987. B. Jamison, The Markov processes of Schrödinger, [*Z.Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie verw. Gebiete*]{} [**32**]{} (1975), 323-331.
C. Léonard, A survey of the Schroedinger problem and some of its connections with optimal transport, [*Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. A*]{}, 2014, [**34**]{} (4): 1533-1574. A. Lindquist and G. Picci, [*Linear Stochastic Systems: A Geometric Approach to Modeling, Estimation and Identification*]{}, Springer, 2015. T. Mikami, Monge’s problem with a quadratic cost by the zero-noise limit of h-path processes, [*Probab. Theory Relat. Fields*]{}, [**129**]{}, (2004), 245-260. T. Mikami and M. Thieullen, Duality theorem for the stochastic optimal control problem., [*Stoch. Proc. Appl.*]{}, 116, 1815-1835 (2006). T. Mikami and M. Thieullen, Optimal Transportation Problem by Stochastic Optimal Control, [*SIAM Journal of Control and Optimization*]{}, [**47**]{}, N. 3, 1127-1139 (2008). K. Okamoto and P. Tsiotras, Optimal Stochastic Vehicle Path Planning Using Covariance Steering, [*International Conference on Robotics and Automation*]{}, Montreal, Canada, May. 20?24, 2019.
M. Pavon and A. Wakolbinger, “On free energy, stochastic control, and [S]{}chr[ö]{}dinger processes,” in *Modeling, Estimation and Control of Systems with Uncertainty*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emSpringer, 1991, pp. 334–348.
M.Pavon, Stochastic control and non-Markovian Schrödinger processes,in [*Systems and Networks: Mathematical Theory and Applications*]{}, vol. II, U. Helmke, R.Mennichen and J.Saurer Eds., Mathematical Research vol.79, Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1994, 409-412.
I. S. Sanov, On the probability of large deviations of random magnitudes (in Russian), [*Mat. Sb. N. S.*]{}, [**42**]{} (84) (1957). Select. Transl. Math. Statist. Probab., 1, 213-244 (1961). E. Schrödinger, Über die Umkehrung der Naturgesetze, [*Sitzungsberichte der Preuss Akad. Wissen. Berlin, Phys. Math. Klasse*]{} (1931), 144-153.
E. Schrödinger, Sur la théorie relativiste de l’électron et l’interpretation de la mécanique quantique, [*Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré*]{} [**2**]{}, 269 (1932). R. Sinkhorn, A relationship between arbitrary positive matrices and doubly stochastic matrices, [*Ann. Math. Statist.*]{}, [**35**]{} (1964), 876-879. C. Villani, [*Topics in optimal transportation*]{}, AMS, 2003, vol. 58.
A. Wakolbinger, Schrödinger Bridges from 1931 to 1991, in: E. Caba$\tilde{n}$a et al. (eds) , [*Proc. of the 4th Latin American Congress in Probability and Mathematical Statistics*]{}, Mexico City 1990, Contribuciones en probabilidad y estadistica matematica 3 (1992) , 61-79.
[^1]: D. Alpago is with the Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione, Università di Padova, 35131 Padova, Italy; [[email protected]]{}
[^2]: Y. Chen is with the School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332;[[email protected]]{}
[^3]: T.T. Georgiou is with the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697; [[email protected]]{}
[^4]: M. Pavon is with the Dipartimento di Matematica “Tullio Levi-Civita", Università di Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy; [[email protected]]{}
[^5]: Supported in part by the NSF under grants 1509387, 1901599, the AFOSR under grants FA9550-15-1-0045 and FA9550-17-1-0435, and by the University of Padova Research Project CPDA 140897.
[^6]: See [@P94] for a considerably simpler “half-bridge" problem where only the final distribution is prescribed.
[^7]: $u(t)$ only depends on $t$ and on $\{x^u(s); 0\le s\le t\}$ for each $t\in [0,T]$.
[^8]: The case where only $\Sigma^y_0$ and $\Sigma^y_T$ are prescribed can be treated in a similar fashion by optimizing also with respect to $\Sigma_0^x$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Recently, there has been much interest in deep learning techniques to do image compression and there have been claims that several of these produce better results than engineered compression schemes (such as JPEG, JPEG2000 or BPG). A standard way of comparing image compression schemes today is to use perceptual similarity metrics such as PSNR or MS-SSIM (multi-scale structural similarity). This has led to some deep learning techniques which directly optimize for MS-SSIM by choosing it as a loss function. While this leads to a higher MS-SSIM for such techniques, we demonstrate using user studies that the resulting improvement may be misleading. Deep learning techniques for image compression with a higher MS-SSIM may actually be perceptually worse than engineered compression schemes with a lower MS-SSIM.'
author:
- |
Yash Patel^2^, Srikar Appalaraju^1^, R. Manmatha^1^\
^1^Amazon\
^2^Center for Machine Perception, Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech Republic\
[[email protected], (srikara,manmatha)@amazon.com]{}
bibliography:
- 'example\_paper.bib'
title: Human Perceptual Evaluations for Image Compression
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Images have a lot of redundancy. Compression takes advantage of this redundancy to reduce image sizes. The value of compression is that it reduces the storage space required for images and the network bandwidth for transmitting them. It can also be used to reduce network latency when transmitting images. This can be significant since large numbers of photographs are transmitted and stored every day. For example, it is reported that users upload 300 million photographs to Facebook every day and Snapchat users share about 527,000 images per minute [@forbes]. Compression may be lossless (e.g. formats such as PNG [@boutell1997png]) or lossy (e.g. JPEG [@wallace1992jpeg], JPEG2000 [@skodras2001jpeg] or BPG [@bpg]). Lossless compression implies that the original image can be perfectly reconstructed. Lossy compression on the other hand trades-off reconstruction error for improved compression (reduced file sizes). Traditionally, compression schemes have been engineered. For example formats such as JPEG [@wallace1992jpeg], JPEG2000 [@skodras2001jpeg] or BPG [@bpg] do not learn from the data.
More recently, deep learned compression schemes [@balle2016end; @balle2018variational; @mentzer2018conditional; @rippel2017real; @lee2018context] have been proposed which can be trained using data. The typical deep learned compression scheme consists of an encoder-decoder architecture with a loss function. The loss function usually optimizes for a distortion loss while at the same time trying to minimize the bit rate aka rate-distortion trade-off [@shannon1948mathematical]. The encoder maps the image into an embedding which is a much more compact representation. An entropy coder takes this embedding as input, quantizes it and converts it to a bitstream which is much more compact. To get back the image, entropy coding is reversed to produce an embedding which is then fed into a decoder to give a reconstructed approximate image as output (this is lossy compression). A variety of deep learning techniques have been proposed using the above basic framework.
Compression techniques are evaluated using measures such as structural similarity (SSIM) or PSNR between the original and reconstructed images. More recently, the trend is to evaluate compression using multiscale structure similarity (MS-SSIM) [@wang2003multiscale] sample compression works [@balle2016end; @balle2018variational; @mentzer2018conditional; @rippel2017real; @lee2018context]. PSNR and MS-SSIM were originally formulated as perceptual metrics but don’t seem to completely capture certain type of distortions created by learned compression methods.
{width="\textwidth"}
While originally formulated as a perceptual loss metric, a common trend has been to use MS-SSIM directly as a loss function for deep learning techniques and optimize for this measure [@mentzer2018conditional; @rippel2017real; @johnston2017improved]. Although, some methods [@balle2018variational; @lee2018context] train separate models using MS-SSIM and MSE (mean-squared-error) loss functions. While the models trained for MSE get higher PSNR (compared to ones trained for MS-SSIM), they have lower MS-SSIM scores. A different ranking of methods may be produced by directly optimizing on MS-SSIM. Several claims have been made that such approaches are better compared to engineered compression formats due to their higher MS-SSIM. We show that when we look at human perceptual judgments, PSNR and MS-SSIM scores may be misleading and may lead to the wrong conclusions about which technique is better. MS-SSIM cannot differentiate between a (locally) blurry patch and a patch which isn’t blurry so this could be one reason for this difference. However, it is clear by looking at the images and user judgments that the problems with these metrics go beyond this issue.
In this paper we conduct extensive human study on perceptual similarity for image compression techniques. Using MTurk platform, we make pairwise comparisons for the following methods: JPEG-2000 [@skodras2001jpeg], BPG [@bpg], Mentzer [@mentzer2018conditional] and Ballé [@balle2016end]. We demonstrate that learning based compression methods [@mentzer2018conditional; @balle2016end] despite having higher MS-SSIM scores are visually worse, see Figure \[fig:kodak\_samples\] for an example. We pick [@mentzer2018conditional; @balle2016end] as two methods for evaluation since their implementations are publicly available unlike a number of other methods. Refer to the original papers Mentzer [@mentzer2018conditional] and Ballé [@balle2016end] for detailed method descriptions.
Human Evaluation Setup {#sec:human_eval}
======================
We conduct human perceptual similarity study on Amazon MTurk by showing an evaluator original image along with two reconstructed images from two compression techniques at a time. They were asked to choose an image which is more similar to the original. The evaluators are shown entire images along with a synchronized (on all three) magnifying glass to observe finer details. This gives them a global context of the whole image and at the same time provides a quick way to access local regions. No time limit was placed for this human experiment. An instance from this evaluation page is shown in Figure \[fig:hit\_example\].
![Sample instance from MTurk HIT. Entire images are shown at the top with original image in the middle and image from one method on the left and other on the right. The bottom images are magnified version of a small window which can be controlled by moving the cursor.[]{data-label="fig:hit_example"}](hit_example.png){width="45.00000%"}
The evaluators are forced to choose the compressed image which is closer to the original (2AFC). 2AFC is a known way of performing perceptual similarity evaluation and has been used by [@sajjadi2017enhancenet] for evaluating super-resolution techniques. In this setup, we compare two engineered (JPEG-2000 [@skodras2001jpeg], BPG [@bpg]) and two learning based (Mentzer [@mentzer2018conditional], Ballé [@balle2016end]) compression techniques by choosing all possible combinations (six pairs in total). Further, we do this at four different compression levels - i.e. bits-per-pixel (bpp) values: $0.23, 0.37, 0.67, 1.0$. The study is conducted on four standard datasets: Kodak [@kodak], Urban100 [@huang2015single], Set14 [@zeyde2010single] and Set5 [@bevilacqua2012low].
With this setup, we have a total of $3432$ pairs ($6$ pairs for four methods, $4$ bpp values and $143$ images in total). For each such pair, we obtain $5$ evaluations resulting in a total of $17160$ HITs.
{width="85.00000%"}
{width="\textwidth"}
{width="85.00000%"}
{width="85.00000%"}
{width="85.00000%"}
Results {#sec:results}
=======
By varying the hyper-parameters such as the number of channels in the bottleneck, weight for distortion loss (target bit-rate for [@mentzer2018conditional]), we reproduce the models for [@mentzer2018conditional; @balle2016end] at different bpp’s by training on the ImageNet dataset [@russakovsky2015imagenet]. For each test dataset, we compress all the images using a model and take an average of bpp, MS-SSIM and PSNR across the images within the dataset. We do the same for all the models which gives us multiple points on the MS-SSIM vs bpp and PSNR vs bpp curves. We interpolate the values between two such points and we do not extrapolate the values outside the bpp range [^1].
For human evaluation, based on the setup explained in Section \[sec:human\_eval\], for each image and a given bpp value we have $5$ pair-wise votes in the form of method-A vs method-B. Since we have all possible pairs for four methods under consideration, we aggregate these votes and obtain the method which does best for the given image (at a particular bpp value) based on maximum votes. In a rare case of a tie between two or more methods (happens for less than $2\%$ of cases), we assign a score of $0.5$ (two-method tie) or $0.33$ (three-method tie) to each tying methods. In the Figures \[fig:kodak\_plots\], \[fig:urban100\_plots\], \[fig:set14\_plots\] and \[fig:set5\_plots\], we show the number of images (y-axis) for which a method performs best.
The comparisons for Kodak [@kodak] are shown in Figure \[fig:kodak\_plots\]. We observe that Mentzer [@mentzer2018conditional] have the highest MS-SSIM score for all bpp values. Ballé [@balle2016end] obtains higher MS-SSIM score compared to BPG and JPEG-2000 after $0.3$ bpp, which is followed by BPG and JPEG-2000 has the lowest MS-SSIM scores. Contrary to the MS-SSIM scores, human evaluation shows that BPG performs significantly better than all the other methods, including [@mentzer2018conditional] which has substantially higher MS-SSIM. In Figure \[fig:human\_eval\_rm\_bpg\] we show the human study plots when BPG is excluded from the comparison. In this case, Mentzer [@mentzer2018conditional] does best at lower bpp and JPEG-2000 does best at higher bpp. This observation contradicts the PSNR scores which are higher for JPEG-2000. Thereby for learned approaches, MS-SIM is still a better loss function than PSNR.
Similarly comparisons for other datasets are made in: Figure. \[fig:urban100\_plots\] for Urban100 [@huang2015single], \[fig:set14\_plots\] for Set14 [@zeyde2010single] and Figure \[fig:set5\_plots\] for Set5 [@bevilacqua2012low].
Discussion
==========
Deep learning techniques directly optimize metrics such as MS-SSIM or MSE (mean-squared-error) and hence are able to get high numbers on these metrics. The experiments above show that there is no direct correlation between the quality of output from a given compression technique and metrics such as PSNR or MS-SSIM. While we picked two techniques this seems to be a more general problem for deep learned image compression techniques. In the absence of a better metric, papers should provide an implementation or at least images on standard datasets so that researchers may compare their new technique against an existing one. Having a better perceptual metric close to human visual perception would be ideal. Note that similar observations have been drawn in [@2019arXiv190708310P].
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
We would like to thank Joel Chan and Peter Hallinan for helping us in setting up the human evaluations.
[^1]: in the case of [@balle2016end] we used an MS-SSIM loss instead of the MSE loss in the original paper but this does not change the general conclusions of the paper
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We address a question of Cavenagh and Wanless asking: which finite abelian groups arise as the canonical group of a spherical latin bitrade? We prove the existence of an infinite family of finite abelian groups that do not arise as canonical groups of spherical latin bitrades. Using a connection between abelian sandpile groups of digraphs underlying directed Eulerian spherical embeddings, we go on to provide several, general, families of finite abelian groups that do arise as canonical groups. These families include:
- any abelian group in which each component of the Smith Normal Form has composite order;
- any abelian group with Smith Normal Form $\mathbb{Z}^{n}_p\oplus\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^k\mathbb{Z}_{pa_i}\right)$, where $1\leq k$, $2\leq a_1,a_2,\ldots, a_k,p$ and $n\leq 1+2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i - 1)$; and
- with one exception and three potential exceptions any abelian group of rank two.
author:
- 'Kyle Bonetta-Martin[^1] and Thomas A. McCourt'
date: |
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Plymouth University, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA.\
Keywords: Spherical latin bitrade; canonical group; abelian sand-pile group.\
Mathematics Subject Classification: 05C10, 05C25, 05B15, 05C20.
title: On which groups can arise as the canonical group of a spherical latin bitrade
---
Introduction
============
Given two latin squares of the same order a latin trade describes the differences between them. Early motivation [@DraKep1] for their study arose from considering the differences between the operation tables of a finite group and a latin square of the same order, that is: what is the ‘distance’ between a group and a latin square? The study of the topological and geometric properties of latin trades has lead to significant progress towards understanding such differences, see for example [@CavWan; @DraHamKal; @BlackburnTMcC; @TMcC; @Szabados], also see [@Cav-surv] for a survey of earlier results.
Given a latin trade it may be the case that the constituent partial latin squares are not ‘contained’ (do not embed) in any group operation table, [@CavWan]. Hence, it is desirable to identify those that are. Connected latin bitrades of maximum size, equivalently spherical latin bitrades provide a family of latin bitrades for which the constituent partial latin squares do embed. We are interested in the ‘minimal group’ that such constituent partial latin squares embed in, and indeed what groups arise as such minimal groups.
Spherical latin bitrades
------------------------
A *partial latin square* $P$ is an $\ell\times m$ array, in which the cells either contain an element of a set $S$ of symbols or are empty, such that each row and each column contains each of the symbols of $S$ at most once. Without loss of generality we let $S=\{s_1,s_2,\ldots,s_n\}$ and index the rows and columns by the sets $R=\{r_1,r_2,\ldots,r_\ell\}$ and $C=\{c_1,c_2,\ldots,c_m\}$ respectively (we may assume that each symbol in $S$ occurs at least once in the array and the rows of $R$ and columns of $C$ are all nonempty). As such a partial latin square $P$ can be considered to be a subset of $R\times C\times S$ such that if $(r_1,c_1,s_1)$ and $(r_2,c_2,s_2)$ are distinct triples in $P$, then at most one of $r_1=r_2$, $c_1=c_2$ and $s_1=s_2$ holds.
A *latin bitrade* is an ordered pair, $(W,B)$ say, of non-empty partial latin squares such that for each triple $(r_i,c_j,s_k)\in W$ (respectively $B$) there exists unique $r_{i'}\neq r_i$, $c_{j'}\neq c_j$ and $s_{k'}\neq s_k$ such that $$\big\{(r_{i,'}c_j,s_k),(r_i,c_{j'},s_k),(r_i,c_j,s_{k'})\big\}\subset B\text{ (respectively $W$)}.$$ Note that $(W,B)$ is a latin bitrade if and only if $(B,W)$ is also a latin bitrade. The *size* of such a latin bitrade is $|W|$ (equivalently $|B|$). A latin bitrade $(W,B)$ for which there does not exist any latin bitrade $(W',B')$ such that $W'\subsetneq W$ and $B'\subsetneq B$ is said to be *connected*.
Let $(W,B)$ be a latin bitrade; for each row, $r$ say, of $(W,B)$ a permutation $\rho_r$ of the symbols in row $r$ can be defined by $\rho_r(s)=s'$ if and only if $(r,c,s)\in W$ and $(r,c,s')\in B$ for some $c$ in $C$. A row $r$ for which $\rho_r$ is comprised of a single cycle is said to be *separated*. Similar definitions hold for separated columns and separated symbols. A latin bitrade in which each row, each column and each symbol is separated is called a *separated latin bitrade*. Suppose that $(W,B)$ is a latin bitrade which is not separated. Then replacing each non-separated row $x$ (respectively column, symbol) by new rows (respectively columns, symbol) for each of the cycles in $\rho_x$ we obtain a separated latin bitrade. See the survey paper [@Cav-surv] for further details and discussion.
A connected latin bitrade $(W,B)$ can be used to construct a face two-coloured triangulation ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ of a pseudo-surface $\Sigma$ in which the vertex set is $R\sqcup C\sqcup S$ and there is an edge between a pair of vertices if and only if the vertices occur together in a triple of $W$ (equivalently a triple of $B$). For each triple $(r,c,s)\in W$ a white triangular face with vertices $r,c,s$ is constructed and for each $(r',c',s')\in B$ a black triangular face with vertices $r',c',s'$ is constructed. As $(W,B)$ is a bitrade the graph underlying ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ is simple, and as $(W,B)$ is connected ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ is also connected. The pseudo-surface $\Sigma$ is a true surface if the rotation at each vertex is a full rotation; this occurs if and only if $(W,B)$ is separated (in which case each row, column or symbol permutation corresponds to the rotation at the corresponding vertex). If $\Sigma$ is not a surface, then replacing each pinch point of multiplicity $t$ with a $t$ vertices, one on each of the sheets at the pinch point, corresponds to the above construction taking a non-separated bitrade to a separated one. As the triangulation ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ is face two-coloured and the underlying graph is vertex three-coloured it follows, see the proof of Theorem 10.1 in [@GrannellGriggs], that ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ is orientable.
The *genus* of a separated connected latin bitrade is the genus of the surface obtained in the above manner; in particular separated connected latin bitrades of genus zero are referred to as *spherical latin bitrades*. Note that for any connected latin bitrade of size $\ell$ we have that $|R|+|C|+|S|\leq \ell+2$, with equality if and only if the bitrade is a spherical latin bitrade, see [@BlackburnTMcC]. That is, spherical latin bitrades are the connected latin bitrades of minimal size (with respect to the sum of the number of rows, columns and symbols).
In [@CavLis] Cavenagh and Lisoněk prove the following result.
\[thm:CavLis\] Spherical latin bitrades are equivalent to spherical Eulerian triangulations whose underlying graphs are simple.
Note that an Eulerian graph that has an embedding in the sphere is necessarily vertex three-colourable [@Hea]. It is not hard to generalise Theorem \[thm:CavLis\] to surfaces of higher genus, however as face two-coloured triangulations of surfaces of higher genus may not be vertex three-colourable, an additional condition is required.
Separated connected latin bitrades of genus $g$ are equivalent to vertex three-colourable Eulerian triangulations of genus $g$ whose underlying graphs are simple.
Embeddings of latin bitrades into abelian groups
------------------------------------------------
Two partial latin squares are said to be *isotopic* if they are equal up to a relabelling of their sets of rows, columns and symbols. A partial latin square $P$, with row set $R$, column set $C$ and symbol set $S$, is said to *embed in an abelian group $\Gamma$* if there exist injective maps $\phi_1:R\rightarrow \Gamma$, $\phi_2:C\rightarrow \Gamma$ and $\phi_3:S\rightarrow \Gamma$ such that $\phi_1(r)+\phi_2(c)=\phi_3(s)$ for all $(r,c,s)\in P$. In other words $P$ is isotopic to a partial latin square contained in the operation table of $\Gamma$. See Figure \[fig:Kyle-example\] for an example.
By defining $\phi|_R=\phi_1$, $\phi|_C=\phi_2$, and $\phi|_S=-\phi_3$ it follows, see [@BlackburnTMcC], that $P$ embeds in an abelian group $\Gamma$ if and only if there exists a function $\phi:R\sqcup C\sqcup S\rightarrow \Gamma$ that is injective when restricted to each of $R$, $C$ and $S$ and is such that $\phi(r)+\phi(c)+\phi(s)=0$ for all $(r,c,s)\in P$. The map $\phi$ is called an *embedding* of $P$. An abelian group $\Gamma$ is said to be a *minimal abelian representation* of a partial latin square $P$ if $P$ embeds in $\Gamma$ and the image of $\phi$ generates $\Gamma$ for all embeddings $\phi$ of $P$ in $\Gamma$.
[ccc]{}
----- ----- -----
$a$ $b$ $c$
$c$ $a$
$a$ $b$
----- ----- -----
&$\qquad$ &
$+$ $0$ $1$ $2$ $3$
----- ----- -------------- -------------- --------------
$0$ $0$ $\mathbf{1}$ $\mathbf{2}$ $\mathbf{3}$
$1$ $1$ $2$ $3$ $0$
$2$ $2$ $\mathbf{3}$ $0$ $\mathbf{1}$
$3$ $3$ $0$ $\mathbf{1}$ $\mathbf{2}$
Two partial latin squares are said to be *conjugate* if they are equal up to permutations of the roles of rows, columns and symbols. Two partial latin squares, say $P$ and $Q$, for which a partial latin square isotopic to $P$ is conjugate to a partial latin square isotopic to $Q$ are said to be in the same *main class*. Note that if a partial latin square $P$ has an embedding in an abelian group $\Gamma$, every partial latin square in the same main class as $P$ also has an embedding in $\Gamma$.
As we are interested in embeddings (into abelian groups) of partial latin squares (and given that if a partial latin square $P$ embeds in an abelian group $\Gamma$, so does any partial latin square isotopic to $P$) from here on we will assume that the row, column and symbol sets of a partial latin square are pairwise disjoint.
In [@CavDra] Cavenagh and Drápal asked the following questions “Can the individual partial latin squares of a connected separated latin bitrade be embedded into the operation table of an abelian group? If this is not true in general is it true for spherical latin bitrades?”. The case of spherical latin bitrades was solved by Cavenagh and Wanless in [@CavWan] and independently by Drápal, Hämäläinen and Kala in [@DraHamKal]. Cavenagh and Wanless [@CavWan] also showed that separated connected latin bitrades of higher genus exist for which the constituent partial latin squares do not embed in any group. Hence our focus on spherical latin bitrades.
Let $P$ be a partial latin square with row set $R$, column set $C$ and symbol set $S$. Let $V=R\cup C\cup S$ and define an abelian group ${\mathcal{A}}_P$ with generating set $V$ subject to the relations $\{r+c+s=0:(r,c,s)\in P\}$. Note that, if $P$ and $Q$ are two partial latin squares in the same main class, then ${\mathcal{A}}_P\cong {\mathcal{A}}_Q$. Also, note that two partial latin squares, $P$ and $Q$, from different main classes may also satisfy ${\mathcal{A}}_P\cong {\mathcal{A}}_Q$ (see Figure 2 in [@TMcC]).
The group ${\mathcal{A}}_P$ has the ‘universal’ property that any minimal abelian representation of $P$ is a quotient of ${\mathcal{A}}_P$, [@DraKep], also see [@BlackburnTMcC]. Moreover ${\mathcal{A}}_P$ is of the form ${\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathcal{C}}_P$, again see [@BlackburnTMcC]. Drápal et al [@DraHamKal] and Cavenagh and Wanless [@CavWan] proved that ${\mathcal{C}}_W$ is finite when $(W,B)$ is a spherical latin bitrade. So in this case ${\mathcal{C}}_W$ is the torsion subgroup of ${\mathcal{A}}_W$. Cavenagh and Wanless conjectured that ${\mathcal{C}}_W\cong {\mathcal{C}}_B$ (and hence ${\mathcal{A}}_W\cong {\mathcal{A}}_B$), [@CavWan], also see [@Kou; @BCC]. This is indeed the case.
\[thm:BlackburnTMcC\] Let $(W,B)$ be a spherical latin bitrade, then ${\mathcal{A}}_W\cong{\mathcal{A}}_B\cong{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathcal{C}}$, where ${\mathcal{C}}$ is finite.
The group ${\mathcal{C}}$ in Theorem \[thm:BlackburnTMcC\] is referred to as the *canonical group* of the spherical latin bitrade (see [@GruWan; @TMcC]).
In [@CavWan] Cavenagh and Wanless asked the following question.
\[ques:main\] Which abelian groups arise as the canonical group of a spherical latin bitrade?[^2]
It is this question that we address in this paper. For any cyclic group ${\mathbb{Z}}_n$ the existence of spherical latin bitrades whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_n$ was established by Cavenagh and Wanless in [@CavWan]. They also noted that no spherical latin bitrade exists whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_2\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_2$.
Given a face 2-coloured triangulation of the sphere in which the underlying graph is not necessarily simple and leaving the definitions of ${\mathcal{A}}_W$ and ${\mathcal{A}}_B$ unchanged it is still the case that ${\mathcal{A}}_W\cong{\mathcal{A}}_B\cong{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathcal{C}}$ where ${\mathcal{C}}$ is finite [@BlackburnTMcC]. In [@TMcC] the second author showed that given any finite abelian group $\Gamma$ there exists a face 2-coloured triangulation of the sphere whose canonical group is isomorphic to $\Gamma$. However, unless $\Gamma$ is a cyclic group the triangulations constructed have underlying graphs that are not simple.
In Section \[sec:exist\] we prove the existence of several, general, infinite families of abelian groups that arise as canonical groups of spherical latin bitrades. Before doing so, we first prove that there exist infinitely many abelian groups that do not arise as the canonical group of any spherical latin bitrade.
\[thm:non-existence\] There does not exist a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_2^k$ for any $k\geq 2$.
In the following we will make repeated use of the fact that for $u,v,w,x,y,z\in {\mathbb{Z}}_2^k$, if $u+w=y$, $v+w=z$ and $v+x=y$, then $u+x=z$.
Let $k\geq 2$ and suppose that $(W,B)$ is a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_2^k$. So, by Theorem \[thm:BlackburnTMcC\], both $W$ and $B$ embed in ${\mathbb{Z}}^k_2$.
Recall that we may assume that the row, column and symbol sets of $W$ (and of $B$) are pairwise disjoint; denote them, respectively, by $R=\{r_1,r_2,\ldots, r_\ell\}$, $C=\{c_1,c_2,\ldots, c_m\}$ and $S=\{s_1,s_2,\ldots, s_n\}$. Let ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ be the related triangulation and $G$ be the underlying graph of this triangulation. As ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ has a proper face 2-colouring, $G$ is Eulerian, and, as $(W,B)$ is a latin bitrade, the minimum degree of $G$ is at least four. Moreover, ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ is a triangulation of the sphere, so, by Euler’s formula, $G$ contains at least six vertices of degree four.
As spherical latin bitrades in the same main class all have isomporphic canonical groups, without loss of generality, we may assume that the degree of $r_1$ is four, and $(r_1,c_1,s_1),(r_1,c_2,s_2)\in B$ and $(r_1,c_1,s_2), (r_1,c_2,s_1)\in W$ where $c_1\neq c_2$ and $s_1\neq s_2$. Hence, as $(W,B)$ is a latin bitrade, there exist $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\in R\setminus\{r_1\}$ such that $(x_1,c_2,s_1),(x_3,c_1,s_2)\in B$ and $(x_2,c_1,s_1),(x_4,c_2,s_2)\in W$ (see Figure \[fig:CaseC\] for an illustration of the corresponding faces).
As $W$ embeds in ${\mathbb{Z}}_2^k$, $x_2=x_4$ and, as $B$ embeds in ${\mathbb{Z}}_2^k$, $x_1=x_3$. Suppose that $x_1=x_2$. Let $$W'=\{(r_1,c_1,s_2),(r_1,c_2,s_1),(x_1,c_1,s_1),(x_1,c_2,s_2)\}$$ and $$B'=\{(r_1,c_1,s_1),(r_1,c_2,s_2),(x_1,c_1,s_2),(x_1,c_2,s_1)\}.$$ Then $(W',B')$ is a spherical latin bitrade such that $W'\subseteq W$ and $B'\subseteq B$. As $(W,B)$ is connected, it must be the case that $W'=W$ and $B'=B$. However, the canonical group of $(W',B')$ is ${\mathbb{Z}}_2$, a contradiction. So $x_1\neq x_2$; in which case $G$ contains a subgraph $H=(V,E)$ where $V=\{r_1,x_1,x_2,c_1,s_1,s_2\}$ and $E=\{r_1c_1,r_1s_1,r_1s_2, x_1c_1,x_1s_1,x_1s_2, x_2c_1,x_2s_1,x_2s_2\}$. However, $H$ is isomorphic to $K_{3,3}$; which contradicts ${\mathcal{G}}_{W,B}$ being a spherical embedding.
Existence results {#sec:exist}
=================
Directed Eulerian spherical embeddings
--------------------------------------
Let $D$ be a, not necessarily simple, digraph of order $n$ with vertex set $V(D)=\{v_1,v_2,\ldots v_n\}$. The *adjacency matrix* $A=[a_{ij}]$ of $D$ is the $n\times n$ matrix where entry $a_{ij}$ is the number of arcs from vertex $v_i$ to vertex $v_j$. The *asymmetric Laplacian* of $D$ is the $n\times n$ matrix $L(D)=B-A$ where $B$ is the diagonal matrix in which entry $b_{ii}$ is the out-degree of vertex $v_{i}$. The digraph $D$ is said to be *Eulerian* if, for each $v\in V(D)$, the out-degree at $v$ equals the in-degree at $v$. Hence, in an Eulerian digraph we will simply refer to the degree of a vertex $v$, i.e. $\deg v$.
Let $D$ be a connected Eulerian digraph of order $n$ with vertex set $V(D)=\{v_1,v_2,\ldots v_n\}$. Fix an $i$, where $1\leq i\leq n$ and define $L'(D,i)$ to be the matrix obtained by removing row and column $i$ from $L(D)$. As $D$ is connected and Eulerian, the group ${\mathbb{Z}}^{n-1}/L'(D,i){\mathbb{Z}}^{n-1}$ is invariant of the choice of $i$, see [@HolLevMesPerProWil Lemma 4.12]. Hence, the *abelian sandpile group* of the connected Eulerian digraph $D$ can be defined to be the group ${\mathcal{S}}(D)=\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}/\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}L'(D,n)$; moreover ${\mathcal{S}}(D)\cong\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}/\mathbb{Z}^{n-1}L'(D,i)$, for any $1\leq i\leq n$.
Consider an embedding ${\mathcal{D}}$ of a connected Eulerian digraph $D$ in an orientable surface $S$. If each face of the embedding corresponds to a directed cycle in $D$, equivalently the rotation at each vertex alternates between incoming and outgoing arcs, then the embedding is said to be a *directed Eulerian embedding*, see [@BonConMorMcK; @BonHarSir]. If the embedding is in the sphere we call it a *directed Eulerian spherical embedding*.
Suppose that ${\mathcal{G}}$ is a face two-coloured triangulation of the sphere. By [@Hea], the underlying digraph of ${\mathcal{G}}$ has a vertex three-colouring with colour classes $R$, $C$ and $S$. Tutte [@Tutte] described a construction, from ${\mathcal{G}}$, of directed Eulerian spherical embeddings $D_I({\mathcal{G}})=D_I$ with vertex set $I$, where $I\in\{R,C,S\}$. We give a description of the construction from $\cite{TMcC}$.
Let $\{I,I_1,I_2\}=\{R,C,S\}$. Consider a vertex $v_i\in I$. Then $v_i$ has even degree, say $d$, the rotation at $i$ is $(u_1,v_1,u_2,v_2,\ldots, u_{d/2},v_{d/2}),$ where, without loss of generality, $u_j\in I_1$ and $v_j\in I_2$ for all $1\leq j\leq d/2$ and the edge $e_j$ between $u_j$ and $v_j$ in the rotation is contained in a black face. Then in $D_I$ there are $d/2$ outgoing arcs from vertex $v_i$, say $a_j$, $1\leq j\leq d/2$, one for each black face, and the terminal vertex for arc $a_j$ is the vertex in $I$ contained in the white face containing edge $e_j$. Clearly, $D_I$ inherits a spherical embedding from ${\mathcal{G}}$ in which the arc rotation at each vertex alternates between incoming and outgoing arcs, so $D_I$ has a directed Eulerian spherical embedding. As the sphere is connected the graph underlying $D_I$ is connected. Note that given any of $D_R$, $D_C$ or $D_S$ the original face two-coloured triangulation can be obtained by reversing the above construction:
\[lem:gobackwards\] Given a directed Eulerian spherical embedding $D$, there exists a face $2$-coloured spherical triangulation ${\mathcal{G}}$ with a vertex $3$-colouring given by the vertex sets $R$, $C$ and $S$, such that for some $I\in\{R,C,S\}$, $D_I({\mathcal{G}})\cong D.$
Tutte’s Trinity Theorem [@Tutte] states that $|{\mathcal{S}}(D_R)|=|{\mathcal{S}}(D_C)|=|{\mathcal{S}}(D_S)|$. For a spherical latin bitrade $(W,B)$ with corresponding face two-coloured triangulation ${\mathcal{G}}$, this result was strengthened implicitly in [@BlackburnTMcC] and explicitly in [@TMcC] to ${\mathcal{S}}(D_R)\cong{\mathcal{S}}(D_C)\cong{\mathcal{S}}(D_S)\cong {\mathcal{A}}_W\cong{\mathcal{A}}_B$.
Given an arbitrary directed Eulerian spherical embeddings applying the above construction in reverse yields a face two-coloured triangulation. However, the underlying graph is not necessarily simple. In order to make use of the above equivalences (between sandpile groups and canonical groups of spherical latin squares) we make use of the following result.
\[prop:simple\] Suppose that ${\mathcal{D}}$ is a directed Eulerian spherical embedding with underlying digraph $D$. Further suppose that $D$ is connected, has no loops, no cut vertices and its underling graph has no 2-edge-cuts. Then there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathcal{S}}(D)$.
Hence, in order to construct a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group $\Gamma$ it suffices to find a directed Eulerian spherical embedding satisfying the connectivity conditions of Proposition \[prop:simple\] whose abelian sandpile group is isomorphic to $\Gamma$.
Arbitrary rank
--------------
In this section we will construct families of canonical groups that have arbitrary rank. We will make repeated use of the following, elementary lemma.
\[cl:prime+comps\] Let $2\leq p,a$ and $0\leq x,y,\ell$. Further let $r=p(x+1)+a-x-1$, $s=p(y+1)+a-y-1$ and $t_{i,j}\in{\mathbb{Z}}$, for $1\leq i\leq m$ and $1 \leq j \leq \ell$. Then the matrix
reduces (under operations invertible over ${\mathbb{Z}}$) to $$$$
For $1\leq i\leq x$ and $1\leq j\leq y$ add Row $2+i$ and Row $2+x+j$ to Row $x+y+3$ of $L$. Subsequently, for $1\leq i\leq x$, add Column $2+i$ to Column $2$ and, for $1\leq j\leq y$, Column $2+x+j$ to Column $3+x+y$. Next add Column $2$ to Column $1$.
Now add Column $1$ to Column $3+x+y$ and $p-1$ copies of Column $1$ to Column $2$. Row $1$ can now be used to clear all non-zeros from Column $1$. Once this is completed it is easy to see the that the remaining non-zeros in Column $2$ can also be cleared.
The proof of Lemma \[lem:composites\] is essentially a special case of the proof of Theorem \[thm:primes\_and\_composites\], however, to aid the reader, we detail this simpler case before proving the general result.
\[lem:composites\] Let $1\leq k$ and let $2\leq m,a_1,a_2, \ldots, a_k$. Then there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to $\bigoplus_{i=1}^k {\mathbb{Z}}_{m a_i}.$
We begin by defining a digraph $D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ with vertex set $\{\alpha_0, \alpha_1, \alpha_2,\ldots, \alpha_{k},\break\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\ldots, \gamma_k\}$ and
- for each $1\leq i\leq k$:
- $m-1$ arcs from $\alpha_i$ to $\gamma_i$ and $m-1$ arcs from $\gamma_i$ to $\alpha_i$;
- $a_i-1$ arcs from $\alpha_{i-1}$ to $\gamma_i$ and $a_i-1$ arcs from $\gamma_i$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$;
- an arc from $\alpha_{i}$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$;
- for each $1\leq i\leq k -1$: an arc from $\gamma_{i}$ to $\gamma_{i+1}$; and
- an additional arc from $\alpha_{0}$ to $\gamma_1$ and an additional arc from $\gamma_k$ to $\alpha_k$.
The digraph $D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ has a directed Eulerian spherical embedding and satisfies the connectivity conditions of Proposition \[prop:simple\], as can be seen from Figure \[fig:Dma\_embedding\] (in this figure $t$ arcs from $u$ to $v$ alternating with $t$ arcs from $v$ to $u$ are represented by a bidirectional edge labelled $t$). Hence, there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k})$.
(a0) at (0.5,1); (a1) at (2,0); (a2) at (4,0); (a3) at (6,0); (ak2) at (8.5,0); (ak1) at (10.5,0); (ak) at (12.5,0);
(c1) at (2,2); (c2) at (4,2); (c3) at (6,2); (ck2) at (8.5,2); (ck1) at (10.5,2); (ck) at (12.5,2);
(a0) – (c1); (a1) – (c2); (a2) – (c3); (ak2) – (ck1); (ak1) – (ck);
(a1) – (c1); (a2) – (c2); (a3) – (c3); (ak2) – (ck2); (ak1) – (ck1); (ak) – (ck);
(a0) – (c1);
(ak) – (ak1); (ak1) – (ak2); (a3) – (a2); (a2) – (a1); (a1) – (a0);
(c1) – (c2); (c2) – (c3); (ck2) – (ck1); (ck1) – (ck);
(a3) – (6.5,0); (c3) – (6.5,2);
(ak2) – (8,0); (ck2) – (8,2);
(a0) to \[bend left=60\](c1); (ck) to \[bend left=90\](ak);
at (7,0) \[dot\]; at (7.25,0) \[dot\]; at (7.5,0) \[dot\];
at (7,2) \[dot\]; at (7.25,2) \[dot\]; at (7.5,2) \[dot\];
at (a0) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_0$\]; at (a1) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_1$\]; at (a2) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_2$\]; at (a3) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_3$\]; at (ak2) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_{k-2}$\]; at (ak1) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_{k-1}$\]; at (ak) \[vertex,label=south:$\alpha_k$\];
at (c1) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_1$\]; at (c2) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_2$\]; at (c3) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_3$\]; at (ck2) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_{k-2}$\]; at (ck1) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_{k-1}$\]; at (ck) \[vertex,label=north:$\gamma_k$\];
at (1.6,0.95)[$m-1$]{}; at (3.6,0.7)[$m-1$]{}; at (5.6,0.7)[$m-1$]{}; at (8.1,0.95)[$m-1$]{}; at (10.1,0.7)[$m-1$]{}; at (12.1,0.7)[$m-1$]{};
at (2.8,1.2)[$a_2-1$]{}; at (4.8,1.2)[$a_3-1$]{}; at (9.2,1.2)[$a_{k-1}-1$]{}; at (11.3,1.2)[$a_k-1$]{};
at (1.6,1.35)[$a_1-1$]{};
Suppose that we order the vertices of $D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ by $\alpha_k, \gamma_k, \alpha_{k-1}, \gamma_{k-1}, \ldots, \alpha_2, \gamma_2,\break \alpha_1, \gamma_1, \alpha_0$, and construct the associated asymmetric Laplacian. Then, removing the row and column corresponding to $\alpha_0$ yields the reduced asymmetric Laplacian ${\mathcal{L}}'(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k})$.
Let $k\geq 1$ and $m,a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}\geq 2$. Note that [${\mathcal{L}}'(D_{m;a_1})=\begin{bmatrix}
m & -m+1 \\
-m & m+a_1-1
\end{bmatrix}$]{} reduces to [$\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\
0 & ma_1
\end{bmatrix}$]{}; so ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{m;a_1})\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_{m a_1}$.
Assume that ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k}})$ is isomorphic to $\bigoplus_{i=1}^{k} {\mathbb{Z}}_{m a_i}$. Setting $a_i-1=a_i'$ for $1\leq i\leq k$, the reduced asymmetric Laplacian ${\mathcal{L}}'_k={\mathcal{L}}'(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k}})$ is shown below.
Now, consider the digraph $D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}}$. Applying Lemma \[cl:prime+comps\], with $p=m$ and $x=y=0$, to rows $\alpha_{k+1}, \gamma_{k+1},\alpha_{k}, \gamma_{k}$ we have that ${\mathcal{L}}'_{k+1}={\mathcal{L}}'(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}})$ reduces to $$.$$ It follows that ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{m;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}})$ is isomorphic to $\bigoplus_{i=1}^{k+1} {\mathbb{Z}}_{m a_i}$.
It is now easy to establish the existence of spherical latin bitrades whose canonical groups can be expressed as the direct sum of components of composite order.
\[thm:composites\] Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a group isomorphic to a direct sum of cyclic groups of composite order; i.e. $\Gamma$ is isomorphic to $\oplus^k_{i=1} {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_i}$, where each $n_i$ is composite. Then there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to $\Gamma$.
Let $n_1, n_2,\ldots, n_k$ be composite integers and consider $\Gamma\cong\oplus^k_{i=1} \mathbb{Z}_{n_i}$. Recall that if $\gcd(n_u,n_v)=1$, $u\neq v$, then $\oplus^k_{i=1} {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_i}\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_1}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_{u-1}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{n_{u+1}}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_{v-1}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{n_{v+1}}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_k}\oplus {\mathbb{Z}}_{n_un_v}$. Thus we may assume that $\gcd\{n_1,n_2,\ldots, n_k\}\neq 1$. Hence there exists a prime, $p$ say, such that $p$ divides $\gcd\{n_1,n_2,\ldots, n_k\}$. Note that, as $n_i$ is composite for all $1\leq i\leq k$, $p\neq n_i$. By setting $m=p$ and applying Lemma \[lem:composites\] the result follows.
The next result addresses the existence of spherical latin bitrades for which the Smith Normal Form of their canonical groups contains components of prime order.
\[thm:primes\_and\_composites\] Let $p$ be a prime and let $2\leq a_1,a_2, \ldots, a_k$. Further let $n\leq 1+2\sum_{i=1}^k (a_i-1)$. Then there exists spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to $${\mathbb{Z}}_p^n\oplus\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^k {\mathbb{Z}}_{p a_i}\right).$$
If $n=0$, then this is Lemma \[lem:composites\]. So for the remainder of the proof assume that $n\geq 1$. As $n\leq 1+2\sum_{i=1}^k (a_i-1)$ there exists a $k'$, $0\leq k'< k$, and $t$, $0\leq t\leq 2a_{k'+1}-1$ such that $$n=1+2\sum_{i=1}^{k'} (a_i-1)+t.$$
First construct the graph $D_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ (from the proof of Lemma \[lem:composites\]). Next, add the following vertices,
- for each $1\leq i\leq k'$: add vertices $\delta_{i,j}$ and $\epsilon_{i,j}$ for all $1\leq i\leq a_i-1$;
- for each $1\leq j\leq \lceil t/2\rceil$: add vertices $\delta_{k'+1,j}$;
- for each $1\leq j\leq \lfloor t/2\rfloor$: add vertices $\epsilon_{k'+1,j}$; and
- the vertex $\epsilon_{1,0}$.
Now,
- replace an arc from $\alpha_{0}$ to $\gamma_1$ with a single arc from $\epsilon_{1,0}$ to $\gamma_1$ and $p-1$ arcs from $\epsilon_{1,0}$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$ and $p$ arcs from $\alpha_{0}$ to $\epsilon_{1,0}$.
- for each $1\leq i\leq k'$:
- replace the arcs from $\gamma_i$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$ with single arcs from $\delta_{i,j}$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$, $p-1$ arcs from $\delta_{i,j}$ to $\gamma_i$ and $p$ arcs from $\gamma_i$ to $\delta_{i,j}$, where $1\leq j\leq a_i-1$.
- replace the arcs from $\alpha_{i-1}$ to $\gamma_i$ with single arcs from $\epsilon_{i,j}$ to $\gamma_i$, $p-1$ arcs from $\epsilon_{i,j}$ to $\alpha_{i-1}$ and $p$ arcs from $\alpha_{i-1}$ to $\epsilon_{i,j}$, where $1\leq j\leq a_i-1$.
- replace $\lceil t/2\rceil$ arcs from $\gamma_{k'+1}$ to $\alpha_{k'}$ with single arcs from $\delta_{k'+1,j}$ to $\alpha_{k'}$, $p-1$ arcs from $\delta_{k'+1,j}$ to $\gamma_{k'+1}$ and $p$ arcs from $\gamma_{k'+1}$ to $\delta_{k'+1,j}$, where $1\leq j\leq \lceil t/2\rceil$.
- replace $\lfloor t/2\rfloor$ arcs from $\alpha_{k'}$ to $\gamma_{k'+1}$ with single arcs from $\epsilon_{k'+1,j}$ to $\gamma_{k'+1}$, $p-1$ arcs from $\epsilon_{k'+1,j}$ to $\alpha_{k'}$ and $p$ arcs from $\alpha_{k'}$ to $\epsilon_{k'+1,j}$, where $1\leq j\leq \lfloor t/2\rfloor$.
Call the resulting digraph $D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$, see Figure \[fig:Dman\_construction\] for an illustration of its construction. Note that $D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ has a directed spherical embedding, and that it satisfies the connectivity conditions of Proposition \[prop:simple\]. Therefore, there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathcal{S}}(D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k})$.
For $i\leq k'$:
Let $a=a_k'-1$, then, if $t=2\ell$:
Again let $a=a'_k-1$, then, if $t=2\ell +1$:
For ease of notation, let $$d_i=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
a_i-1 & \text{for }1\leq i\leq k'\\
\lceil t/2\rceil & \text{for }i=k'+1\\
0&\text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\quad\text{ and }\quad
e_i=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
a_i-1 & \text{for }1\leq i\leq k'\\
\lfloor t/2\rfloor & \text{for }i=k'+1\\
0&\text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right..$$ Suppose that we order the vertices of $D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}$ by $$(\alpha_k,\gamma_k,\delta_{k,d_k},\ldots,\delta_{k,1},\epsilon_{k,e_k}, \ldots, \epsilon_{k,1}), \ldots,
(\alpha_2,\gamma_2,\delta_{2,d_{2}},\ldots,\delta_{2,1},\epsilon_{2,e_{2}}, \ldots, \epsilon_{2,1}),$$ $$(\alpha_1,\gamma_1,\delta_{2,d_{1}},\ldots,\delta_{1,1},\epsilon_{1,e_{1}}, \ldots, \epsilon_{1,1}, \epsilon_{1,0}),\alpha_0$$ and construct the associated asymmetric Laplacian. Then, removing the row and column corresponding to $\alpha_0$ yields the reduced asymmetric Laplacian ${\mathcal{L}}'(D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k})$.
Let $k\geq 1$ and $p,a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}\geq 2$ and let $1\leq n\leq 1+2\sum_{i=1}^{k+1} (a_i-1)$. Then, letting $x=d_1$, $y=e_1$ and $r=p(x+1)-a_1-x-1$, $$’(D\^[{n,1+2(a\_1-1)}]{}\_[p;a\_1]{})=.$$Which reduces, under a similar argument to that used to prove Lemma \ref{cl:prime+comps}, to$$.$$ Hence, ${\mathcal{S}}(D^{\min\{n,1+2(a_1-1)\}}_{p;a_1})\cong{\mathbb{Z}}_p^{\min\{n,1+2(a_1-1)\}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{p a_1}$.
Assume that ${\mathcal{S}}\left(D^{\min\{n,1+2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1)\}}_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}\right)\cong{\mathbb{Z}}_p^{\min\{n,1+2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1)\}}\oplus\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^k {\mathbb{Z}}_{p a_i}\right)$. Denote ${\mathcal{L}}'\left(D^{\min\{n,1+2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1)\}}_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k}\right)$ by ${\mathcal{L}}_k'$ and consider ${\mathcal{L}}'\left(D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}}\right)$. Applying Lemma \[cl:prime+comps\], with $$x=\left\lceil \frac{1}{2}\max\left\{n-1-2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1),0\right\}\right\rceil$$ and $$y=\left\lfloor \frac{1}{2}\max\left\{n-1-2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1),0\right\}\right\rfloor$$ to rows $\alpha_{k+1},\gamma_{k+1},\delta_{k+1,x},\ldots,\delta_{k+1,1},\epsilon_{k+1,y}, \ldots, \epsilon_{k+1,1},\alpha_k,\gamma_k$ of ${\mathcal{L}}_{k+1}(D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}})$ reduces it to $$.$$ Therefore ${\mathcal{S}}(D^n_{p;a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_{k+1}})\cong{\mathbb{Z}}_p^n\oplus\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{k+1} {\mathbb{Z}}_{p a_i}\right)$.
Canonical groups of rank two
----------------------------
In this section we will restrict our attention to canonical groups of rank two. We show that, with one exception and a further three possible exceptions, any finite abelian group of rank two is isomorphic to the canonical group of some spherical latin bitrade.
We will make use of the following elementary lemma.
\[lem:121-reduction\] Let $2\leq d$, $1\leq x$, $2\leq y$ and $t_{i,j}\in\mathbb{Z}$ for $1\leq i\leq x$ and $1\leq j\leq y$. Further let $M$ be the $d-1$ by $d$ matrix where $$m_{ij}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
2&\text{if } i=j\\
-1&\text{if } j=i+1\text{ or }j=i-1\\
0&\text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right..$$ Then the $d+x-2$ by $d+y-2$ matrix $$$$ reduces (under operations invertible over $\mathbb{Z}$) to $$.$$
When $d=2$, the result is trivial. Assume that the statement holds for $d=k$, and consider $L(k+1)$. Then $L(k+1)$ reduces to $$$$ Adding $k-1$ copies of Row $k$ to Row $k-1$ followed by adding one copy of the updated Row $k-1$ to Row $k$ yields a $1$ in entry $(k-1,k-1)$ and this is now the only non-zero in Column $k-1$. The result follows.
\[lem:ab+bc+ac+1\] Suppose that $1\leq a,b,c$. Then there exists spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{ab+bc+ac+1}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{ab+bc+ac+1}.$
Without loss of generality we may assume that $1\leq a\leq b\leq c$. Define $D_{a,b,c}$ to be the digraph of order $a+b+c+1$ with vertex set $\{\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_a,\beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_b,\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\break\ldots,\gamma_c,\delta\}$ and
- for $1\leq i\leq a-1$ an arc from $\alpha_i$ to $\alpha_{i+1}$ and an arc from $\alpha_{i+1}$ to $\alpha_{i}$;
- for $1\leq i\leq b-1$ an arc from $\beta_i$ to $\beta_{i+1}$ and an arc from $\beta_{i+1}$ to $\beta_{i}$;
- for $1\leq i\leq c-1$ an arc from $\gamma_i$ to $\gamma_{i+1}$ and an arc from $\gamma_{i+1}$ to $\gamma_{i}$;
- for each $\iota\in\{\alpha,\beta,\gamma\}$ an arc from $\delta$ to $\iota_1$ and from $\iota_1$ to $\delta$; and
- $a$ arcs from $\beta_b$ to $\gamma_c$ and from $\gamma_c$ to $\beta_b$; $b$ arcs from $\alpha_a$ to $\gamma_c$ and from $\gamma_c$ to $\alpha_a$; and $c$ arcs from $\alpha_a$ to $\beta_b$ and from $\beta_b$ to $\alpha_a$.
Note that $D_{a,b,c}$ has a directed Eulerian spherical embedding, see Figure \[fig:rank2\], and that $D_{a,b,c}$ satisfies the connectivity conditions of Proposition \[prop:simple\]. Hence, there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{a,b,c})$.
Suppose that we order the vertices of $D_{a,b,c}$ by $$\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\ldots,\gamma_{c-2},\gamma_{c-1},\gamma_{c}, \beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_{b-2},\beta_{b-1},\beta_b,\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_{a-2},\alpha_{a-1}, \alpha_a,\delta.$$ Let ${\mathcal{L}}'(D_{a,b,c})$ be the reduced asymmetric Laplacian for $D_{a,b,c}$ obtained by removing the row and column corresponding to $\delta$.
When $a=b=c=1$, ${\mathcal{L}}'(D_{1,1,1})=$[$\begin{bmatrix}
3&-1&-1\\
-1&3&-1\\
-1&-1&3
\end{bmatrix}$]{}, which reduces to [$\begin{bmatrix}
1&0&0\\
0&4&0\\
0&0&4
\end{bmatrix}$]{}.
Suppose that $2\leq a,b,c$. Consider ${\mathcal{L}}'(D_{a,b,c})$, via three applications of Lemma \[lem:ab+bc+ac+1\] and setting $a+b+c+1=t$, this reduces to $$.$$Computing the Smith Normal form of$$
c&1-c&0&0&0&0\
-1&t-c&0&-a&0&-b\
0&0&b&1-b&0&0\
0&-a&-1&t-b&0&-c\
0&0&0&0&a&1-a\
0&-b&0&-c&-1&t-a
$$ we have that ${\mathcal{S}}(D_{a,b,c})\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_{ab+bc+ac+1}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{ab+bc+ac+1}$.
The cases where $1=a<b\leq c$ and $1=a=b< c$ follow similarly.
\[thm:rank2\] For $n, m\geq 2$, with one exception and a further three possible exceptions, there exists a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{n}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{m}$.
The exceptions are as follows. There does not exist a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{2}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{2}$. There may or may not exist a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{3}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{3}$ or ${\mathbb{Z}}_{5}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{5}$ or ${\mathbb{Z}}_{r}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{r}$ for some $r$ greater than $10^{11}$.
Finally, if we assume the Generalised Riemann Hypothesis, then there exists a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{r}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{r}$.
If $n$ and $m$ are coprime, then ${\mathbb{Z}}_n\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_m\cong{\mathbb{Z}}_{nm}$ and the result follows from [@CavWan] (it also follows from Lemma \[lem:composites\] with $k=1$). So assume that $n$ and $m$ are not coprime, that is we are in the rank 2 case.
Suppose that $n\neq m$. If $n$ and $m$ are both composite, then the result follows from Theorem \[thm:composites\]. So suppose that $n$ is prime and $m$ is composite. Then as $n$ and $m$ are not coprime $m=kn$ for some $k>1$ and the result follows from Theorem \[thm:primes\_and\_composites\].
So, suppose that $n=m$. If there exist $a,b,c\geq 1$ such that $ab+ac+bc+1=n$, then by Lemma \[lem:ab+bc+ac+1\] there exits a spherical latin bitrade whose canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_n\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_n$. In [@BorCho] Borwein and Choi proved that there are at most nineteen integers that are not of the form $ab+ac+bc+1$ where $a,b,c\geq 1$. The first eighteen are: $2$, $3$, $5$, $7$, $11$, $19$, $23$, $31$, $43$, $59$, $71$, $79$, $103$, $131$, $191$, $211$, $331$ and $463$. The nineteenth is greater than $10^{11}$ and is not an exception if the Generalised Riemann Hypothesis is assumed. For $n\in\{7,11,19,23,31,43,59,71,79,103,131,191,211,331,463\}$ directed Eulerian spherical embeddings whose underlying digraphs satisfy the connectivity conditions of Proposition \[prop:simple\] and with abelian sandpile groups isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_n\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_n$ are given in Figures \[fig:6m+5\] and \[fig:6m+1\].[^3]
Questions
---------
We conclude with three questions for future consideration. The first two address the remaining cases to be considered in order to resolve Question \[ques:main\].
Let $p\neq 2$ be a prime, $n\geq 3$ if $p>7$ and $n\geq 2$ if $p=3$ or $5$; does there exist a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_p^n$?
Let $p$ be a prime and let $2\leq a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k$. If $n>1+2\sum_{i=1}^k(a_i-1)$, does there exist a spherical latin bitrade with canonical group is isomorphic to $${\mathbb{Z}}_p^n\oplus\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^k\mathbb{Z}_{pa_i}\right)?$$
Our final question arises naturally in response to the non-existence result Theorem \[thm:non-existence\]. For a separated, connected latin bitrade $(A,B)$ of genus greater than zero, the group ${\mathcal{A}}_W$ is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}\oplus {\mathcal{C}}$, but the minimal abelian representation (if one exists) is now a quotient of ${\mathcal{C}}$, [@BlackburnTMcC Theorem 6]. Hence, we ask the following.
Does there exist a family of separated, connected latin bitrades for which the minimum abelian representation of one (or both) of the partial latin squares is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_2^k$ for arbitrary $k$? If so does such a family exist for a fixed genus?
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
----------------
The authors express their thanks to the London Mathematical Society for a grant which enabled this research to by undertaken.
[00]{}
S.R. Blackburn and T.A. McCourt, ‘Triangulations of the sphere, bitrades and abelian groups’, [*Combinatorica*]{}, **34** (2014), 527–546.
C.P. Bonnington, M. Conder, M. Morton and P. McKenna, ‘Embedding digraphs on orientable surfaces’, *J. Combin. Theory Ser. B*, **85** (2002), 1–20.
C.P. Bonnington, N. Hartsfield and J. Širáň, ‘Obstructions to directed embeddings of Eulerian digraphs in the plane’, *European J. Combin.*, **25** (2004), 877–891.
J. Borwein and K.K.S. Choi, ‘On the Representations of $xy+yz+zx$’, *Exp. Math.*, **9** (2000), 153–158.
P.J. Cameron, ‘Research problems from the BCC22’, *Discrete Math.* **311** (2011), 1074–1083.
N.J. Cavenagh, ‘The theory and application of latin bitrades: a survey’, *Mathematica Slovaca* **58** (2008), 6189–6202.
N.J. Cavenagh, and P. Lisoněk, ‘Planar Eulerian triangulations are equivalent to spherical Latin bitrades’, *J. Combin. Theory Ser. A* **115** (2008), 193-–197.
N.J. Cavenagh and I.M. Wanless,‘Latin trades in groups defined on planar triangulations’, *J. Algebr. Comb.* **30** (2009), 323–347.
A. Drápal and N.J. Cavenagh, Open Problem 8, ‘Open problems from Workshop on latin trades’, Prague, 6–10 February 2006. <http://www.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~rozendo/op.html>
A. Drápal, C. Hämäläinen and V. Kala, ‘Latin bitrades, dissections of equilateral triangles, and abelian groups’, *J. Combin, Des.*, **18** (2010), 1–24.
A. Drápal and T. Kepka, ‘Group modifications of some partial groupoids’, *Annals of Discr. Math.* **18** (1983), 319–332.
A. Drápal and T. Kepka, ‘Exchangeable partial groupoids I’, *A Acta Univ. Carolin. Math. Phys.* **24** (1983), 57–72.
M.J. Grannell and T.S. Griggs, ‘Designs and Topology’, in surveys in Combinatorics 2007, *London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 346*, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007) 121–174.
T. Grubman and I.M. Wanless, ‘Growth rate of canonical and minimal group embeddings of spherical latin trades.’ *J. Combin. Theory Ser. A* **123** (2014), 57–72.
P.J. Heawood, ‘On the four-colour map theorem’, *Quart J. Pure Math.* **29** (1898), 270–285.
A.E. Holroyd, L. Levine, K. Mészáros, Y. Peres, J. Propp and D.B. Wilson, Chip-firing and rotor-routing on directed graphs, in: In and Out of Equilibrium, vol. 2, in: Progr. Probab., vol. 60, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2008, pp. 331–364.
V.D. Mazurov and E.I. Khurkro (eds), *The Kourovka notebook (Unsolved Problems in group theory*, 17th edition, Russian Academy of Sciences, Siberian Division, Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, 2010.
T.A. McCourt, ‘Growth rates of groups associated with face 2-coloured triangulations and directed Eulerian digraphs on the sphere’, *Electron. J. Combin.* **23** (2016), 23pp.
M. Szabados, ‘Distances of group tables and latin squares via equilateral triangle dissections’, *J. Combin. Theory Ser. A* **123** (2014), 1–7.
W.T. Tutte, The dissection of equilateral triangles into equilateral triangles. , 44:463–482, 1948.
[^1]: Research supported by a London Mathematical Society Undergraduate Research Bursary, grant number URB 15–49.
[^2]: Cavenagh and Wanless actually asked this for the finite torsion subgroup of ${\mathcal{A}}_W$ as Theorem \[thm:BlackburnTMcC\] was not established at the time.
[^3]: The families of indicated in Figures \[fig:6m+5\] and \[fig:6m+1\] generalise to give abelian sandpile groups isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}_{6m+5}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{6m+5}$, for all $m\geq 1$ and ${\mathbb{Z}}_{3m+1}\oplus{\mathbb{Z}}_{3m+1}$, for all $m\geq 1$, respectively. However, we do not require these more general results to prove Theorem \[thm:rank2\].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
**GINZBURG-LANDAU THEORY OF VORTEX PHASE DIAGRAM**
**IN LAYERED TYPE II SUPERCONDUCTOR**
**RYUSUKE IKEDA**
Department of Physics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, JAPAN
Various macroscopic phenomena seen in high temperature superconductors (HTSC) under nonzero magnetic fields have inspired much interest in studying the phase diagram of vortex states of three dimensional (3D) layered type II superconductors. Experimentally, thermodynamic and transport phenomena have been intensively examined mainly in YBCO \[1-3\] and BSCCO \[4\]. The resistive broadening \[5\] in the so-called vortex liquid regime below the crossover line $H_{c2}(T)$ is common to these materials with strong fluctuation effect and is well described in terms of the non-Gaussian superconducting fluctuation theory\[6\]. Since, on approaching a phase transition, macroscopic behaviors tend to become insensitive to microscopic details of each material, one expects that the phase diagram itself should be qualitatively the same between these materials. However, recent data \[7-10\] in YBCO seem to have shown some details of transition lines in real systems with pinning disorders which have been unseen in BSCCO. It is important to find how such phenomena [*apparently*]{} dependent on the materials are explained within a single GL theory.
Theoretically, the phase diagram of vortex states has been tackled from two different points of view. In the literature \[11-13\] based on the elastic theory for the vortex systems with pinning disorder, one first starts from low fields and low temperatures and hence, works in the London (phase-only) limit of the GL model. Consequently, a glassy solid phase, named Bragg-glass (BrG) phase, was proposed as the ground state in cleaner real systems. Then, a melting line of BrG phase is estimated in terms of some kind of Lindemann criterion and is usually identified with a simultaneous destruction of positional and glass (superconducting) orders. Since the positional ordering of field-induced vortices in clean bulk systems is believed to occur through a first order transition \[14\], however, this picture of glass ordering \[11-13\] does not permit a continuous disappearance of linear resistance and hence, is incompatible with transport phenomena in fields lower than a lower critical point of clean YBCO samples \[7-9\] and in systems with a continuous glass transition \[15\] due to strong correlated (line-like) disorder.
By contrast, the approach \[16-19\] from higher temperatures describes the vanishing of linear resistance according to a superconducting glass ordering proposed by Fisher et al. \[20\] for homogeneous (nongranular) type II superconductors in nonzero fields. In layered materials, this ordering occurs when the glass susceptibility, which is the spatial average of correlation function \[20\] $$G_G(md, {\bf R})=d \sum_j \int d^2r {\overline {|< \, \psi^*_j({\bf
r}) \psi_{j+m}({\bf r}+{\bf R}) \, >|^2}} \eqno(1.1)$$ expressed in terms of the pair-field (superconducting order parameter) $\psi_j({\bf r})$ at $j$-th layer, becomes divergent. In eq.(1.1), the angular bracket and the overbar denote, respectively, the thermal and the random averages, and $d$ is the interlayer spacing. This approach can be formulated \[17-19\] as a natural extension of the nonGaussian superconducting fluctuation theory \[6\] to lower temperature at which the vortex pinning due to structural disorder is not negligible [*even in clean systems*]{}. Previously, this approach was criticized in a review paper \[21\] because it was not easy \[16\] for this approach to justify the phenomenological guess \[20,21\] that, in thermodynamic limit, the vortex solid in the pinning-free case with nonzero vortex flow resistance should be replaced in clean limit of real systems by a vortex glass with zero linear resistance. This obstacle was overcome \[17,22\] at least in high field case by combining properties of the pinning-free Abrikosov solid in 2D limit with the framework of vortex glass fluctuation based on eq.(1.1). Further, since eq.(1.1) is an expression independent of the detail of random average, this approach is easily extended \[19\] for describing continuous glass transitions \[15\] induced by correlated disorder. On the other hand, it is unclear at present to what extent this approach can be extended into the resulting glass phases.
In this article, a theoretical development on the vortex glass transitions based on eq.(1.1) is reviewed. Consistently with eq.(1.1), the GL model for the layered system, i.e., the Lawrence-Doniach (LD) model \[23\], will be used throughout this paper: $${\cal H}_{\rm LD}=d \sum_j \int d^2r \biggl[ \, \biggl({T \over
{T_{c0}}}-1\biggr) |\psi_j|^2 + \xi_0^2 \biggl|\biggl(-{\rm
i}\nabla_\perp + {{2\pi} \over {\phi_0}} {\bf A}_{\perp, j} \biggr)
\psi_j \biggr|^2$$ $$+ \Gamma^{-1} \biggl({{\xi_0} \over d}\biggr)^2 \biggl|\psi_j -
\psi_{j+1}
\exp{\biggl({\rm i} {{2\pi d {\delta A_\parallel}} \over {\phi_0}}
\biggr)}
\biggr|^2 + {b \over 2} |\psi_j|^4 \biggr] \eqno(1.2)$$ with disorder terms $${\cal H}_{rp}=d \sum_l \int d^2r \biggl[ \, u_l({\bf r})
|\psi_l({\bf r})|^2 + f_l({\bf r}) \xi_0^2 (\nabla \times {\bf
j}_l)_\parallel \biggr], \eqno(1.3)$$ where $\xi_0$ the in-plane coherence length, $\phi_0$ the flux quantum, $b > 0$, $\Gamma$ the mass anisotropy, and the vector indices $\perp$ and $\parallel$ imply the directions, respectively, parallel and perpendicular to the layer plane. Throughout this paper, internal gauge fluctuations except the external disturbance $\delta {\bf A}$ are neglected by focusing on the type II limit so that the applied field is given by ${\rm curl} {\bf A}_{\rm ext}$ where ${\bf A}_{\rm ext}
= {\bf A} - \delta {\bf A}$. In eq.(1.3), ${\bf j}_l=\psi^*_l
( - {\rm i}\nabla + 2 \pi {\bf A}_{\rm ext}/\phi_0) \psi_l + {\rm
c.c.}$, and the structural disorder is described by a random potential expressing $T_{c0}$-variations, $u_j({\bf r})$, and a randomness of flux $f_j({\bf r})$ \[18,19\]. We note that, in the phase-only limit ($|\psi|$ const.), the second term of eq.(1.3) expresses the pinning of vortex cores \[11,12\], while its first term becomes negligible.
This paper is organized as follows. In $\S 2$, the phase diagram of real systems in the case with ${\bf B} \perp$ layers and, primarily with only point (uncorrelated) disorder, is discussed according to recent works \[17-19, 24\], which are based on the theoretical findings that, in the pinning-free case, the vortex liquid region of the normal metal phase discontinuously freezes to change into the Abrikosov vortex solid with long-ranged positional order and quasi long-ranged \[25\] (conventional) phase coherence and that, in real systems with pinning disorder, a static glass ordering defined using eq.(1.1) occurs while the conventional phase coherence remains short-ranged because of a disorder-induced partial destruction \[20,21\] of positional long-ranged order. The above second statement may be subtle if the BrG phase \[11-13\] will occur just below the first order freezing of the vortex liquid. In $\S 3$, the phase diagram in the case ${\bf B} \parallel $ layers of real systems with point disorder is discussed by applying \[26,27\] the treatment sketched in $\S 2$ to this case and is briefly compared with existing data \[28,29\]. In $\S 4$, a relevance of results in $\S 2$ to BSCCO in low fields perpendicular to the layers is discussed together with an issue of Hall conductivity near glass transitions.
First, the model (1.2) will be rewritten within the subspace of the lowest Landau level (LLL) of the $\psi$-fluctuation by invoking a high field approximation valid far from a critical region of the normal-Meissner transition at $T_{c0}$. Further, the 2D case will be considered \[22\] for a while for our convenience of description. Using a Laudau-gauge and expressing $\psi$ as $\psi({\bf r})=\sum_p \phi_p
u_p({\bf r})$ in terms of the LLL eigenfunction $u_p$, the model ${\cal
H} \equiv {\cal H}_{\rm LD} + {\cal H}_{rp}$ takes the form $${\cal H}=\sum_p \, \mu_0 \, |\phi_p|^2 + \sum_{\bf k} \biggl({b
\over {2 \xi_0^2 d}} \, v_{\bf k} \, |{\tilde \rho}_{\bf k}|^2 +
(u_{-{\bf k}} + f_{-{\bf k}} \, {\bf k}^2 \xi_0^2 ) \, v^{1/2}_{\bf k}
{\tilde \rho}_{\bf k} \biggr), \eqno(2.1)$$ where $h=2 \pi \xi_0^2 B/\phi_0$, $\mu_0=-1+h+T/T_{c0}$, $B$ the magnitude of the applied field, $v_{\bf k}=\exp(-{\bf k}^2/(2 h))$, and $${\tilde \rho}_{\bf k}={{\xi_0} \over L} \sum_p \exp({\rm i} p k_1/h)
\,
\phi^*_{p-k_2/2} \, \phi_{p + k_2/2} \eqno(2.2)$$ with linear system size $L$. Since the characteristic microscopic length of a vortex state is the magnetic length $r_B \equiv \sqrt{\phi_0/(2 \pi
B)}$, the factor $k^2$ of the random-flux term implies that the random potential $f$ is accompanied by the factor $h$ and hence that the pinning disorder will be enhanced with increasing field. This trend is also valid in the phase-only model with no $u$-potential term and will be valid in general at least in type II limit \[20,21\]. The Gaussian ensemble for the $u$-potential will be assumed: ${\overline {u({\bf r}) \, u({\bf r}')}}=\Delta
\delta^{(2)} ({\bf r} - {\bf r}')$. For just simplicity of our presentation, the $f$-potential term will be omitted for a while.
First, let us consider, as typical quantities appearing even in the pinning-free case, the pairing entropy density (pair-field propagator) $${\overline {< |\phi_p|^2 >}}=N_v^{-1} \int d^2r {\overline {<
|\psi|^2 >}} \eqno(2.3)$$ and the Abrikosov factor $$\beta_A={{2 \pi} \over h} N_v \biggl( \int d^2r {\overline {<
|\psi|^2 >}} \biggr)^{-2} {\int d^2r {\overline {< |\psi|^4 >}}},
\eqno(2.4)$$ where $N_v=L^2/(2 \pi r_B^2)$ is the number of vortices. The former satisfies a Dyson equation $$\mu={{k_{\rm B} T} \over {\overline {< |\phi_p|^2 >}}}=\mu_0 +
\mu \, x \,
(\beta_A - \Delta_{\rm eff}(T) (\beta_A - 1)), \eqno(2.5)$$ where $x=k_{\rm B} T \, b \, h/(2 \pi \xi_0^2 d \mu^2)$, and $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T)=\Delta d \xi_0^2 /k_{\rm B} T b$ is the pinning strength [*relative*]{} to the thermal fluctuation strength. The Abrikosov factor \[30\] is expressed in the form $$\beta_A=1 + N_v^{-1} \sum_{\bf k} v_{\bf k} ( \, 1 - 2\, x \, V_{\bf
k} \, ), \eqno(2.6)$$ where $V_{\bf k}$ is the fully-renormalized four-point vertex corresponding to the bare one $v_{\bf k}$ and also depends on $\Delta_{\rm eff}$. If the freezing to the solid is of first order, a precursor of the positional ordering of vortices (zero points of $\psi$) will appear only in the vicinity of the transiton. Then, sufficiently above the transition, $V_{\bf k}$ will take a form of RPA type such as $$V^{\rm liq}_{\bf k} \simeq {{v_{\bf k}} \over {1 + 2 \, x \, v_{\bf
k}}}. \eqno(2.7)$$ On the other hand, one will notice by comparing eq.(2.6) with its mean field expression \[30\] that $V_{\bf k}$ in the limit of a perfect solid takes the form $$V^{\rm sol}_{\bf k}=V^{\rm liq}_{\bf k}(x \gg 1) + \delta V_{\bf k}
=
{1 \over {2 x}} ( \, 1 - N_v \sum_{{\bf G} \neq 0} \delta_{{\bf k}, {\bf
G}} \, ), \eqno(2.8)$$ where ${\bf G}$’s are the reciprocal lattice vectors of the vortex solid. Note that the first term corresponds to the $x \to \infty$ (i.e., low $T$) limit of $V^{\rm liq}_{\bf k}$, while the second term $\delta
V_k$ corresponds to the structure factor of a vortex state. In a solid-like vortex state with a long but finite positional correlation length, $\delta
V_{\bf k}$ near ${\bf G}$ will take, for instance, a Gaussian form like $$\delta V_{\bf k} \sim - {1 \over {2 \, x \, \epsilon}} \exp{\biggl(-
{{({\bf k} - {\bf G})^2}
\over {2 \epsilon h}} \biggr)}, \eqno(2.9)$$ where $\epsilon^{-1}$ ($\gg 1$) corresponds to the positional correlation area $N_{\rm cor}$. One can verify by substituting eq.(2.9) into eq.(2.6) that the $\beta_A$-value does not depend remarkably on $N_{\rm cor}$ at least at low enough $T$. In addition, we note that, at low $T$, eq.(2.5) reduces to the mean field result $${\overline {< < |\psi|^2 > >_{\rm sp}}}=- (b \, \beta_A)^{-1} \,
\mu_0,
\eqno(2.10)$$ where $< \,\,\,\,\,>_{\rm sp}$ denotes space average, and the small O($\Delta_{\rm eff}$) correction to $\beta_A$ was neglected.
Now, let us turn to the glass susceptibility in 2D, which is expressed within LLL in the form $$\chi_{\rm G}=N_v^{-1} ({\overline {< |\phi_p|^2 >}})^{-2} \sum_{p,
p'} {\overline {|< \phi_p \, \phi^*_{p'} >|^2}}. \eqno(2.11)$$ In clean limit, $\chi_G$ is given as a ladder-series of the irreducible vertex represented in Fig.1, i.e., $$\chi_G=1 + I_{\rm irr} + I_{\rm irr}^2 + I_{\rm irr}^3 + \cdot \cdot
\cdot \cdot \cdot, \eqno(2.12)$$ where $$I_{\rm irr}={{\Delta \, h} \over {2 \pi N_v \mu^2}} \sum_{\bf k} \,
v_{\bf k} ( 1 - 2 \, x \, V_{\bf k} )^2. \eqno(2.13)$$ Far above the freezing transition where $V_{\bf k}$ is dominated by the RPA term (2.7), we obtain $I_{\rm irr}
\simeq \Delta_{\rm eff}/2(1 - O(x^{-1}))$. Since this expression is insensitive to $B$, one may conclude the absence \[31\] of 2D glass transition even at the mean field level. However, once the [*quantum*]{}
superconducting fluctuation is taken into account, a glass transition line at the mean field level can exist above a (if any) first order transition line \[32\].
By contrast, when taking account of $\delta V_{\bf k}$ illustrated by eq.(2.9) which becomes rather remarkable in the vicinity of the (if any)
first order line, one obtains a result suggestive of a glass transition [*induced*]{} \[17,22\] by the vortex solidification (i.e., by the first order transition). For instance, if substituting the expression of the perfect solid eq.(2.8) into eq.(2.13), one finds $$I_{\rm irr}= {{\Delta \, h} \over {2 \pi \mu^2}} \, (\beta_A - 1) \,
N_v \eqno(2.14)$$ proportional to the total number $N_v$ of vortices. The factor $\beta_A
- 1$ ($> 0$) implies that a spatial variation of $|\psi|$ due to the vortices is crucial in obtaining a glass ordering at or below the (if any) first order line. The factor $N_v$ is a consequence of the assumption of a perfect solid in the case with a small but finite $\Delta$ and must be replaced by the positional correlation area $N_{\rm cor}(\Delta_{\rm eff})$ in terms of, say, eq(2.9). Note that the origin of the large factor $N_v$ or $N_{\rm cor}$ is the vertex correction to the impurity line (the semicircles in Fig.1). If, as an estimation of $N_{\rm cor}$, identifying it with the correlation area resulting from the collective pinning theory \[33\], we find $N_{\rm cor} \simeq (\Delta_{\rm eff})^{-1}$. Further, since the mean field glass transition line $T_{\rm G}^{\rm mf}(B)$ in clean limit will lie just below the freezing transition, or crossover, line $T_m^{(2d)}(B)$ in 2D LLL, $\mu^2$ in eq.(2.13) may be replaced by its value at $T_m^{(2d)}(B)$ $10^{-2} h \, b \, k_{\rm B} T (2 \pi \xi_0^2 d)^{-1}$. Then, since the $\beta_A$-value is insensitive to material parameters, the resulting $I_{\rm irr}$ is almost independent of material and physical parameters. At least, it does [*not*]{} vanish in clean limit ($\Delta_{\rm eff} \to 0$), implying that the disorder-free theory cannot be used even in clean limit below the expected $T_m^{(2d)}(B)$.
Next, let us extend the above analysis to 3D case in which the glass transition will occur more easily. For a while, the case of [*point*]{} disorder will be considered in which the random potentials satisfy ${\overline {u_j({\bf r}) u_l({\bf r}')}}=d^{-1} \Delta^{(p)}
\delta^{(2)}({\bf r} - {\bf r}') \, \delta_{j, l}$ and ${\overline {f_j({\bf r}) f_l({\bf r}')}}=d^{-1}
\Delta_\Phi^{(p)} \delta^{(2)}({\bf r} - {\bf r}')
\, \delta_{j, l}$. Roughly speaking, $\chi_G$ in 3D case is given by replacing $\Delta/\mu^2$ in eq.(2.13) by $\Delta^{(p)}/\mu^{3/2}$ when, for simplicity, neglecting a $\Delta_\Phi$ term. If, as in 2D case, $N_{\rm cor}$ is identified with the dimensionless positional correlation area perpendicular to ${\bf B}$ found in the collective pinning theory (in type II limit) \[33\], we obtain $$I_{\rm irr} \simeq \Delta_{\rm eff} (\beta_A - 1) \exp(c_1 \,
\Delta_{\rm eff}^{-1}) \eqno(2.15)$$ along the first order line expected in LLL (see eq.(2.17) below), where $c_1$ is a positive constant. Since eq.(2.15) is divergent in $\Delta_{\rm eff} \to 0$ limit, it implies that the glass transition due to point disorder, the so-called vortex-glass (VG) transition, will occur more suddenly in cleaner systems with smaller $\Delta_{\rm eff}$ and that the first order transition in clean limit should be a glass transition simultaneously. Further, the exponential $\Delta_{\rm eff}$-dependence of $N_{\rm cor}$ suggests that this pinning dependence is stronger than the prefactor $\Delta_{\rm eff}$ in eq.(2.15). Since $N_{\rm cor}$ will decrease down to a constant of order unity with increasing $\Delta_{\rm
eff}$, and $\beta_A$ depends only weakly on $\Delta_{\rm eff}$, it is expected that $I_{\rm irr}$ monotonically [*decreases*]{} with increasing $\Delta_{\rm eff}$ down to a value $\simeq \Delta^{(p)} h
(\beta_A-1)/(2 \pi \mu^{3/2})$. Namely, the resulting VG transition line is expected to deviate from the first order line to [*lower*]{} temperature with increasing $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T)$ and, in high $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T)$ limit, approach $$B_{\rm VG}^\infty(T) \simeq H_{c2}(0) \biggl({{-\mu_0}
\over {\theta_f(T)}} \biggr)^{3/2} (\Delta^{(p)})^{1/2}. \eqno(2.16)$$ Although this line \[16\] satisfies the LLL scaling $B \sim (T_c(B) -
T)^{3/2}$ as well as the first order line \[34\] in 3D and LLL $$B_m(T) \simeq H_{c2}(0) {{(-\mu_0)^{3/2}} \over {\theta_f(T)}},
\eqno(2.17)$$ the dependences on the (anisotropic) 3D fluctuation strength $\theta_f=b k_{\rm B} T
\sqrt{\Gamma}/\xi_0^3$ of $B_{\rm VG}^\infty$ and $B_m$ are different from each other.
Through the above findings on the glass transition at or below $B_m(T)$, a picture on the phase diagram above a lower critical point $B_{\rm lcp}$ (defined below) of the thermal first order transition is easily obtained \[17\]. First, since most of the above expressions depend not on $\Delta^{(p)}$ but on the relative pinning strength $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T) \propto 1/T$, a cooling along $B_m(T)$ (i.e., an increase of $B$) will imply an effective enhancement of random pinning effect. Further, as mentioned below eq.(2.2), an inclusion of nonzero $\Delta_\Phi$ additionally induces a pinning effect enhanced by an increase of $B$ \[18,19\]. For these reasons, the first order transition along $B_m(T)$ will be weakened with increasing $B$ and will disappear at some upper critical point $B_{\rm
ucp}$. Then, it is clear that the vortex state just below the thermal first order transition and below $B_{\rm ucp}$ need not have a positional order. Actually, as explained above, the glass transition line begins to deviate from $B_m(T)$ to lower temperature with increasing $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T)$ or $B$ and approaches $B_{\rm VG}^\infty(T)$ at high enough fields. Note that $B_{\rm
VG}^\infty(T)$ decreases with reducing the pinning strength and, as suggested below eq.(2.17), decreases more rapidly than $B_m(T)$ with increasing $\theta_f$. Hence, there is a possibility \[17\] of a wider window of the so-called vortex slush regime \[35\] in cleaner systems as far as it is not masked by the BrG phase which may exist at lower fields (see Fig.3 below).
Of course, the vortex slush regime is a part of the vortex liquid region and hence, of the normal metal phase because the linear resistance is finite there. In the present theory, the in-plane resistivity $\rho_{xx}$ ($= \rho_{yy}$) in this regime vanishes algebraically on approacing the glass transition, as in the strong disordered case, but with a field-dependent smaller exponent \[18\]. To show this, let us briefly explain how to evaluate the conductivity near a VG transition. As accepted even through the studies \[6\] at higher temperatures, the conductivity $\sigma_{ij}$ may be separated into the quasiparticle part $\sigma_{n, \, ij}$ and the superconducting fluctuation part $\sigma_{s, \, ij}$, and, deep in the liquid regime of clean systems, $\sigma_{s, \, ij}$ can be expressed as a sum of the pinning-free contribution $\sigma_{F, ij}$ and the glass fluctuation part $\sigma_{G, ij}$ so that $\sigma_{ij} \simeq \sigma_{n, \, ij} +
\sigma_{F, ij} + \sigma_{G, ij}$ \[17\]. The dynamics of $\psi$-field is incorporated according to the TDGL equatioin, or equivalently the quantum TDGL action \[17,36\] $${{S_{\rm QLD}} \over \hbar}=d \sum_j \int d^2r \beta \sum_\omega
(\gamma_1 |\omega| + {\rm i} \gamma_2 \omega ) |\psi_j({\bf r},
\omega)|^2 +
\int_0^{\hbar \beta} {{d\tau} \over \hbar} \biggl[ {\cal H}_{\rm
LD}(\psi \to \psi(\tau))$$ $$+ {\cal H}_{rp}(\psi \to \psi(\tau)) \, \biggr], \eqno(2.18)$$ for the LD model, where $\beta=1/(k_{\rm B} T)$, $\gamma_1 > 0$, and $\omega$ denotes Matsubara frequency. As first found in Ref.37, the vortex flow conductivities $$\sigma_{F, xx}=R_q^{-1} {{\gamma_1 \, \phi_0} \over {b \, B}} (-
\mu_0) \eqno(2.19)$$ and $\sigma_{F, xy}=\gamma_2 \sigma_{F, xx}/\gamma_1$ are obtained as the low $T$ limit of the renormalized Aslamasov-Larkin (AL) fluctuation conductivities \[38\], where $R_q$ is the resistance quantum $\pi \hbar/2 e^2$. According to eq.(4.1) of ref.6, the corresponding diagonal AL conductivity parallel to ${\bf B}$ has the following low $T$ form obeying the LLL scaling $$\sigma_{F, zz} \simeq \sigma_{F, xx} \biggl(-{{2 \pi \xi_0^2 \, r_B \,
\mu_0}
\over {b k_{\rm B} T \Gamma}} \biggr)^2 \propto {{(T_c(B) - T)^3} \over
{(B
k_{\rm B} T \Gamma)^2}}. \eqno(2.20)$$ The same relation was derived later in ref.39 in terms of the phase-only model. It suggests that the behavior (2.20) of $\rho_{zz}$ is also valid in the liquid regime in lower fields.
Below, we focus on the glass fluctuation term $\sigma_{G, xx}$. The Feynman diagrams expressing $\sigma_{G, xx}$ are illustrated in Fig.2. In weak enough pinning case, the resistive vanishing can be described just by Fig.2 (a), while Fig.2 (b) becomes necessary in order to derive the universal VG scaling.
Actually, assuming the glass transition to be continuous, Fig.2 (a) gives \[17\] $$\sigma_{G, xx}^{(a)} \sim (T-T_{\rm VG})^{(3-z)\nu}, \eqno(2.21)$$ while the diagrams such as Fig.2 (b) result in the scaling behavior \[20\]
argued by Fisher et al. $$\sigma_{G, xx}^{(b)} \sim (T - T_{\rm VG})^{(1-z)\nu}, \eqno(2.22)$$ where $T_{\rm VG}(B)$ is the VG transition line (in type II limit), and $z$ ($> 4$) and $\nu$ are, respectively, dynamical exponent and the exponent of correlation length $\xi_{\rm VG}(T)$ in VG critical region (in type II limit). $\sigma_{G, xx}$ is given by a sum of eqs.(2.21) and (2.22). A crossover between the behaviors (2.21) and (2.22) occurs when \[18\] $$\xi_{\rm VG}(T) \sim L_{\rm cr}(B)=\sqrt{{{\phi_0}
\over {B \Delta_{\rm eff}(T)}} \biggl( 1 + {{\Delta^{(p)}} \over {4 h^2
\Delta_\Phi}} \biggr)}. \eqno(2.23)$$ Namely, if $L_{\rm cr}(B)$ is beyond the system size, the behavior (2.21) may be seen like a true critical behavior in type II limit in cleaner systems, and, in a clean sample, the exponent of vanishing resistivity is $B$-dependent and will increase from $\nu(z-3)$ to $\nu(z-1)$ with increasing $B$ in an apparently continuous manner \[18\]. In fact, a $B$-dependent exponent was observed in the vortex slush regime of a YBCO sample, and the expected universal behavior (2.22) seems to have been found in higher fields than $B_{\rm ucp}$ \[40\]. A similar behavior was observed previously in other experiments: the resistivity exponent in a moderately disordered sample was $B$-dependent and smaller than the expected one (2.22) \[41\], while a
$B$-independent scaling behavior has been observed in dirtier samples \[42\]. This expectation \[18\] of an algebraic and $B$-dependent scaling of resistance in the vortex slush regime is different from the thermally-activated vanishing in the slush regime argued by Worthington et al. \[35\].
So far, our discussion has been limited to the field range in which the VG transition occurs (at or) below the first order line or its extraporation to higher fields than $B_{\rm ucp}$. Since, as mentioned above, the pinning disorder becomes effectively weaker in lower fields, it may be natural to expect the first order transiiton not to terminate at lower fields. However, the [*thermal*]{} first order transition should not occur any longer in fields where a glass transition line exists above $T_m(B)$, and a lower critical point $B_{\rm lcp}$ of the first order line should appear if the glass transition lies above $B_m(T)$ in lower fields \[19\].
Actually, this situation is realized even at weak disorder in the present LLL approach which may be qualitatively valid far above the $H_{c1}(T)$. To see this, let us first consider the case with only [*line*]{}-like disorder parallel to ${\bf B}$ \[19,43\], defined by ${\overline {u_j({\bf r}) u_l({\bf r}')}}=\Delta^{(l)}
\delta^{(2)}({\bf r}-{\bf r}')$ and a similar one for the $f$-potential. The resulting glass transition due to such correlated defects $\parallel
{\bf B}$ is called in the literature the Bose-glass (BG) transition \[44\]. Assuming the BG transition to occur above $B_m(T)$, the $\delta V_{\bf
k}$-contribution to the vertex correction to the impurity line, carrying $\Delta^{(l)}$ in this case, in Fig.1 can be neglected, and the vertex correction consists only of the RPA term (a 3D version of eq.(2.7)). Then, $I_{\rm irr}$ is easily obtained in the lowest order in $\Delta^{(l)}$, and a BG-line results in. When $l_{ph}=\xi_0/\sqrt{\Gamma \mu}$ (the usual phase coherence length $\parallel {\bf B}$) $\gg d$, it is expressed as $$B_{\rm BG}(T) \simeq H_{c2}(0) {{\Delta^{(l)}} \over {(\theta_f(T))^2}}
(-\mu_0), \eqno(2.24)$$ which is linear in $T_{c0} - T$ near $T_{c0}$, as observed in ref.15. Since $B_m(T)$ (2.17) has a vanishing curvature near $T_{c0}$, one finds that the resistivities vanish on cooling [*continuously*]{} on $B_{\rm BG}(T)$ above $B_m(T)$ in $B <
B_{\rm lcp}^{(l)}$, where $$B_{\rm lcp}^{(l)} \simeq {{(\Delta^{(l)})^3} \over {(\theta_f(T))^4}}
\, H_{c2}(0), \eqno(2.25)$$ increasing with reducing the fluctuation or enhancing the pinning. Accompanying this BG transition, not only the diagonal conductivities $\sigma_{xx}$ and $\sigma_{zz}$ but also the tilt modulus (the diamagnetic susceptibility to a transverse field $\perp {\bf B}$) show a critical divergence, implying the presence of a transverse Meissner effect in the BG phase \[44\]. The details of calculations of these response quantities near a BG transition will not be given here and can be found in ref.19 together with the corresponding results in the Gaussian splayed-glass transitions \[45\].
Interestingly, the corresponding situation with $B_{\rm VG}(T) > B_m(T)$ also occurs in the case \[24\] with only point disorder. Under the same assumption as that used above for $B_{\rm BG}(T)$, we find a $B_{\rm
VG}(T)$-line \[17\] $$B_{\rm VG}(T) \simeq \biggl({{\Delta^{(p)}} \over {\theta_f(T)}}
\biggr)^2 B_{dc}(T)=H_{c2}(0) {{\xi_0 (\Delta^{(p)})^2} \over
{\sqrt{\Gamma} (\theta_f(T))^3}} (-\mu_0) \eqno(2.26)$$ linear in $-\mu_0$, where $B_{dc}(T)$ is the so-called decoupling crossover line \[34\]. In this case, the resulting lower critical point $B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$ $$B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)} \sim 10^{-2} H_{c2}(0) \biggl({{\xi_0} \over
{\sqrt{\Gamma} d}} \biggr)^3 {{(\Delta^{(p)})^6} \over
{(\theta_f(T))^7}} \eqno(2.27)$$ is usually much smaller than but has similar dependences on the pinning and fluctuation strengths to the corresponding $B_{\rm lcp}^{(l)}$. We note that the above expression was derived in the lowest order in $\Delta^{(p)}$. An inclusion of the next order contribution to $I_{\rm
irr}$ tends to increase $B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$-value, although the resulting dependences on the pinning and fluctuation strengths become complicated \[46\]. Hence, eq.(2.27) should be seen as a lower limit of the expected lower critical point. In any case, the resistivities in $B
< B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$ are expected to vanish continuously at the second order VG transition, and the [*thermal*]{} first order transition should not occur in these low fields where $B_m(T)$ lies in the glass phase. It is important to note that, as clear from the above discussion, a lower critical point is not due to an enhancement of pinning effect accompanying a lowering of the field: A lower critical point was observed in a couple of experiments \[7-9\] in tesla range of YBCO clean samples where the type II limit neglecting fluctuations of flux density is safely valid. It is theoretically difficult to expect a pinning-enhancement accompanying a field-lowering in type II limit. Actually, for this reason, the appearance of a lower critical point was not predicted from treatments based on the vortex elasticity.
As a test of the present explanation \[17,24\] on the existence of the vortex slush regime and of $B_{\rm lcp}$, it is interesting to compare the above results with the oxygen-deficiency dependence \[9\] of YBCO phase diagram. As systematically examined by Nishizaki et al., [*both*]{} the upper and lower critical points of first order line tend to decrease with underdoping \[9,10\]. It is well known at present through the doping dependences of penetration depth \[47\] and heat capacity jump \[48\] that the thermal superconducting fluctuation is enhanced with underdoping. On the other hand, effects of point disorder due to oxygen deficiency also become more remarkable with underdoping. Namely, both $\theta_f(T_{c0})$ and $\Delta^{(p)}$ increase with underdoping. It is natural to interpret the doping dependence of $B_{\rm ucp}$ as being due to a $\Delta_{\rm eff}(T)=\Delta^{(p)}/\theta_f(T)$-increase (i.e., a relative enhancement of pinning) with underdoping. However, additional dependences on the anisotropy $\Gamma$ and on $\theta_f$ of $B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$ (2.27) imply that $B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$ can decrease with increasing $\Delta_{\rm
eff}$, because $\Gamma$ remarkably increases with underdoping \[48\]. An explanation of other experimental findings on the lower critical points was given in ref.24. Now, we are in a position of discussing possible phase diagrams under ${\bf B} \perp$ layers, which are described in Fig.3 \[24\]. Before explaining Fig.3, we need to mention a bit about results of the elastic approach. As emphasized in, for instance, ref.12, the melting line of the BrG phase should be of first order in general. However, the superconducting transition observed in $B < B_{\rm lcp}$ is of second order, and it is difficult to explain the presence of $B_{\rm lcp}$ consistently with the argument favoring the BrG phase. As far as the lower critical point is unrelated to the BrG melting, there is no reason why all of the thermal first order line in $B_{\rm lcp} < B < B_{\rm ucp}$ is included in the BrG melting line. Through some consideration including the above statements, we have concluded that a generic 3D phase diagram in ${\bf B} \perp$ layers with intermediate strengths of fluctuation and pinning will be of the form Fig.3 (a), in which the BrG melting is separated from the thermal first order transition occuring along $B_m(T)$, and the vortex slush regime exists entirely in $B_{\rm lcp} < B < B_{\rm ucp}$. An evidence of a BrG melting line lying much below $B_{\rm VG}(T)$ was recently found in data of NbSe$_2$ \[49\] and (K, Ba)BiO$_3$ \[50\]. However, in HTSC with strong fluctuation, the thermal first order line may be pushed down to lower temperature and, in part, merge the BrG melting line. Then, the only possible phase diagram will be of the form Fig.3 (b), in which the glass phase just below the first order transition in $B_{\rm lcp} < B <
B^*$ is BrG, and the vortex slush regime exists only in $B^* < B <
B_{\rm ucp}$. A recent magnetization measurement in heavily overdoped YBCO \[51\] seems to have shown the presence of the BrG melting line in $B
< B_{\rm lcp}$ approaching $T_{c0}$ with decreasing $B$ just like what we expect through Fig.3 (b). The dashed curves in both Fig.3 (a) and (b) indicate $B^\infty_{\rm VG}(T)$. In passing, we note that the phase diagrams given in Fig.3 are valid even for real systems including weak line-like disorder, although in this case the glass phases have the transverse Meissner effect, and the vortex slush regime is much narrower \[24\] than in the case with no line disorder.
In this section, we briefly explain results found in LLL approach to the phase diagram of model (1.1) in ${\bf B} \parallel$ layers. In this field configuration, the field strength is usually measured by the combination \[26,52\] $$p \equiv {{2 \pi d^2} \over {\phi_0}} \sqrt{\Gamma} B, \eqno(3.1)$$ as far as the relation $\xi_0 < \sqrt{\Gamma} d/\sqrt{2}$ is satisfied. Below, we primarily focus on the strong field region satisfying $\exp(-p) \ll 1$ in such a layered system. In such high fields, the mean field transition line $T_c(B)$ approaches a limiting behavior \[53\] $$T_c(B) \to T_{c0} \biggl( 1 - {{2 \xi_0^2} \over {\Gamma d^2}} \biggr)
\eqno(3.2)$$ independent of $p$, and the action (2.18) written in terms of LLL modes takes the simple form \[26,27\] $${{S_{\rm QLD}} \over \hbar}=\beta \sum_{\bf Q} \sum_\omega \,
\gamma_1 |\omega| |\phi_\omega({\bf Q})|^2 + \int_0^{\hbar \beta}
{{d\tau} \over \hbar} \sum_{\bf Q} \biggl[ \, \biggl( \mu_0 + \xi_0^2
\sum_{\mu=x, y} \biggl( q_\mu + {{2 \pi} \over {\phi_0}} \delta
A_\mu(\tau) \biggr)^2 \biggr)$$ $$\times |\phi({\bf Q}, \tau)|^2 + {b \over {2 d L^2}} \sum_{{\bf Q}_1,
{\bf Q}_2, {\bf Q}_3} V_0(n_1-n_3, n_2-n_3; q_{y, i})$$ $$\times \phi^*({\bf Q}_1, \tau) \phi^*({\bf Q}_2, \tau) \phi({\bf Q}_3,
\tau) \phi({\bf Q}_1+{\bf Q}_2-{\bf Q}_3, \tau) \, \biggr], \eqno(3.3)$$ where $\phi_\omega$ is the Fourier transform of the LLL fluctuation field $\phi(\tau)$, ${\bf Q}_j=q_x {\hat x} + Q_j {\hat y}$, $Q_j==
q_{y, j} +
r_B^{-2} d \, n_j$ with integer $n_j$, $\mu_0=(T - T_c(B))/T_{c0}$ with eq.(3.2), and the disorder energy term ${\cal H}_{rp}$ was dropped for convenience of our presentation. The bare vertex $V_0$ is an even function \[26\] of $n_1-n_3$ and $n_2-n_3$, implying that the partial LLL degeneracy of degree $N_d=L/d$ is measured by $n_j$. Further, the gauge disturbance $\delta {\bf A}$ necessary in deriving a conductivity at a uniform current was assumed to be spatially uniform. The corresponding action useful in deriving tilt modulus can be seen in ref.27.
In the [*disorder-free*]{} case, the only true transition is argued again to be a first order transition at $T_m(B)$ between a vortex solid and a (narrow) vortex liquid regime below $T_c(B)$ \[26\]. In low fields, $T_m(B)$ is close to the corresponding one
of the anisotropic 3D GL model, which is given by eq.(2.17) with $\Gamma$ replaced by $1$, while it approaches, as well as $T_c(B)$, a $p$-independent value in large $p$ limit \[26,27\]: $$T_m(p \gg 1) \simeq {T_c(B)} \biggl( 1 + c_m \, \theta_f^{(2d)}(T_{c0})
\biggr)^{-1} \eqno(3.4)$$ with eq.(3.2), where $\theta_f^{(2d)}(T)=b \, k_{\rm B} T/(2 \pi
\xi_0^2 d)$ is the fluctuation strength in 2D, and a constant of order unity $c_m$ ($> 0$) has not been determined analytically. The fact that $T_m(B)$ becomes independent of $p$ for high $p$ values is a reflection of confinement of vortices between all interlayer spacings. Because an increase of $p$ in $p > 1$ does not delocalize the vortices out of interlayer spacing any longer but just compresses each vortex row along the layers, the spatial variation of $|\psi|$ on the superconducting layers diminishes with increasing $p$. Namely, since the Abrikosov factor $\beta_A$, eq.(2.4), approaches $1.0$ with increasing $p$ ($> 1$) irrespective of the vortex lattice structure at lower temperatures, the first order transition becomes significantly weaker with increasing $p$. In the simulation of 3D XY model \[54\] where $T_c(B)$ is always identical with $T_{c0}$, a similar melting line insensitive to $p$ in $p > 1$ was detected from heat capacity data.
However, the high $p$ ($> 1$) portion of the melting transition was argued there not to be weakened first order mentioned above but to be continuous. This controversy may not be resolved by real experiments because, as discussed below, there is a reason why the disorder-free melting transition in higher $p$ should be easily destroyed by disorder existing in real systems \[27\]. Here we merely note that $T_m$ of eq.(3.4) decreases with increasing the fluctuation strength $\theta_f^{(2d)}(T_{c0})$ or with [*decreasing*]{} the anisotropy $\Gamma$. The latter dependence seems to become dominant in the doping dependence in YBCO according to resistivity data in ref.55.
Below $T_m(B)$ of the [*disorder-free*]{} system, a Josephson-vortex-solid, i.e., a solid phase pinned by the layer structure, is created. This low $T$ phase has finite helicity moduli and thus, zero resistance for any direction on the layer, while it has a nonzero vortex flow resistance guaranteed by zero helicity modulus in the perpendicular direction to the layers. Consequently, there is a transverse Meissner effect for a tilt perpendicular to the layers but not for any tilt parallel to the layers. With a slight change of the $p$-value, a structural transition possibly mediated by a [*unpinned*]{} solid occurs between different pinned solids and is reflected on the $T_m(B)$ line in intermediated fields as its oscillating $B$-dependence \[26\]. This oscillating behavior has been suggested in YBCO data \[55,56\]. However, a description of $p$-dependences of such consecutive structure transitions is highly complicated and will not be given here.
The isotropic form of the gradient terms in eq.(3.3) within the layers (in $x$-$y$ plane) leads to a key insight on the physical picture in the liquid regime. It implies that, for high enough $p$ values, the linear responses, such as the resistance, measured along the layers are independent of the relative direction between $\delta {\bf A}$ (i.e., the current) and ${\bf B}$. This is the essence of the so-called in-plane Lorentz force-free behavior observed \[57,58\] in tesla range of BSCCO where $p > 1$ is safely valid. Simultaneously, the in-plane isotropic form of gradients implies that, on cooling, the phase coherence lengths grow isotropically on the layers, while, as in the case ${\bf B}
\perp$ layers \[34\], the phase coherence perpendicular to the layers above $T_m$ is not sensitive to cooling and remains microscopic as a result of the (partial) LLL degeneracy. Since the phase correlation must be compatible with the positional correlation of vortices \[25,26\], the above-mentioned anisotropy appearing in the phase correlation must be also satisfied by the positional correlation. Hence, the observed in-plane Lorentz-force free behavior proves that, above $T_m$, the positional correlation first grows along the layers rather than across the layers, which is an opposite trend to an argument favoring a vortex smectic liquid \[59\]. Namely, the observation \[57,58\] is incompatible with assuming the intermediate phase \[59\].
It is not easy to describe in details the glass transition due to point disorder in this case ${\bf B} \parallel$ layers. In ref.27, a high field behavior of glass transition line, corresponding to eq.(2.16) in ${\bf B} \perp$ layers, was found and its interpolated behavior to lower fields was conjectured.
Applying a similar analysis to that leading to eq.(2.14) to the present case, the irreducible vertex $I_{\rm irr}$ of $\chi_G=(1 - I_{\rm
irr})^{-1}$, when $N_{\rm cor} \sim$ O(1) and $e^{-p} \ll 1$, is found to have the form $$I_{\rm irr} \simeq {\Delta \over {2 \pi \mu}} \exp(-2 p), \eqno(3.5)$$ where $\mu$ in the present case satisfies $$\mu \simeq \exp( \, 2 \mu_0/\theta_f^{(2d)}(T) \,) \eqno(3.6)$$ which is identical with eq.(2.10), and the random flux $\Delta_\Phi$ was again neglected. The $e^{-p}$-dependence of eq.(3.5) is a reflection of $\beta_A -1 \sim e^{-p}$, i.e., of a weak spatial variation of $|\psi|$ and is also related to an exponentially small shear modulus of the pinning-free solid \[60,26\], while the exponential $T$-dependence in eq.(3.6) is a reflection of a 2D-like superconducting fluctuation weakened by a partial breaking, due to the layering, of the LLL degeneracy. Further, the $p$-insensitive melting line, eq.(3.4), is a consequence of eq.(3.6) which is also independent of $p$.
Here we will assume the first order transition line $T_m(B)$ to terminate at some $p$ ($> 1$) and hence to have a upper critical point indicated as $p_c$ in Fig.4. This is reasonable, because the above-mentioned exponentially small shear modulus in $p > 1$ likely results in a stronger random-pinning effect with increasing $p$. Then, even the first order transition in $p < p_c$ may not be accompanied by an ordinary superconducting ordering signaled by $\mu \to 0$, and eq.(3.6) becomes valid even below $T_m$. Consequently, using the above expressions, one obtains a Josephson-vortex glass (JG) transition line $$B_{\rm JG}(T) \simeq {{\phi_0} \over {2 \pi d \xi_0 \theta_f(T)}}
\biggl[ 1 - 2 {{\xi_0^2} \over {\Gamma d^2}} - {T \over {T_{c0}}}
\biggl(1 + {{\theta_f^{(2d)}(T_{c0})} \over 2} {\rm ln}{{2 \pi} \over
\Delta} \biggr) \biggr],
\eqno(3.7)$$ which has a similar $T$-dependence to eq.(2.26). Note that the prefactor decreases with increasing 3D fluctuation strength $\theta_f$ ($\propto \sqrt{\Gamma}$) and that, due to the assumption $N_{\rm cor}
\sim 1$, the $\Delta \to 0$ limit cannot be taken in eq.(3.7). In the sketched phase diagram Fig.4, eq.(3.7) is useful just in $p > p_{c1}$. In $p_c < p < p_{c1}$, an exponential decay of $N_{\rm
cor}$ resulting from a similar $p$-dependence of shear modulus will not be negligible with increasing $p$. Then, the prefactor of eq.(3.7) effectively diminishes in this field range, and the resulting $B_{\rm
JG}(T)$, as described in Fig.4, becomes more flat. This phase diagram Fig.4 will be compared with existing data in HTSC. An a.c. susceptibility measurement for examining the onset of lock-in phenomena (i.e., of the transverse Meissner effect) in BSCCO has been performed \[28\], and the onset line of lock-in behavior found there has shown a relation similar to eq.(3.7) appearing in $p > p_{c1}$ in Fig.4. A detailed resistivity measurement has been performed in an optimally-doped BSCCO above 60 (K) \[29\] and has shown, at lower temperatures, a [*continuous*]{} vanishing of resistance along a flat curve consistent with $B_{\rm JG}(T)$ of Fig.4 but, near $T_{c0}$, a discontinuous resistivity vanishing at $B_{\rm JG}(T)$ just on or below the disorder-free melting line $T_m(B)$. Further, recent resistivity data in 60K YBCO have suggested the presence of a remarkable slush regime and of a $B_{\rm lcp} \simeq $ 7 (T) above which $T_m$ is roughly independent of $p$ \[56\]. The occurrence of a $B_{\rm lcp}$ in $p \sim 1$ of the case ${\bf B} \parallel$ layers is not surprising if the system is moderately dirty so that the VG transition line in $p < 1$ lies above the $T_m(B)$-line. In fact, the ”vertical” $T_m(B)$ in $p > 1$ suggests that a situation with $B_{\rm lcp}$ and with the first order transition at higher $p$ occurs more easily than in the case ${\bf B} \perp$ layers. The continuous resistivity vanishing in 90K YBCO reported previously \[61\] might be a phenomenon below a $B_{\rm lcp}$.
In the case with disorder, the resistances for a current in [*all*]{} directions vanish simultaneously at $T_{\rm JG}(B)$. Further, the transverse Meissner effect signalled by a critical divergence of tilt modulus for a tilt [*across*]{} the layers is expected to occur for any $p$-value, i.e., even if the vortex lattice in the ${\it pinning-free}$ case is a unpinned solid. A detailed analysis leading to these conclusions on response properties is seen in ref.27.
We have briefly explained the existing theory of phase diagram and physical properties deep in the vortex liquid regime based on the LLL approximation of the GL model. This theory can describe the vanishing behaviors of resistance in various situations in a way consistent with the phase diagram, while it is unclear to what extent the glass phases and possible transitions [*between*]{} them are described starting from the original GL model.
In $\S 2$, a comparison of the theory with experimental data was done for YBCO. In BSCCO with stronger fluctuation and much larger anisotropy, it is known through the angular dependence \[62\] that the internal gauge fluctuation (leading to a magnetic screening changing features of interaction between the vortices) is no longer negligible in the low fields where the first order transition is realized, and hence, the present theory will not be directly applicable.
Nevertheless, we note that, due to the strong dependence on the anisotropy of $B_{\rm lcp}^{(p)}$ in eq.(2.27), the absence of a lower critical point in BSCCO is not surprising. The position of the upper critical point and the presence of slush regime in BSCCO are not clear yet to us. We simply guess here that, like in Fig.4, the VG transition curve and its high field limit (corresponding to eq.(2.16)) in BSCCO should lie extremely below an extrapolated curve of $T_m(B)$ to higher fields.
Recently, the presence of pinning-induced growth of $|\sigma_{xy}|$ near a glass transition was shown theoretically \[63\] and experimentally \[64,65\] and cannot be explained correctly based on the mean field vortex dynamics neglecting thermal fluctuation \[66\]. This should be the case, because the present extension of the fluctuation theory \[6\] has explained the details of phase transition lines at which the linear dissipation vanishes. The glass fluctuation contribution $\sigma_{G, xy}$ to the Hall conductivity is expressed, as well as $\sigma_{G, xx}$, by Fig.2, and it is expected that the magnitude of $\sigma_{G, xy}$ grows on approaching a glass transition with its sign, relative to that of $\sigma_{F, xy}$, dependent on the dimensionality of a dominant pinning disorder \[63\]. The phenomena in the case with only line disorder are the best understood ones, and we find for this case that $\sigma_{G, xy} \cdot \sigma_{F, xy} < 0$ \[63,65\] and that the ratio $\sigma_{G,xy}/\sigma_{G,xx}$ (i.e., the Hall angle near the transition) does not vanish but seems to approach a constant at the transition \[65,66\]. Its details will be reported elsewhere.
\[1\] H. Safar et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**69**]{} (1992) 824.
\[2\] W. K. Kwok et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**69**]{} (1992) 3370.
\[3\] U. Welp et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**67**]{} (1991) 3180.
\[4\] E. Zeldov et al., Nature (London) [**375**]{} (1995) 373.
\[5\] See, for instance, S. Sarti et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 56**]{} (1997) 2356.
\[6\] R. Ikeda, T. Ohmi and T. Tsuneto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**60**]{} (1991) 1051.
\[7\] W. K. Kwok et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{} (2000) 3706.
\[8\] L.M. Paulius et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 61**]{} (2000) R11910.
\[9\] T. Nishizaki et al., Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 341-348**]{} (2000) 957.
\[10\] T. Nishizaki et al., J. Low Temp. Phys. [**117**]{} (1999) 1375; K. Shibata et al., unpublished.
\[11\] T. Giamarchi and P.le Doussal, Phys. Rev. [**B 55**]{} (1997) 6577.
\[12\] T. Nattermann and S. Scheidl, Adv. Phys. [**49**]{} (2000) 607.
\[13\] D. Ertas and D.R. Nelson, Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 272**]{} (1996) 79.
\[14\] E. Brezin, D.R. Nelson, and A. Thiville, Phys. Rev. [**B 31**]{} (1984) 7124.
\[15\] A.W. Smith et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 59**]{} (1999) R11665.
\[16\] A.T. Dorsey, M. Huang, and M.P.A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. [**B 45**]{} (1992) 523.
\[17\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**65**]{} (1996) 3998.
\[18\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**66**]{} (1997) 1603.
\[19\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**69**]{} (2000) 559.
\[20\] D.S. Fisher, M.P.A. Fisher, and D.A. Huse, Phys. Rev. [**B 43**]{} (1991) 130.
\[21\] G. Blatter et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. [**66**]{} (1995) 1125.
\[22\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**65**]{} (1996) 1170.
\[23\] W.E. Lawrence and S. Doniach, [*Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on Low Temp. Phys.*]{}, Kyoto, 1970, ed. by E. Kanda (Keigaku, Tokyo, 1971) page 361.
\[24\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**70**]{} (2001) 219.
\[25\] M.A. Moore, Phys. Rev. [**B 45**]{} (1992) 7336; R. Ikeda, T. Ohmi, and T. Tsuneto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**61**]{} (1992) 254.
\[26\] R. Ikeda and K. Isotani, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**68**]{} (1999) 599.
\[27\] R. Ikeda and H. Adachi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**69**]{} (2000) 2993.
\[28\] S. Nakaharai et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 61**]{} (2000) 3270.
\[29\] J. Mirkovic, S.E. Savel’ev, E. Sugahara, and K. Kadowaki, preprint. Quite recently, this result in fields parallel to the layers was drastically changed by lowering the applied current \[a talk in 56th Annual Meeting, Japan Physica Society (March, 2001)\]. In a low enough current, the resistance has vanished [*discontinuously*]{} along a line insensitive to $B$ in a most field range examined there. This is consistent with the proposed phase diagram \[26,27\] in clean enough case but contradicts that argued \[54\] based on the XY model.
\[30\] D. Saint-James, E.J. Thomas, and G. Sarma, [*Type II Superconductivity*]{} (Pergamon press, Oxford, 1969).
\[31\] M. V. Feigel’man, V.B. Geshkenbein, and A.I. Larkin, Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 167**]{} (1990) 177.
\[32\] H. Ishida and R. Ikeda, unpublished.
\[33\] A.I. Larkin and Yu. Ovchinnikov, [*Nonequilibrium Superconductivity*]{}, ed. by D.N. Langenberg and A.I. Larkin (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986) $\S$ 5.3.
\[34\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**64**]{} (1995) 1683.
\[35\] T.K. Worthington et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 46**]{} (1992) 11854.
\[36\] R. Ikeda, Int. J. Mod. Phys. [**B 10**]{} (1996) 601.
\[37\] R. Ikeda, T. Ohmi, and T. Tsuneto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**59**]{} (1990) 1397.
\[38\] L.G. Aslamasov and A.I. Larkin, Phys. Lett. [**A 26**]{} (1969) 238.
\[39\] A.E. Koshelev, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**76**]{} (1996) 1340.
\[40\] T. Nishizaki et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 61**]{} (2000) 3649.
\[41\] J.A. Fendrich et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{} (1995) 1210.
\[42\] A.M. Petrean et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{} (2000) 5852.
\[43\] R. Ikeda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**68**]{} (1999) 728.
\[44\] D.R. Nelson and V.M. Vinokur, Phys. Rev. [**B 48**]{} (1993) 13060.
\[45\] T. Hwa, P. le Doussal, D.R. Nelson, and V.M. Vinokur, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**71**]{} (1993) 3545.
\[46\] R. Ikeda, unpublished.
\[47\] Y.J. Uemura et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**66**]{} (1991) 2665.
\[48\] J.W. Loram et al., J. Superconductivity [**7**]{} (1994) 243.
\[49\] Y. Paltiel et al., cond-mat/0008092.
\[50\] T. Klein et al., J. Low Temp. Phys. [**117**]{} (1999) 1353.
\[51\] T. Nishizaki, K. Shibata, and N. Kobayashi, unpublished.
\[52\] S.E. Korshunov and A.I. Larkin, Phys. Rev. [**B 46**]{} (1992) 6395.
\[53\] R.A. Klemm, A. Luther, and M.R. Beasley, Phys. Rev. [**B 12**]{} (1975) 877.
\[54\] X. Hu and M. Tachiki, cond-mat/0003068.
\[55\] S.N. Gordeev et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**85**]{} (2000) 4594.
\[56\] T. Naito et al., unpublished.
\[57\] Y. Iye, T. Tamegai, and S. Nakamura, Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 174**]{} (1991) 227.
\[58\] K. Kadowaki, Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 185-189**]{} (1991) 1811.
\[59\] L. Balents and D.R. Nelson, Phys. Rev. [**B 52**]{} (1995) 12951.
\[60\] B.I. Ivlev, N.B, Kopnin, and V.L. Pokrovsky, J. Low Temp. Phys. [**80**]{} (1990) 187.
\[61\] W.K. Kwok et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**72**]{} (1994) 1088.
\[62\] S. Ooi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**82**]{} (1999) 4308.
\[63\] R. Ikeda, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**82**]{} (1999) 3378; Physica (Amsterdam) [**C 316**]{} (1999) 189.
\[64\] G. D’Anna et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**82**]{} (1999) 3379.
\[65\] W. Goeb et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 62**]{} (2000) 9780; W.N. Kang et al., Phys. Rev. [**B 61**]{} (2000) 722.
\[66\] R. Ikeda, in preparation.
\[0.6\][ ]{}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper we study an integral invariant which obstructs the existence on a compact complex manifold of a volume form with the determinant of its Ricci form proportional to itself, in particular obstructs the existence of a Kähler-Einstein metric, and has been studied since 1980’s. We study this invariant from the view point of locally conformally Kähler geometry. We first see that we can define an integral invariant for coverings of compact complex manifolds with automorphic volume forms. This situation typically occurs for locally conformally Kähler manifolds. Secondly, we see that this invariant coincides with the former one. We also show that the invariant vanishes for any compact Vaisman manifolds.'
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1, O-okayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152–8551, Japan'
- 'Department of Mathematics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1, O-okayama, Meguro, Tokyo 152–8551, Japan'
- 'Univ. of Bucharest, Faculty of Mathematics, 14 Academiei str, 70109 Bucharest, Romania, and Institute of Mathematics “Simion Stoilow" of the Romanian Academy, 21, Calea Grivitei str., 010702-Bucharest, Romania.'
author:
- Akito Futaki
- Kota Hattori
- Liviu Ornea
date: 'May 24, 2011'
title: An integral invariant from the view point of locally conformally Kähler geometry
---
Introduction
============
In [@futaki83.1], the first author introduced an integral invariant defined on Fano manifolds and showed that it obstructs the existence of Kähler-Einstein metrics. More precisely, if $M$ is a Fano manifold of dimension $n$ and $$\omega = i\, g_{i{{\overline j}}}\, dz^i \wedge d{{\overline z}}^j$$ is a Kähler form representing $2\pi c_1(M)$, there exists a real smooth function $F \in C^\infty(M)$ such that the Ricci form $$\rho(\omega) = - i \partial {{\overline \partial}}\log \det g$$ is written as $$\rho(\omega) - \omega = i \partial {{\overline \partial}}F$$ since both $\rho(\omega)$ and $\omega$ represent $2\pi c_1(M)$. Then the invariant is defined as a character $f$ of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak h(M)$ of all holomorphic vector fields on $M$ into $\mathbb C$ and is expressed for $X \in \mathfrak h(M)$ by $$\label{invariant1} f(X) = \int_M\, XF\, \omega^n.$$ This invariant was later extended in various ways. We first briefly review the various extension.
The first line of extension is as invariants for compact Kähler manifolds with fixed Kähler class. Let $(M, [\omega])$ be a compact Kähler manifold $M$ with a Kähler class $[\omega]$. Then we can extend $f$ as an obstruction to the existence of a Kähler form in $[\omega]$ of constant scalar curvature ([@futaki83.2], [@calabi85]). This is defined by the same formula (\[invariant1\]) if we replace the condition of $F$ by $$\sigma - \int_M \sigma \omega^n/\vol(M) = \Delta F$$ where $\sigma$ denotes the scalar curvature of $\omega$. When $[\omega]$ is an integral class this was further reformulated by Donaldson [@donaldson02] as an invariant for polarized schemes, and was used to define the notion of K-stability. In a guise the reformulated invariant was expressed as slopes for subschemes by Ross and Thomas [@rossthomas06]. For Fano manifolds with the anticanonical class, the invariant $f$ has recently been extended to an obstruction to the existence of Kähler-Einstein metrics with cone singularities along a divisor (Donaldson [@donaldson1102], Li [@ChiLi1104]), and it is used to define logarithmic K-stability. Around the same time as the work [@futaki83.2] and [@calabi85], the invariant $f$ obstructing the constant scalar curvature Kähler metric was extended further by Bando [@bando83] to a family of invariants $f_k$, $k=1, \cdots, n$, where $f_k$ obstructs the existence of a Kähler form in $[\omega]$ such that the $k$-th Chern form $c_k(\omega)$ is harmonic. Notice that the scalar curvature is constant if and only if the first Chern form is harmonic by the second Bianchi identity. Thus $f_1$ coincides with $f$. Bando’s idea can be further extended to transverse Kähler geometry of compact Sasaki manifolds [@FOW].
The second line of extension was obtained in [@futakimorita85], but this extension is obtained by relating the invariant $f$ for Fano manifolds to invariants classically known in the theory of the equivariant cohomology. Again, let $M$ be a Fano manifold and $\omega = i\, g_{i{{\overline j}}}\, dz^i \wedge d{{\overline z}}^j$ is a Kähler form representing $2\pi c_1(M)$. By the solution by Yau [@yau77] to the Calabi conjecture, there exists a Kähler form $\eta$ representing $2\pi c_1(M)$ such that $\rho(\eta) = \omega$. Then we can rewrite $f$ as in (\[invariant1\]) in terms of $\eta$ and obtain \[invariant2\] f(X) = \_M X ()\^n where \[invariant3\] X\^n = i(X) \^n and $i(X)$ denotes the interior product by $X$, see [@futakimorita85] or [@futaki88] for the detail. Note that, instead of the Kähler form $\eta$, we may use any volume form $\Omega$ and its Ricci form $$\rho(\Omega) = - i \p\bp \log \O.$$ Then we may write (\[invariant2\]) as \[invariant4\] f(X) = \_M X (Ø)\^n where \[invariant5\] XØ= i(X) Ø. We can prove that $f$ is then independent of the choice of $\Omega$, and thus we do not need to assume that $M$ is Fano or Kähler. Thus we obtained an invariant for (possibly non-Kähler) complex manifolds. This last invariant is the one we wish to study in this paper. Note also that we can rewrite (\[invariant4\]) as \[invariant6\] f(X) = - \_M X () . Therefore the invariant $f$ is an obstruction to the existence of a volume form $\O$ such that $\rho(\O)^n/\O$ is constant.
We remark in passing that there is a larger family of invariants including these two lines of extension ([@futaki04-1]). Among them we have a family of invariants which obstructs asymptotic Chow semistability of polarized manifolds ([@futaki04-1], [@FOS08]). By computing them for a 7-dimensional toric Fano manifold suggested by Nill and Paffenholz [@NillPaffen], Ono, Sano and Yotsutani [@OSY09] showed that there is a Kähler-Einstein Fano manifold which is asymptotically unstable.
Now let us turn to the study of the invariant defined by (\[invariant4\]) or (\[invariant6\]). Let $M$ be a compact connected complex manifold of dimension $n$. Consider a covering space $\pi : \wt M \to M$ with the group $\Gamma$ of the deck transformations, and let $\chi : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$ be a homomorphism. A volume form $\Omega$ on $\wt M$ is said to be automorphic with respect to $\chi$ if, for any $\gamma \in \Gamma$, $$\label{Intro1}
\gamma^\ast \Omega = \chi(\gamma)\Omega.$$ Such a covering with automorphic volume form naturally occurs for locally conformally Kähler manifolds as we shall see in the next section.
Given such a covering $\wt M$ with automorphic volume form with respect to $\chi$ we have a Ricci form $\rho_\O$ of $\O$ defined on $\wt M$ by \[Intro2\] \_Ø= - i Ø. Since $\O$ is automorphic, $\rho_\O$ is invariant under the action of $\Gamma$, and thus descends to a $2$-form on $M$ which is denoted by the same notation $\rho_\O$. This represents the first Chern class $2\pi c_1(M)$, and also $2\pi c_1(\wt M)$ upstairs if $\wt M$ is compact.
Denote by $\mathfrak h(M)$ and $\mathfrak h(\wt M)$ the Lie algebras of all holomorphic vector fields on $M$ and $\wt M$ respectively. Denote also by $\mathfrak h_\Gamma (\wt M)$ the Lie subalgebra of $\mathfrak h(\wt M)$ consisting of all holomorphic vector fields on $\wt M$ which are invariant under the action of $\Gamma$. Then a holomorphic vector field in $\mathfrak h_\Gamma(\wt M)$ descends to a holomorphic vector field on $M$, and thus $\mathfrak h_\Gamma(\wt M)$ can be naturally regarded as a Lie subalgebra of $\mathfrak h(M)$. For an $X$ in $\mathfrak h_\Gamma(\wt M)$, its divergence $\div X$ is defined by \[Intro3\] XØ= i(X) Øwhere $i(X)$ denotes the interior product by $X$. Since $\O$ is automorphic and $X$ is invariant under $\Gamma$ it follows that $\div X$ is invariant under $\Gamma$ and that $\div X$ descends to a smooth function on $M$.
We define a linear function $f : \mathfrak h_\Gamma(\wt M) \to {{\mathbb C}}$ by \[Intro4\] f(X) = \_M X \_Ø\^n.
The main theorem of this paper is the following.
\[Intro5\] $\mathrm{(a)}$ Let $M$ be a compact connected complex manifold and $\wt M$ its covering space with the group $\Gamma$ of deck transformations. Suppose that we are given a character $\chi : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$. Then $f$ is independent of the choice of the volume form automorphic with respect to $\chi$.\
$\mathrm{(b)}$ The invariants defined by (\[invariant4\]) and (\[Intro4\]) coincide.\
A locally conformally Kähler manifold $(M,J,g)$ is said to be a Vaisman manifold if there is a metric in the conformal class of $g$ for which the Lee form is parallel, see section 2 for more detail.
\[Intro6\] The invariant in the previous theorem vanishes for any compact Vaisman manifold.
This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we summarize the basics of locally conformally Kähler geometry, and give a proof of Theorem \[Intro6\]. In section 3 we give a proof of Theorem \[Intro5\]. In section 4 we compute the invariant for the one point blow-up of the Hopf surface, and see that this surface gives an example of nontrivial invariant.
Locally conformally Kähler manifolds
====================================
Let $(M,J)$ be a connected complex manifold of complex dimension $n \ge 2$ with $J$ a complex structure. A locally conformally Kähler structure (LCK structure for short) on $(M,J)$ is a covering $$\Gamma \to (\widetilde M,\wt J,\wt \o) \to (M,J)$$ where $\widetilde M$ is a covering space of $M$, $\wt \o$ a Kähler form on $\widetilde M$, and $\Gamma$ the group of deck transformations acting on $\widetilde M$ as holomorphic homotheties. Thus there is a homomorphism $\chi : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$ satisfying $$\gamma^\ast \wt \o = \chi(\gamma) \wt \o.$$ A $p$-form $\alpha$ on $\widetilde M$ ia said to be automorphic if $\gamma^\ast \alpha = \lambda(\gamma) \alpha$ for some character $\lambda : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$. The above Kähler form $\wt \o$ is an example of an automorphic $2$-form.
There is an equivalent definition of an LCK structure described as follows. An LCK structure is a collection of an open covering $M = \cup_{\alpha \in \Lambda} U_\alpha$ and Kähler metrics $g_\alpha$ on $U_\alpha$ satisfying $$g_\alpha = c_{\alpha\beta} g_\beta$$ on $U_\alpha \cap U_\beta$ with $c_{\alpha\beta} \in \mathbb R_+$. Then $\{c_{\a\b}\}$ gives a cocycle. Let $\theta$ be a representative as a closed one form defining the same cohomology class as $\{\log c_{\a\b}\}$. Thus we have $d\theta = 0$, and locally $\theta|_{U_\a} = df_\a$ for a smooth function $f_\a$ on $U_\a$ with $f_\b - f_\a = \log c_{\a\b}$ and $e^{f_\a}g_\a = e^{f_\b} g_\b$ on $U_\a \cap U_\b$. Therefore $g := e^{f_\a}g_\a$ defines a global Hermitian metric locally conformal to a Kähler metric. The $1$-form $\theta$ is called the Lee form. Let $\omega$ be the fundamental $2$-form defined by $$\omega(X,Y) = g(JX,Y).$$ Then one easily shows that $$\begin{aligned}
d\omega &=& \theta \wedge\omega \label{lck1}\\
d\theta &=& 0. \label{lck2}
\end{aligned}$$ As an equivalent third definition we may say that an Hermitian manifold $(M,J,g)$ is a locally conformally Kähler manifold if the fundamental $2$-form $\omega$ of $g$ satisfies (\[lck1\]) and (\[lck2\]).
When we say $(M,J,g)$ is an LCK manifold we assume that $\theta \ne 0$, that is, $(M,J,g)$ is not globally Kähler.
The equivalence between the second and the third definitions is obvious. To see that first implies the third, suppose that we are in a situation of the first definition. Let $L$ be the $\mathbb R$-bundle given by $\wt M \times_\chi \mathbb R$. Since $\chi$ is $\mathbb R^+$-valued, $L$ is oriented and thus is a trivial bundle. It follows that $L$ has a nowhere zero section which defines a positive $\chi$-equivariant function $\phi$ on $\wt M$. Then $\omega := \phi^{-1}\wt\omega$ is a $\Gamma$-invariant positive $2$-form. This $\omega$ satisfies the third definition with $\theta = - \log \phi$.
We need only to show that the second implies the first. Suppose that we have Kähler forms $\omega_\a$ on $U_\a$ such that $\omega_\a = c_{\a\b} \omega_\b$ with $c_{\a\b} \in \mathbb R^+$. Then $\{c_{\a\b}\} \in H^1(M, \mathbb R^{+\delta})$ defines a flat principal $\mathbb R^+$-bundle. The holonomy gives a character $\chi : \Gamma = \pi_1(M) \to \mathbb R^+$. Let $L = \wt M \times_\chi \mathbb R$ be the associated $\mathbb R$-bundle. We may regard $\{\omega_\a\}$ as a section of $$L\otimes \Lambda^2T^{\ast} M = (\wt M \times_\chi \mathbb R)\otimes \Lambda^2T^\ast M = \wt M \times_\chi (\mathbb R \otimes p^\ast\Lambda^2T^{\ast} M)$$ where $p : \wt M \to M$ is the projection. Thus $\{\omega_\a\}$ defines a $\chi$-equivariant closed $2$-form $\wt \o$ on $\wt M$. This completes the equivalence of the three definitions of LCK structures.
Recall that a locally conformally Kähler manifold $(M,J,g)$ is said to be a Vaisman manifold if there is a metric in the conformal class of $g$ for which the Lee form is parallel. It is shown in [@KamishimaOrnea05] that a Vaisman manifold is obtained as a quotient of the Kähler cone $C(S)$ of a Sasakian manifold $S$ by a subgroup $\Gamma$ of the homotheties acting freely and properly discontinuously. Then the proof follows from Lemma \[Ricci\] below since for the Reeb vector field $\xi = Jr\frac\p{\p r}$ on $C(S)$, $\xi - iJ\xi$ is a holomorphic flow and the Ricci tensor degenerates on this orbit. See the arguments below for the notations.
Recall that a Riemannian manifold $(S, g)$ of dimension $2m + 1$ is a Sasakian manifold if the cone $(C(S), \bar g) = (\mathbb R^+ \times S,
dr^2 + r^2 g)$ is a Kähler manifold. Here $r$ is the standard coordinate on $\mathbb R^+$. The metric $\bar g$ is a warped product metric, and the Riemannian geometry of $C(S)$ is easily studied from that of $S$. Let $\bar\nabla$ and $\nabla$ be the Levi-Civita connections on $C(S)$ and $S$ respectively. Let $X, Y$ be tangent vector fields on $S$, which are naturally regarded as vector fields on $C(S)$ by the product structure $C(S) = \mathbb R^+ \times S$. Consider a vector field $\Psi := r\frac \p{\p r}$ on $C(S)$. It is generally true for cone manifolds that \[Ricci1\] |\_X = |\_ X = X and that \[Ricci2\] |\_X Y = \_X Y - g(X,Y) . Let $\bar R$ be the curvature tensors on $C(S)$. Then using (\[Ricci1\]) and (\[Ricci2\]) we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\bar R(X,\Psi, Y, \Psi) &=& \bar g (- \bar\nabla_X \bar\nabla_{\Psi} Y + \bar\nabla_{\Psi}\bar\nabla_X Y + \bar\nabla_{[X, \Psi]}Y, \Psi\\
&=& \bar g (- \bar\nabla_X Y + \bar\nabla_{\Psi}(\nabla_X Y - g(X,Y)\Psi), \Psi)\\
&=& - \bar g(\nabla_X Y - g(X,Y)\Psi, \Psi) + \bar g(\nabla_X Y - g(X,Y)\Psi, \Psi)\\
&=& 0.\end{aligned}$$ This implies that \[Ricci3’\] |Ric(, ) = 0 where $\bar Ric$ denotes the Ricci tensor on $C(S)$. Let $J$ be the complex structure on $C(S)$. The vector field $\xi = Jr\frac\p{\p r}$ on $C(S)$ is called the Reeb vector field, and it is a standard fact in Sasakian geometry that $\xi - iJ\xi$ is a holomorphic vector field. Since the Ricci tensor on a Kähler manifold is $J$-invariant, (\[Ricci3’\]) implies \[Ricci4’\] |Ric(, ) = 0. From (\[Ricci3’\]) and (\[Ricci4’\]) we have proved the following.
\[Ricci\] The Ricci tensor on $C(S)$ vanishes on the plane spanned by $\xi$ and $J\xi = - r \frac \p{\p r}$.
For a Vaisman manifold $M$ we can also find an LCK metric $g$ for which the Ricci form $\rho(g)$ satisfies $\rho(g)^n = 0$, showing that the integrand of (\[invariant4\]) and (\[invariant6\]) vanishes. Recall that the Kähler form $\wt \o$ on $C(S)$ is written as $\wt \o = dd^c r^2$, see for example [@FOW]. As we have seen in Lemma \[Ricci\], we have $\rho(\wt \o)^{m+1} = 0$. Note that $n= m+1$ here. Then $\wt \o/r^2 = \frac 1 {r^2} dd^c r^2$ defines a $\Gamma$-invariant 2-form and descends to $M$. Since $dd^c \log r$ is the transverse Kähler form $\omega^T$ on the Sasaki manifold $S$ (but regarded as lifted to $C(S)$), the Ricci form of $\wt \o/r^2$ is equal to $\rho(\wt \o) + 2(m+1)\omega^T$. This also degenerates on the orbit of the flow generated by $\xi - iJ\xi$. Hence we have $\rho(\wt \o/r^2)^{m+1} = 0$ on the Vaisman manifold $M$.
Proof of Theorem \[Intro5\]
===========================
In this section we prove the following result.
\[result1\] Let $M$ be a compact connected complex manifold and $\wt M$ its covering space with the group $\Gamma$ of deck transformations. Suppose that we are given a character $\chi : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$. Then $f$ defined by (\[Intro4\]) is independent of the choice of the automorphic volume form $\Omega$ and its character $\chi$.
Theorem \[Intro5\] follows from Theorem \[result1\] because (a) in Theorem \[Intro5\] is obtained by comparing $(\O_1, \chi)$ and $(\O_2, \chi)$, and (b) in Theorem \[Intro5\] is obtained by comparing $(\O_1, \chi)$ and $(\O_2, 1)$.
Let $M$ be a compact connected complex manifold and $\wt M$ be a covering space of $M$ with the group $\Gamma$ of deck transformations. Let $\O$ be a smooth volume form on $\wt M$ automorphic with respect to $\chi : \Gamma
\to \mathbb R^+$. If $z^1, \cdots, z^n$ are local holomorphic coordinates on $\wt M$, the volume form $\O$ can be expressed as \[proof1\] Ø= aidz\^1 d[[z]{}]{}\^1 i dz\^n d[[z]{}]{}\^n where $a$ is a local positive smooth function. The Ricci form $\rho_\O$ and the divergence $\div X$ can be expressed using $a$ as \[proof2\] \_Ø= - ia, and \[proof3\] X = \_[i=1]{}\^n + X a. From (\[proof3\]) we obtain \[proof4\] X = i(X) a.
Let $\O_0, \O_1$ be volume forms automorphic with respect to $\chi_0,\chi_1 : \Gamma \to \mathbb R^+$, respectively. Then $\O_i$ can be expressed as Ø\_0 &=& a idz\^1 d[[z]{}]{}\^1 i dz\^n d[[z]{}]{}\^n,\
Ø\_1 &=& a idz\^1 d[[z]{}]{}\^1 i dz\^n d[[z]{}]{}\^n, where the positive real valued function $\varphi$ on $\wt M$ is given by $\O_1 = \varphi \O_0$. Then we have \[proof6\] \^\*= for all $\gamma\in \Gamma$.
Let $\O_t$ be \[proof7\] Ø\_t = \^t a idz\^1 d[[z]{}]{}\^1 i dz\^n d[[z]{}]{}\^n, for each $0 \le t \le 1$. Then each $\O_t$ is automorphic with respect to a character $\chi_t:=\chi_0^{1-t}\chi_1^t$. Thus a smooth family of linear maps $f_t:\mathfrak h_\Gamma (\wt M) \to \mathbb{C}$ is defined by \[proof8\] f\_t(X) = \_M \_t X \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n, where $\div_t X$ is the divergence determined by $\O_t$. Then it suffices to show that \[proof9\] f\_t(X) = 0 for all $X \in \mathfrak h_\Gamma (\wt M)$.
It is easy to see \[proof10\] d[dt]{} (\_t X) = X() and \[proof11\] d[dt]{} \_[Ø\_t]{} = - i. Then we have && d[dt]{} \_M \_t X \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n\
&=& \_M X( ) \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n - \_M \_t X i( ) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{}\
&=& \_M X( ) \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n + \_M (\_tX (i ) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{})\
&& - \_M (\_tX) (i ) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{}. Although $\varphi$ is not $\Gamma$-invariant, $\p \log \varphi$ is $\Gamma$-invariant from (\[proof6\]) and descends to a $1$-form on $M$. Since $\div_tX$ and $\rho_{\O_t}$ are also defined globally on $M$, we can deduce \[proof12\] \_M (\_tX (i ) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{}) = 0 from Stokes’ Theorem. Therefore we have && d[dt]{} \_M \_t X \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n\
&=& \_M X( ) \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n - \_M (\_tX) (i ) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{}\
&=& \_M X( ) \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n\
&& - \_M (i(X)(\^t a)) (i) n\_[Ø\_t]{}\^[n-1]{}\
&=& \_M X( ) \_[Ø\_t]{}\^n + \_M (i(X)\_[Ø\_t]{}\^n) \
&=& \_M i(X) (\_[Ø\_t]{}\^n ) = 0 since $\rho_{\O_t}^n \wedge \p \log \varphi \equiv 0$ because of dimension reasons. This completes the proof of Theorem \[result1\].
In general the vanishing of $f$ is the obstruction to the existence of an automorphic volume form on $\wt M$ with $\rho_\O = 0$. But if $\wt M = M$ or $\chi$ is trivial, the vanishing of $f$ obstructs the existence of a volume form with $\rho_\O^n = k\O$ for some constant $k$.
The localization formula and an example
=======================================
Now that the invariant is independent of the choice of $(\O, \chi)$ we may use an old result to compute the case when $\chi$ is trivial. This is a residue formula for holomorphic vector fields.
Let $X$ be a holomorphic vector field in $\frak h (M)$. Define a section $L(X)$ of the endomorphism bundle $\mathrm{End}(TM)$ of the holomorphic tangent bundle $TM$ by \[proof13\] L(X)Y = \_XY - \[X,Y\]. Suppose that the zero set $\mathrm{zero}(X)$ of $X$ consists of smooth submanifolds $\{Z_\lambda\}_{\lambda \in \Lambda}$. Then $L(X)$ induces a section $L^\nu(X)$ of the endomorphism bundle of the normal bundle $\nu(Z_\lambda) = (TM|_{Z_\lambda})/TZ_{\lambda}$ of $Z_\lambda$.
\[zero1\] If $L^\nu(X)$ is nonsingular at every $q \in \mathrm{zero}(X)$, we have the following localization formula (1[2]{})\^n (n+1)f(X) = \_\_[Z\_]{}((X + c\_1(M))\^[n+1]{}|\_[Z\_]{})/(L\^(X) + i[2]{}K) where $K$ is the curvature form of $\nu(Z_\lambda)$ with respect to the induced Hermitian connection.
We provide an explicit computation of non-zero invariant on the blow-up at a point of a Hopf surface which by [@tr; @vu] is an LCK manifold, using the localization formula.
Let $H^2$ be a Hopf surface that we regard as $\CM^2\setminus \{0\}/\ZM$, where $\ZM$ is generated by the transformation $(z_1,z_2)\mapsto (2z_1,2z_2)$. We choose the fundamental domain on $\CM^2\setminus \{0\}$ to be $\{(z_1,z_2)\ |\ 1 \leq |z_1|^2+|z_2|^2\leq 2\}$.
Let $M$ be the blow-up of $H^2$ at the point $(0, \frac 32)$. It will be convenient to change the coordinates $(z_1,z_2)$ into $(w_1,w_2)$ by: $$w_1=z_1,\quad w_2=z_2-\frac 32.$$ Then the blow-up takes place at the origin $(w_1,w_2)=(0,0)$ and the exceptional divisor $E$ is $\{(w_1:w_2)\}\cong \CM P^1\subset M$.
Let $X=z_1\frac \p{\p z_1}$ be the radial (global) vector field on $\CM^2$. Its zero set contains $(0,\frac 32)$. We shall equally denote by $X$ its lift to $M$. Its zero set on $M$ will certainly contain $\{z_1=0\}$, but also some other point that we now determine.
Take first local coordinates on $M$ around $(1:0)\in E$ to be $$\z_1=w_1, \quad \z_2=\frac{w_2}{w_1}.$$ This change of coordinates is consistent with the coordinates on the exceptional divisor. In the new coordinates, $X$ is written as $$X=\z_1\frac \p{\p \z_1}-\z_2\frac \p{\p \z_2}.$$ In these coordinates $(\z_1,\z_2)$, $\mathrm{zero}(X)=\left\{ (0,0)\right\}.$ Hence, the zero is on $E$ (as $\z_1=0$). On the other hand, $\z_2=0$ implies $w_2=0$. Thus, the isolated zero of $X$ is $(w_1:w_2)=(1:0)$.
Now recall that, in general, if a holomorphic vector field $Y=a\frac \p{\p\z_1}+b\frac \p{\p\z_2}$, then $$\label{zero}
L(Y)(\frac \p{\p\z_j})|_{\mathrm{zero}(Y)}=-\Ll_Y \frac \p{\p\z_j}+\nabla_X\frac \p{\p\z_j}=\frac{\p a}{\p\z_j}\frac \p{\p\z_1}+\frac{\p b}{\p\z_j}\frac \p{\p\z_2},$$ as the $\nabla_Y=0$ on the zero set of $Y$.
Hence, in our case, for the point $(1:0)$, the localization formula reduces to: $$\frac{\tr(L(X))^3}{\det(L^\nu(X))}=\frac{\left(\tr\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{pmatrix}\right)^3}{\det \begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{pmatrix}}=0,$$ as the normal bundle of the point equals the tangent bundle at the point, and this is trivial, hence $\Theta=0$.
So, the isolated zero does not contribute to the value of the invariant.
For the dimension 1 component of $\mathrm{zero}(X)$, take on $M$, around $(0:1)$, the coordinates: $$\z_1=w_2,\quad \z_2=\frac{w_1}{w_2}.$$ In these coordinates $X$ takes the form $$X=\z_2\frac \p {\p\z_2},$$ and $\mathrm{zero}(X)=\left\{(\z_1,0)\right\}$, a line represented by $(0:1)$. It is the proper transform of $\{z_1=0\}$. Using , we find now $$L(X)=\begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&1\end{pmatrix}.$$ The localization formula gives: $$\int_Z\frac{\left(\tr \left( \begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&1\end{pmatrix} +\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{2\pi}\Theta\right)\right)^3}{1+\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{2\pi}\Theta^\nu}=
\int_Z\frac{\left(1+c_1(Z)+c_1(\nu(Z))\right)^3}{1+c_1(\nu(Z))},$$ where $\nu(Z)$ is the normal bundle of the zero set $Z=\mathrm{zero}(X)$.
Observe that $\nu(Z)=-[E]$. Indeed, if $\pi:M \to H^2$ denotes the natural projection, then: $$[\pi(Z)]=[\pi(Z+E)],$$ and hence (as they are trivial line bundles), $$0=\pi^*[\pi(Z)]=[Z+E]=[Z]+[E]=[\nu(Z)]+[E].$$ On the other hand, $c_1(Z)=0$, as $Z$ is an elliptic curve. We obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
\int_Z\frac{\left(1+c_1(Z)+c_1(\nu(Z))\right)^3}{1+c_1(\nu(Z))}
&=& \int_Z(1-c_1([E]))^3 (1+c_1([E])))\\
&=& \int_Z(-3c_1([E]))+c_1([E])))\\
&=& Z\cdot (-2[E]))=-2.\end{aligned}$$ In conclusion, $3(\frac 1{2\pi})^2f(X)=-2\neq 0$.
[100]{}
S. Bando : An obstruction for Chern class forms to be harmonic, Kodai Math. J., 29(2006), 337-345.
E. Calabi : Extremal Kähler metrics II, Differential geometry and complex analysis, (I. Chavel and H.M. Farkas eds.), 95-114, Springer-Verlag, Berline-Heidelberg-New York, (1985).
S.K. Donaldson : Scalar curvature and stability of toric varieties, J. Differential Geometry, 62(2002), 289-349.
S.K. Donaldson : Kähler metrics with cone singularities along a divisor, preprint. arXiv:1102.1196.
S. Dragomir, L. Ornea : Locally conformal Kähler geometry, Progress in Math. [**155**]{}, Birkhäuser, 1998.
A. Futaki : An obstruction to the existence of Einstein Kähler metrics, Invent. Math. [**73**]{}, 437-443 (1983).
A. Futaki : On compact Kähler manifolds of constant scalar curvature, Proc. Japan Acad., Ser. A, [**59**]{}, 401-402 (1983).
A. Futaki : Kähler-Einstein metrics and integral invariants, Lecture Notes in Math., vol.1314, Springer-Verlag, Berline-Heidelberg-New York,(1988)
A. Futaki : Asymptotic Chow semi-stability and integral invariants, Internat. J. Math., [**15**]{}, 967-979, (2004).
A. Futaki and S. Morita : Invariant polynomials of the automorphism group of a compact complex manifold, J. Differential Geometry, [**21**]{}, 135–142 (1985).
A. Futaki, H. Ono and Y. Sano : Hilbert series and obstructions to asymptotic semistability, Advances in Math., 226 (2011), 254–284.
A. Futaki, H. Ono and G. Wang : Transverse Kähler geometry of Sasaki manifolds and toric Sasaki-Einstein manifolds, J. Differential Geometry, 83(2009), 585-636.
Y. Kamishima and L. Ornea : Geometric flow on compact locally conformally Kähler manifolds, Tohoku Math. J., 57 (2005), no. 2, 201–221.
C. Li : Remarks on logarithmic K-stability, preprint. arXiv:1104.0428v1.
B. Nill and A. Paffenholz : Examples of non-symmetric Kähler-Einstein toric Fano manifolds, preprint. arXiv:0905.2054.
H.Ono, Y.Sano and N.Yotsutani : An example of asymptotically Chow unstable manifolds with constant scalar curvature, to appear in Annales de L’Institut Fourier. arXiv:0906.3836.
J. Ross and R.P. Thomas : An obstruction to the existence of constant scalar curvature Kähler metrics, J. Differential Geom. 72 (2006), no. 3, 429–466.
F. Tricerri : [Some examples of locally conformal K[ä]{}hler manifolds]{}, Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino [**40**]{} (1982), 81–92.
V. Vuletescu : [Blowing-up points on l.c.K. manifolds]{} Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Roumanie (N.S.) [**52(100)**]{} (2009), 387–390.
S.-T. Yau : On Calabi’s conjecture and some new results in algebraic geometry, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, [**74**]{}, 1798-1799 (1977).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We obtain the wave functions associated to the quantum Newtonian universe with a cosmological constant which is described by the Schrödinger equation and discuss some aspects of its dynamics for all forms of energy density, namely, matter, radiation, vacuum, dark energy, and quintessence. These wave functions of the quantum Newtonian universe are obtained in terms of the Heun’s functions and the respective energy levels are shown. We use these solutions to investigate the expansion of the universe and found that the asymptotic behavior for the scale factor is $R \sim \mbox{e}^{t}$ for whatever the form of energy density is. We also analyze the behavior of the universe at early stages.'
author:
- 'H. S. Vieira'
- 'V. B. Bezerra'
- 'C. R. Muniz'
- 'M. S. Cunha'
title: Some exact results on quantum Newtonian cosmology
---
Introduction
============
A model of the universe constructed by combining Newtonian mechanics with the cosmological principle and assuming the fact that the matter is pressureless and our universe experiences an expansion was presented in the 1930’s by Milne and McCrea [@QJMath.5.64; @QJMath.5.73]. Then, they derived a cosmological equation which is algebraically analogous to the Friedmann one, to describe the evolution of the universe taking into account the expression for the total energy of the particles (galaxies) subject to the gravitational interaction and additionally, considering the cosmological principle. Taking into account this system, we can construct the Lagrangian and write down the Hamiltonian associated to it and find the equation and integral of motion. The description obtained in this approach, with pressureless matter, is equivalent to the one obtained in the context of relativistic cosmology. In other words, the description of the universe using Newtonian dynamics and gravitation, for a pressureless system and assuming the cosmological principle and the expansion of the universe, is exactly the same obtained in the context of relativistic cosmology.
In what follows we will use this classical approach to describe the universe using Newtonian mechanics and gravitation and extend it to the domain of quantum cosmology. To do this we construct the Hamiltonian of the system from which we can write the corresponding Schrödinger equation whose wave function is supposed to describe the time-dependent evolution of the universe, which should depend only on the scale factor. Thus, this wave function describes the evolution of the observed universe and this evolution follows a unique route. Therefore, using this point of view, it is not necessary to take into account the Schrödinger equation for a system of $N$ particles, with $N > 1$, but just consider the single particle problem.
It is worth calling attention to the fact that when the pressure is different from zero, it is necessary to modify the equations to take into account the pressure [@ProcRSocLondA.206.562] and adopt a series of assumptions [@ProcRSocLondA.149.384] to guarantee that the Newtonian and Einstein theories give similar results.
In the context of pure quantum cosmology the universe should be described by a single wave function defined for the different Friedmann-Robertson-Walker spacetime geometries taking into account all matter contents. In this approach, the equation for the wave function is not the Schrödinger equation, but the Wheeler-DeWitt equation [@PhysRev.160.1113; @Wheeler:1968]. Based on this equation a lot of investigations have been done with the proposal to determine the wave function of the universe [@PhysLettB.117.25; @PhysRevD.27.2848; @PhysRevD.28.2960; @LettNuovoCimento.39.401; @PhysRevD.30.509; @NuclPhysB.239.257; @NuclPhysB.252.141; @PhysRevD.32.2511; @NuclPhysB.264.185; @PhysRevLett.57.2244; @PhysLettA.236.10; @PhysRevD.86.063504; @ClassQuantumGrav.30.143001].
On the other hand, it is possible to find the wave function of the universe in the context which corresponds to what is termed quantum Newtonian cosmology. In this approach the wave functions are solutions of the Schrödinger equation for the system under consideration [@AIPConfProc.743.286; @arXiv:0504072; @ProcRSoc.A.463.503; @IntJTheorPhys.47.455; @ISRNMathPhys.2013.509316], which, in principle, is much more simple than in pure quantum cosmology approach where the Wheeler-DeWitt equation is taken into account. Otherwise, it is more involved than by merely adding quantum corrections to the Newtonian potential [@EurPhysJC.76.543].
Thus, we will consider different epochs of the early Universe, where the involved energies are lower but its scale is small enough in order to use a quantum approach by taking the Schrödinger equation into consideration. In this scenario, the galaxies do not have emerged yet, but their seeds, yes. This quantum approach to Newtonian cosmology does not correspond necessarily to a real description of the evolution of the universe, but could be a source of inspiration to construct, possibly, a real quantum theory of gravity.
It is worth calling attention to the fact that in adopting this point of view, we are extending the Birkhoff’s theorem to quantum Newtonian cosmology. We considered the usual understanding of standard cosmology, in which a galaxy is a material point under the influence of $1/R$ potential generated by a spherical distribution of matter with radius $R$ reaching it. The galaxies outside this region are not taken into account. In addition, we consider later epochs of the universe, where the energies are lower but the scale factor is small enough in order that it is possible to use of the Schrödinger equation to describe the system, instead of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section \[Sec.II\], we solve the Schrödinger equation for different contents of matter, show the effective potential energy and determine the energy spectrum. In Section \[Sec.III\], we analyze the behaviors of the scale factor for different scenarios. Finally, in Section \[Sec.IV\], we present the conclusions.
Schrödinger equation in a Newtonian universe: wave functions and energy levels {#Sec.II}
==============================================================================
In a previous paper [@JMathPhys.56.092501], we have found that the Hamiltonian operator for a particle (galaxy) moving in the Newtonian universe is given by $$H=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu}\frac{d^{2}}{dR^{2}}-\frac{GM\mu}{R}-\frac{1}{6}\Lambda \mu R^{2}\ ,
\label{eq:Hamiltonian_op-canonical}$$ where $\mu$ is the mass of a particle, $R$ is the scale factor, and $\Lambda$ is the cosmological constant. The total mass $M$ of the Newtonian universe (mass inside the sphere of radius $R$) is given by $$M=\frac{4}{3}\pi R^{3}\rho\ .
\label{eq:mass_Newtonian_universe}$$ The density energy $\rho$ can be expressed as [@PhysRevD.94.023511] $$\rho_{\omega}=A_{\omega}R^{-3(\omega+1)}\ ,
\label{eq:WDE_density}$$ where $$A_{\omega}=\rho_{\omega 0}R_{0}^{3(\omega+1)}\ ,
\label{eq:A_WDE_density}$$ and $\rho_{\omega 0}$ stands for the value of $\rho_{\omega}$ at present time, with the state parameter, $\omega$, being given by $$\omega=\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
0 & \mbox{for matter}\ (\rho_{m})\ ,\\
\frac{1}{3} & \mbox{for radiation}\ (\rho_{r})\ ,\\
-1 & \mbox{for vacuum}\ (\rho_{v})\ ,\\
-\frac{1}{3} & \mbox{for dark energy}\ (\rho_{d})\ ,\\
-\frac{2}{3} & \mbox{for quintessence}\ (\rho_{q})\ ,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:omega_Newtonian_universe}$$ so that $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
A_{m}=\rho_{m0}R_{0}^{3}\ ,\\
A_{r}=\rho_{r0}R_{0}^{4}\ ,\\
A_{v}=\rho_{v0}\ ,\\
A_{d}=\rho_{d0}R_{0}^{2}\ ,\\
A_{q}=\rho_{q0}R_{0}\ .
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:A_Newtonian_universe}$$ If matter, radiation, vacuum, dark energy and quintessence contribute all together, the energy density is given by the sum $$\rho=\sum_{\omega}\rho_{\omega}=\rho_{m}+\rho_{r}+\rho_{v}+\rho_{d}+\rho_{q}\ .
\label{eq:density_sums}$$ Thus, substituting Eqs. (\[eq:mass\_Newtonian\_universe\])-(\[eq:omega\_Newtonian\_universe\]) into Eq. (\[eq:Hamiltonian\_op-canonical\]), we obtain $$H=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu}\frac{d^{2}}{dR^{2}}+V_{eff}(R)\ ,
\label{eq:generalized_Hamiltonian_Newtonian_universe}$$ which corresponds to the generalized Hamiltonian operator for a particle moving in the Newtonian universe, where $V_{eff}(R)$ is the effective potential energy given by $$V_{eff}(R)=-\frac{4 \pi G \mu}{3}\biggl[A_{d}+A_{q}R+\biggl(A_{v}+\frac{\Lambda}{8 \pi G}\biggr)R^{2}+\frac{A_{m}}{R}+\frac{A_{r}}{R^{2}}\biggr]\ .
\label{eq:Newtonian_universe_effective_potential_energy}$$ The behaviors of $V_{eff}(R)$ for all cases are shown in Figs. \[fig:Newtonian\_universe\_Fig1\]-\[fig:Newtonian\_universe\_Fig4\], for positive and negative values of the cosmological constant.
![The effective potential energy for $\Lambda > 0$.[]{data-label="fig:Newtonian_universe_Fig1"}](Figure1.eps)
![The effective potential energy for $\Lambda > 0$, for different kind of energy densities.[]{data-label="fig:Newtonian_universe_Fig2"}](Figure2.eps)
![The effective potential energy for $\Lambda = -|\Lambda|$.[]{data-label="fig:Newtonian_universe_Fig3"}](Figure3.eps)
![The effective potential energy for $\Lambda = -|\Lambda|$, for different kind of energy densities.[]{data-label="fig:Newtonian_universe_Fig4"}](Figure4.eps)
In the Newtonian approach to cosmology, the dynamics of the system comes from the radial proper motion of the galaxies, and not of the spacetime itself, which is supposed to be flat. In this context, the cosmological equation analogous to the Friedmann one is obtained. Thus, let us solve the time independent Schrödinger equation $H\psi(R)=E\psi(R)$, where $\Psi(R,t)=\psi(R)\mbox{e}^{-iEt/\hbar}$, and the Hamiltonian is given by Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_Hamiltonian\_Newtonian\_universe\]). Instead of solve this equation separately for each value of the state parameter $\omega$, we will do this in a general way, and thus it will be valid for any kind of energy $\omega$. Therefore, the Schrödinger equation for a particle moving in the Newtonian universe can be written as $$\frac{d^{2}\psi(R)}{dR^{2}}+\biggl(B_{1}+B_{2}R+B_{3}R^{2}+\frac{B_{4}}{R}+\frac{B_{5}}{R^{2}}\biggr)\psi(R)=0\ ,
\label{eq:generalized_Schrodinger_equation_Newtonian_universe}$$ where the coefficients $B_{1}$, $B_{2}$, $B_{3}$, $B_{4}$, and $B_{5}$ are given by $$B_{1}=\frac{2\mu E}{\hbar^{2}}+\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}}{3 \hbar^{2}}A_{d}\ ,
\label{eq:B1_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$B_{2}=\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}}{3\hbar^{2}}A_{q}\ ,
\label{eq:B2_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$B_{3}=\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}}{3 \hbar^{2}}\biggl(A_{v}+\frac{\Lambda}{8 \pi G}\biggr)\ ,
\label{eq:B3_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$B_{4}=\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}}{3 \hbar^{2}}A_{m}\ ,
\label{eq:B4_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$B_{5}=\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}}{3 \hbar^{2}}A_{r}\ .
\label{eq:B5_Newtonian_universe}$$ Now, we define a new variable, $x$, such that $$x=\tau R\ ,
\label{eq:x_Newtonian_universe}$$ where the parameter $\tau$ is given by $$\tau=(-B_{3})^{\frac{1}{4}}\ .
\label{eq:tau_Newtonian_universe}$$ Thus, with this new variable, we can write Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_Schrodinger\_equation\_Newtonian\_universe\]) as $$\frac{d^{2}\psi(x)}{dx^{2}}+\biggl(b_{1}+b_{2}x-x^{2}+\frac{b_{4}}{x}+\frac{b_{5}}{x^{2}}\biggr)\psi(x)=0\ ,
\label{eq:generalized_motion_Newtonian_universe}$$ where the coefficients $b_{1}$, $b_{2}$, $b_{4}$, and $b_{5}$ are written as $$b_{1}=\frac{B_{1}}{\tau^{2}}\ ,
\label{eq:b1_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$b_{2}=\frac{B_{2}}{\tau^{3}}\ ,
\label{eq:b2_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$b_{4}=\frac{B_{4}}{\tau}\ ,
\label{eq:b4_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$b_{5}=B_{5}\ .
\label{eq:b5_Newtonian_universe}$$
In what follows we will solve Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_motion\_Newtonian\_universe\]) and determine the eigenvalues. Equation (\[eq:generalized\_motion\_Newtonian\_universe\]) is a biconfluent Heun equation [@Ronveaux:1995], which is a particular case of a second order linear differential equation with four singularities, called Heun equation. The confluent form of this equation is obtained when two of the singularities coalesce and at infinity there is an irregular point. The canonical form of the biconfluent Heun equation reads as $$\frac{d^{2}y(x)}{dx^{2}}+\biggl(\frac{1+\alpha}{x}-\beta-2x\biggr)\frac{dy(x)}{dx}+\biggl\{(\gamma-\alpha-2)-\frac{1}{2}[\delta+(1+\alpha)\beta]\frac{1}{x}\biggr\}y(x)=0\ ,
\label{eq:Biconfluent_Heun_Canonical}$$ where $y(x)=\mbox{HeunB}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta;x)$ is the biconfluent Heun function. By using the approach described in [@AnnPhys.350.14], we can write Eq. (\[eq:Biconfluent\_Heun\_Canonical\]) in the normal form as $$\frac{d^{2}Y(x)}{dx^{2}}+\biggl[\frac{1}{4}(4\gamma-\beta^{2})-\beta x-x^{2}-\frac{\delta/2}{x}-\frac{(\alpha^{2}-1)/4}{x^{2}}\biggr]Y(x)=0\ ,
\label{eq:Biconfluent_Heun_normal}$$ where $Y(x)=x^{\frac{1}{2}(1+\alpha)}\mbox{e}^{-\frac{1}{2}(x^{2}+\beta x)}y(x)$.
Thus, the Schrödinger equation for a particle moving in the Newtonian universe, given by Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_motion\_Newtonian\_universe\]) for an arbitrary $\omega$, is similar to the biconfluent Heun function given by Eq. (\[eq:Biconfluent\_Heun\_normal\]), and therefore, its exact solution is given by $$\psi(x)=C_{1}\ x^{\frac{1}{2}(1+\alpha)}\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{1}{2}(x^{2}+\beta x)}\ \mbox{HeunB}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta;x)\ ,
\label{eq:psi_HeunB_Newtonian_universe}$$ where $C_{1}$ is a constant to be determined, and the parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, and $\delta$ are identified as $$\alpha=\sqrt{1-4b_{5}}\ ,
\label{eq:alpha_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$\beta=-b_{2}\ ,
\label{eq:beta_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$\gamma=b_{1}+\frac{b_{2}^{2}}{4}\ ,
\label{eq:gamma_Newtonian_universe}$$ $$\delta=-2b_{4}\ .
\label{eq:delta_Newtonian_universe}$$ The complete set of solutions of Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_motion\_Newtonian\_universe\]), for different values of $\omega$, is summarized in Table \[tab:parameters\].
$\omega$ $\psi(x)$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $\gamma$ $\delta$
---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------
0 $x\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}\ y(x)$ 1 0 $\frac{2 \mu E}{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}$ -$\frac{16 \pi G \mu^{2} A_{m}}{3 \hbar^{2} \tau}$
$\frac{1}{3}$ $x^{\frac{1}{2}(1+\alpha)}\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}\ y(x)$ $\sqrt{1-\frac{32 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{r}}{3\hbar^{2}}}$ 0 $\frac{2 \mu E}{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}$ 0
-1 $x\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}\ y(x)$ 1 0 $\frac{2 \mu E}{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}$ 0
-$\frac{1}{3}$ $x\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{x^{2}}{2}}\ y(x)$ 1 0 $\frac{2 \mu E}{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}+\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{d}}{3\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}$ 0
-$\frac{2}{3}$ $x\ \mbox{e}^{-\frac{1}{2}(x^{2}+\beta x)}\ y(x)$ 1 -$\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{q}}{3\hbar^{2}\tau^{3}}$ $\frac{2 \mu E}{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}+\frac{1}{4}\bigl(\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{q}}{3\hbar^{2}\tau^{3}}\bigr)^{2}$ 0
: The parameters $\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$, and $\delta$ for the biconfluent Heun function related to the $\omega$ predominance, where $y(x)=\mbox{HeunB}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta;x)$.[]{data-label="tab:parameters"}
As it was described in the paper [@JMathPhys.56.092501], the biconfluent Heun function becomes a polynomial of degree $n$ if and only if the following conditions are fulfilled: $\gamma-\alpha-2=2n$ and $C_{n+1}=0$, where $n=0,1,2,\ldots$, and $C_{n+1}$ is a polynomial in $\delta$. From the first condition, the energy levels for each value of $\omega$ are shown in Table \[tab:energy\_levels\].
-- -- ---------------- -- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
0 $\frac{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}{\mu}\bigl(n+\frac{3}{2}\bigr)$
$\frac{1}{3}$ $\frac{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}{\mu}\bigl(n+1+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{1-\frac{32 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{r}}{3\hbar^{2}}}\bigr)$
-1 $\frac{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}{\mu}\bigl(n+\frac{3}{2}\bigr)$
-$\frac{1}{3}$ $\frac{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}{\mu}\bigl(n+\frac{3}{2}-\frac{4 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{d}}{3\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}\bigr)$
-$\frac{2}{3}$ $\frac{\hbar^{2}\tau^{2}}{\mu}\bigl[n+\frac{3}{2}-\frac{1}{8}\bigl(\frac{8 \pi G \mu^{2}A_{q}}{3\hbar^{2}\tau^{3}}\bigr)^{2}\bigr]$
-- -- ---------------- -- -- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
: The energy levels related to the $\omega$ predominance.[]{data-label="tab:energy_levels"}
Now, we adapt the method developed by He *et al*. [@PhysLettB.748.361], based on the approach used by Vilenkin [@PhysRevD.33.3560], who analyzed the dynamical interpretation of the wave function of the universe, from the Wheeler-DeWitt equation in the minisuperspace model. Thus, we will use the exact solution of the Schrödinger equation for a particle moving in the Newtonian universe in order to study the dynamical interpretation of the quantum Newtonian wave function and then discuss the boundary conditions in quantum Newtonian cosmology scenario.
As in Eq. (\[eq:generalized\_Schrodinger\_equation\_Newtonian\_universe\]) there is only one variable, namely, the scale factor $R$, and thus the function $\psi(R)$ can be rewritten as $$\psi(R)=F(R)\ \mbox{e}^{iS(R)}\ ,
\label{eq:psi_expansion}$$ where $F$ e $S$ are real functions. In our case, the square modulus of the wave function of the Newtonian universe is given by $$|\psi(R)|^{2}=F^{2}(R)\ .
\label{eq:square_modulus_Newtonian_universe}$$
From the quantum mechanics formalism [@Bransden:2000], we have that the conserved probability current density is written as $$\vec{j}(R,t)=\frac{i\hbar}{2\mu}[\Psi^{*}(\vec{\nabla}\Psi)-\Psi(\vec{\nabla}\Psi^{*})]\ ,
\label{eq:current_density_Newtonian_universe}$$ in such a way to garantee the validity of the continuity equation, namely, $$\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{j}(R,t)=0\ .
\label{eq:conserved_Newtonian_universe}$$ Substituting Eq. (\[eq:psi\_expansion\]) into Eq. (\[eq:current\_density\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we obtain $$\vec{j}=-\frac{\hbar}{\mu}F^{2}\frac{\partial S}{\partial R}\ .
\label{eq:j_1_Newtonian_universe}$$ On the other hand, integrating Eq. (\[eq:conserved\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we get $$\vec{j}=C_{0}\ ,
\label{eq:j_2_Newtonian_universe}$$ where $C_{0}$ is a constant. Thus, from Eqs. (\[eq:j\_1\_Newtonian\_universe\]) and (\[eq:j\_2\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we get $$-\frac{\hbar}{\mu}F^{2}\frac{\partial S}{\partial R}=C_{0}\ .
\label{eq:result_1_Newtonian_universe}$$
Now, we may use the Hamilton-Jacobi formalism of quantum mechanics in order to write down the following relation between the action and the canonical momentum $$p_{R}=\frac{\partial S}{\partial R}=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{R}}=\mu\dot{R}\ ,
\label{eq:action_momentum_Newtonian_universe}$$ where $L$ is the Lagrangian for the motion of a particle in the Newtonian universe, given by Eq. (1) in Ref. [@JMathPhys.56.092501]. Thus, from Eqs. (\[eq:result\_1\_Newtonian\_universe\]) and (\[eq:action\_momentum\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we get $$F^{2}=-\frac{C_{0}}{\hbar\dot{R}}\ ,
\label{eq:result_2_Newtonian_universe}$$ which explicitly shows the dependence of the function $F$ with the scale factor.
The expansion of the universe from the quantum Newtonian cosmology {#Sec.III}
==================================================================
In this section we investigate the classical evolution laws of the universe, which were already obtained using the solutions of the Friedmann equation. However, we want to show that this can also be made from the quantum dynamical interpretation of the Newtonian universe.
Now, consider the wave function of the Schrödinger equation in the $R \gg 1$ limit, which implies that $x \gg 1$. The biconfluent Heun functions have the following asympotic behaviors $$\mbox{HeunB}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta;x) \sim \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
x^{\frac{\gamma-2-\alpha}{2}}\sum_{k \geq 0}^{\infty}\frac{a_{k}}{x^{k}}\ ,\\
\\
x^{\frac{-\gamma-2-\alpha}{2}}\mbox{e}^{x^{2}+\beta x}\sum_{k \geq 0}^{\infty}\frac{e_{k}}{x^{k}}\ ,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:HeunB_infty_Newtonian_universe}$$ where $|\arg x| \leq \frac{\pi}{2}-\epsilon$, $a_{0}=1$, and $e_{0}=1$. Then, the Newtonian wave function can be written as $$\psi(R) \sim C_{1}\ (\tau R)^{-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\gamma}{2}}\ ,
\label{eq:psi_R_HeunB_Newtonian_universe}$$ and as a consequence $$|\psi^{2}(R)| = \frac{C_{1}^{2}}{\tau R} = F^{2}\ ,
\label{eq:psi_R_2_HeunB_Newtonian_universe}$$ where we have used the fact that $\gamma$ is an imaginary number. Thus, taking into account Eq. (\[eq:result\_2\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we get $$\frac{\dot{R}}{R}=-\frac{C_{0}\tau}{C_{1}\hbar}\ ,
\label{eq:evolution_Newtonian_universe}$$ where $C_{0} < 0$ [@PhysLettB.748.361]. Rewriting this formula as $$\frac{dR}{R}=\frac{|C_{0}|\tau}{C_{1}\hbar}\ dt\ ,
\label{eq:separated_Newtonian_universe}$$ its integration give us the following asymptotic behavior for the scale factor $$R \propto \mbox{e}^{t+t_{0}}\ .
\label{eq:scale_factor_asymptotic}$$ The evolution law of the universe from the quantum Newtonian cosmology in the classical limit ($R \gg 1$) is completely consistent with the solution of the Friedmann equation for the vacuum energy predominance, which means that the universe will behave according to the energy contained in the vacuum, whatever the dominant form of energy. In fact, regardless of whether the energy comes from the cosmological constant or from a dark sector, is the component of the vacuum that governs the expansion of the universe when $R$ goes to infinity. Furthermore, our result is independent of the form of energy density and hence it is general than the ones found in the literature [@dInverno:1998].
If we try to fix the constants $C_{0}$ and $C_{1}$ in a such way that the exponential becomes dimensionless, we find $$C_{1}=\sqrt{\frac{|C_{0}|\mu}{\hbar^{2}\tau}}\ ,
\label{eq:C1}$$ where we have used the fact that $E_{n} \sim \hbar^{2}\tau^{2}/\mu$. In this way, we can write $$R(t)=\mbox{e}^{\frac{\hbar\tau^{2}}{\mu}(t+t_{0})}\ .
\label{eq:full_R}$$
Next, consider the wave function of the Schrödinger equation in the $R \ll 1$ limit, which implies that $x \ll 1$. In this case, the biconfluent Heun functions have the following asympotic form $$\mbox{HeunB}(\alpha,\beta,\gamma,\delta;x)=\sum_{s \geq 0}\frac{D_{s}}{(1+\alpha)_{s}}\frac{x^{s}}{s!}\ ,
\label{eq:Biconfluent_Heun_expansion}$$ where $D_{0}=1$, and $$\begin{aligned}
(1+\alpha)_{s} = \frac{\Gamma(s+1+\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+\alpha)}\ .
\label{eq:alpha_s_Biconfluent_Heun_expansion}\end{aligned}$$ Thus, the Newtonian wave function given by Eq. (\[eq:psi\_HeunB\_Newtonian\_universe\]) for the small scale factor $R \ll 1$ can be rewritten as $$\psi(R) \sim \sqrt{\frac{|C_{0}|\mu}{\hbar^{2}\tau}}\ (\tau R)^{\frac{1+\alpha}{2}}\ ,
\label{eq:psi_R_small_HeunB_Newtonian_universe}$$ where we have used the same value for $C_{1}$. Thus, the squared modulus of the wave function is given by $$\psi^{2}(R) = \frac{|C_{0}|\mu}{\hbar^{2}\tau}\ (\tau R)^{1+\alpha}\ .
\label{eq:psi_R_small_2_HeunB_Newtonian_universe}$$ Now, taking into account once more Eq. (\[eq:result\_2\_Newtonian\_universe\]), we get $$R^{1+\alpha}\ dR=\frac{\hbar}{\mu\tau^{\alpha}}\ dt\ .
\label{eq:separated_small_Newtonian_universe}$$ Therefore, in this limit, the scale factor has the following asymptotic form $$R(t) \sim \biggl[\frac{(2+\alpha)\hbar}{\mu\tau^{\alpha}}\biggr]^{\frac{1}{2+\alpha}}t^{\frac{1}{2+\alpha}}\ ,
\label{eq:evolution_small_Newtonian_universe}$$ which means that when the universe was very small, its behavior depends on the parameter $\alpha$.
Conclusions {#Sec.IV}
===========
In this work we generalized the previous results for the quantum Newtonian cosmology in the sense that we have now the analytical solutions for each kind of energy density, namely, matter, radiation, vacuum, dark energy and quintessence.
The analysis of the effective potentials for $\Lambda > 0$ and $\Lambda = -|\Lambda|$, taking into account different scenarios, show us that these potentials behave in completely different forms. It is worth noticing that the functional forms of the effective potentials when all kind of energy are considered are similar to the cases when only radiation or vacuum is taken into account, in the appropriate limit when $R \rightarrow 0$ or $R \rightarrow \infty$, respectively. Furthermore, the connection between these regions has the functional form which corresponds to the matter predominance. Otherwise for the other components considered separately, namely, vacuum, dark energy and quintessence, the functional form of the corresponding potentials in the limit $R \rightarrow 0$ are completely different from the one when all kind of energy are present. This means that the components of the sources which correspond to radiation, matter and vacuum determine the behavior of the total effective potential obtained when all sources are considered together.
The Newtonian wave function is given in terms of the biconfluent Heun functions and obeys the appropriate boundary conditions. Thus, the polynomial condition for the biconfluent Heun equation were used to obtain the energy levels related to each value of the parameter $\omega$. As to the energy, in all cases there is a common factor which depends on the vacuum energy as well as on the cosmological constant. The other factor contains a term which is similar to the one corresponding to the spherical oscillator for $\omega = 0$ and $\omega = -1$, and an additional term which depends on the radiation density, for $\omega = 1/3$; on the dark energy density, for $\omega = -1/3$; and on the amount of quintessence, for $\omega = -2/3$.
The dynamical interpretation gives the behavior of the scale factor at the end of the expansion, which is in accordance with the correspondence principle applied to quantum cosmology, namely, we recover the classical limit. On the other hand, when the universe was very small, the quantum effects on the scale factor are given in terms of the parameter $\alpha$, which depends on the form of the energy density.
One conclusion of the Section \[Sec.III\] is that the evolution of the universe described by quantum Newtonian cosmology, at the classical level, is consistent with the relativistic description when the energy contained in the vacuum dominates over the others forms of energy.
The authors would like to thank Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for partial financial support. H. S. V. is funded through the research Project No. 150640/2018-8. V. B. B. is partially supported through the research Project No. 305835/2016-5. M. S. C. is partially supported through the research Project No. 312251/2015-7.
[99]{} E. A. Milne, Q. J. Math. **5**, 64 (1934). W. H. McCrea and E. A. Milne, Q. J. Math. **5**, 73 (1934). W. H. McCrea, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A **206**, 562 (1951). E. T. Whittaker, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A **149**, 384 (1935). B. S. DeWitt, Phys. Rev. **160**, 1113 (1967). J. A. Wheeler, *Batelle Rencontres*, edited by B. S. DeWitt *et al*. (Benjamin, New York, 1968), pp. 242–307. A. Vilenkin, Phys. Lett. B **117**, 25 (1982). A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D **27**, 2848 (1983). J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D **28**, 2960 (1983). A. D. Linde, Lett. Nuovo Cimento **39**, 401 (1984). A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D **30**, 509 (1984). S. W. Hawking, Nucl. Phys. B **239**, 257 (1984). A. Vilenkin, Nucl. Phys. B **252**, 141 (1985). A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D **32**, 2511 (1985). S. W. Hawking and D. N. Page, Nucl. Phys. B **264**, 185 (1986). A. Ashtekar, Phys. Rev. Lett. **57**, 2244 (1986). S. P. Kim, Phys. Lett. A **236**, 11 (1997). N. Pinto-Neto, F. T. Falciano, R. Pereira and E. S. Santini, Phys. Rev. D **86**, 063504 (2012). N. Pinto-Neto and J. C. Fabris, Classical Quantum Gravity **30**, 143001 (2013). D. Z. Freedman, M. Schnabl and G. W. Gibbons, AIP Conf. Proc. **743**, 286 (2004). J. M. Romero and A. Zamora, arXiv:0504072 **\[gr-qc\]** (2005). B. Bramson, Proc. R. Soc. A **463**, 503 (2007). H. T. Elze, Int. J. Theor. Phys. **47**, 455 (2008). C. Kiefer, ISRN Math. Phys. **2013**, 509316 (2013). P. Bargueño, S. Bravo Medina, M. Nowakowski and D. Batic, Eur. Phys. J. C **76**, 543 (2016). H. S. Vieira and V. B. Bezerra, J. Math. Phys. **56**, 092501 (2015). H. S. Vieira and V. B. Bezerra, Phys. Rev. D **94**, 023511 (2016). A. Ronveaux, *Heun’s Differential Equations*, (Oxford University Press, New York, 1995). H. S. Vieira, V. B. Bezerra and C. R. Muniz, Ann. Phys. (NY) **350**, 14 (2014) D. He, D. Gao and Q. Y. Cai, Phys. Lett. B **748**, 361 (2015). A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D **33**, 3560 (1986). B. H. Bransden and C. J. Joachain, *Quantum mechanics*, (Pearson education, Dorchester, 2000). R. d’Inverno, *Introducing Einstein’s relativity*, (Oxford University Press, New York, 1998). W. M. Napier and B. N. G. Guthrie, J. Astrophys. Astr. **18**, 455 (1997).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
=1
Introduction
============
Giannini and Joseph [@jgrj89], in a nonlinear optics context, introduced a class of symmetry reductions for a cubic nonlinear Schrödinger (NLS) equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:nls}
i\Psi_t + \Psi_{xx}+\nu |\Psi|^2\Psi=0,\end{gathered}$$ with subscripts denoted partial derivatives, which resulted in the Painlevé II equation but with zero parameter $\a$ $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:PII0}
{\frac{d^{2}{q}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} = 2q^3+zq,\end{gathered}$$ see also [@ams15; @ksc; @ms12]; the reduction of the NLS equation to equation was derived in [@gw89; @taj83]. Numerical integration led to the isolation of interesting non-stationary solutions both bounded and stable in shape for a restricted range of ratio of nonlinearily to dispersion. However, the absence of the Painlevé parameter $\a$ in that reduction does not allow the iterative construction of sequences of exact solutions via the Bäcklund transformation for the canonical Painlevé II () $$\begin{gathered}
\label{P2}
{\frac{d^{2}{q}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} = 2q^3 + z q + \a, \end{gathered}$$ with $\a$ a parameter, as given by Gambier [@refGambier10] and Lukashevich [@nl71]. Here, symmetry reduction to or to a hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation linked to the integrable Painlevé XXXIV () equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{P34}
{\frac{d^{2}{p}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} = \frac{1}{2p} \left({\frac{d^{}{p}}{{d{z}}^{}}}\right)^2 + 2p^2 - z p - \frac{(\a+\tfrac12)^2}{2p}, \end{gathered}$$ with $\a$ a parameter, is obtained for a wide class of NLS equations which incorporates a triad of power law terms together with a de Broglie–Bohm potential term. It is remarked that NLS equations involving such triple power law nonlinearities arise in nonlinear optics (see [@memm16; @yxpsdmkkmmabmb16] and literature cited therein). Moreover, NLS equations containing a de Broglie–Bohm term also arise in the analysis of the propagation of optical beams [@crbmkcha10; @wwhhjm68] as well as in cold plasma physics [@jlopcrws07]. Under appropriate conditions, such ‘resonant’ NLS equations admit novel fusion or fission solitonic behaviour [@jlop07; @jlopcrws07; @opjl02; @opjlcr08].
The Ermakov–Painlevé II symmetry reduction is applied here to an NLS encapsulation of a nonlinear capillarity system with origin in classical work of Korteweg [@dk01]. Iterated application of a Bäcklund transformation admitted by permits the construction via the linked equation of novel multi-parameter wave packet solutions to the capillarity system in terms of either Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials or classical Airy functions. These are shown to be valid for a multi-parameter class of model specific free energy relations. An invariance of the $(1+1)$-dimensional Korteweg capillarity system under a one-parameter class of reciprocal transformations as recently set down in [@crws14] allows the extension of the reduction procedure to a yet wider class of capillarity systems.
A Ermakov–Painlevé II symmetry reduction
========================================
Here, a class of $(1+1)$-dimensional nonlinear Schrödinger equations of the type $$\begin{gathered}
\label{1}
\i \Psi_t + \Psi_{xx} - \left[ (1 - \mathcal{C}) \frac{|\Psi|_{xx}}{|\Psi|} -\i c \frac{|\Psi|_{x}}{|\Psi|^2} + \la |\Psi|^2 + \mu |\Psi|^{2m} + \nu |\Psi|^{2n} \right] \Psi = 0, \end{gathered}$$ which incorporates a de Broglie–Bohm potential $|\Psi|_{xx}/|\Psi|$ and a triad of power law terms is investigated under a symmetry reduction. Thus, constraints on the parameters in are sought for which the class of NLS equations admits symmetry reduction either to the , with non-zero parameter $\a$, or to a hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation under a wave packet ansatz
\[2-3\]$$\begin{gathered}
\label{2}
\Psi = [ \phi (\xi) + \i \psi (\xi) ] \exp(\i \eta), \end{gathered}$$ with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{3}
\xi = \bar{\a} t + \bar{\b} t^2 + \bar{\ga} x ,\qquad \eta = \bar{\gamma} t^3 + \bar{\delta} t^2 + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} t x + \bar{\zeta} t + \bar{\la} x.\end{gathered}$$
In the nonlinear optics context of [@jgrj89] such a similarity transformation was used to reduce a standard cubic NLS equation to Painlevé II but with zero parameter $\a$ and resort was made to a numerical treatment. Asymptotic properties of with $\a=0$ have been discussed by various authors, see, e.g., [@mahs81; @bclm; @cmcl88; @dz95; @fikn06; @hmcl81; @jm78].
In the present case, on introduction of the wave packet ansatz into , it is seen that
\[4-5\]$$\begin{gathered}
\label{4}
\bar{\ga}^2 \ddot{\phi} - \dot{\psi} \big[ 2\big(\bar{\b} + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga}^2\big) t + \bar{\a} + 2\bar{\la} \bar{\ga} \big] + \frac{c\bar{\gamma}\psi}{|\Psi|^3} \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right) - \Delta \phi = 0 , \\ $$$$\begin{gathered}
\label{5}
\bar{\ga}^2 \ddot{\psi} + \dot{\phi} \big[ 2\big(\bar{\b} + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga}^2\big) t + \bar{\a} + 2\bar{\la} \bar{\ga} \big] - \frac{c\bar{\gamma} \phi}{|\Psi|^3} \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right) - \Delta \psi = 0, \end{gathered}$$
where $$\begin{gathered}
\Delta = 3\bar{\ga} t^2 + 2 \bar{\delta} t + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} x + \bar{\zeta} + (\bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} t + \bar{\la})^2 + \la |\Psi|^2 + \mu |\Psi|^{2m} + \nu |\Psi|^{2n} \nonumber\\
\hphantom{\Delta =}{} + \dfrac{s \bar{\ga}^2}{|\Psi|^4} \left\{ \left[\phi \ddot{\phi} + \psi \ddot{\psi} + \left(\dot{\phi}\right)^2 + \left(\dot{\psi}\right)^2\right]
\left(\phi^2 + \psi^2\right) - \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right)^2 \right\},\!\!\! \label{6}\end{gathered}$$ with $s=1-\mathcal{C}$. The relations together show that $$\begin{gathered}
\bar{\ga}^2 \left(\ddot{\phi} \psi - \ddot{\psi} \phi\right) - \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right) \big[ 2\big(\bar{\b} + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga}^2\big) t + \bar{\a} + 2\bar{\la} \bar{\ga} \big]\nonumber\\
\qquad{} + \frac{c\bar{\gamma}}{|\Psi|} \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right) = 0, \label{7} \end{gathered}$$ whence it is required that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{8}
\bar{\b} + \ep \bar{\ga}^2 = 0, \end{gathered}$$ in which case equation admits the integral $$\begin{gathered}
\label{9}
\bar{\ga}^2 \left(\dot{\phi} \psi - \dot{\psi} \phi\right) - \tfrac{1}{2} (\bar{\a} + 2\bar{\la} \bar{\ga}) |\Psi|^2 + c \bar{\ga} |\Psi| = \mathcal{I}, \end{gathered}$$ where $\mathcal{I}$ is an arbitrary constant of motion.
On use of the relation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{10}
\left[\phi \ddot{\phi} + \psi \ddot{\psi} + \left(\dot{\phi}\right)^2 + \left(\dot{\psi}\right)^2\right] (\phi^2 + \psi^2) - \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right)^2 =|\Psi|^3 {\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} , \end{gathered}$$ it is seen that yields, if $\bar{\b}\neq0$, $$\begin{gathered}
\Delta = \bar{\ga} \bar{\b}^{-1} \big(\bar{\ep}^2 \bar{\ga} + 3\big) (\xi - \bar{\a} t - \bar{\ga} x) + 2(\bar{\delta} + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} \bar{\la}) t + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} x + \bar{\zeta} + \bar{\la}^2 \nonumber\\
\hphantom{\Delta =}{} + \la |\Psi|^2 + \mu |\Psi|^{2m} + \nu |\Psi|^{2n} + \dfrac{s \bar{\ga}^2}{|\Psi|} {\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} \nonumber\\
\hphantom{\Delta}{}= \bar{\ep} \xi + \bar{\zeta} + \bar{\la}^2 + \la |\Psi|^2 + \mu |\Psi|^{2m} + \nu |\Psi|^{2n} + \dfrac{s \bar{\ga}^2}{|\Psi|} {\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}},\label{11}\end{gathered}$$ on setting $$\begin{gathered}
\bar{\b} \bar{\ep} = \bar{\ga} \big(3 + \bar{\ep}^2 \bar{\ga}\big),\qquad \bar{\a} \bar{\ep} = 2(\bar{\delta} + \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} \bar{\la}). \label{13}\end{gathered}$$ Moreover, equations again combine to show that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{14}
\bar{\ga}^2 \left(\phi \ddot{\phi} + \psi \ddot{\psi}\right) + \left(\dot{\phi} \psi - \dot{\psi} \phi\right) (\bar{\a} + 2 \bar{\la} \bar{\ga})
- \Delta |\Psi|^2 = 0, \end{gathered}$$ whence, on use of the identity $$\begin{gathered}
\label{15}
(\phi^2 + \psi^2) \left[\left(\dot{\phi}\right)^2 + \left(\dot{\psi}\right)^2\right] - \left(\dot{\phi} \psi - \dot{\psi} \phi\right)^2 \equiv \left(\phi \dot{\phi} + \psi \dot{\psi}\right)^2, \end{gathered}$$ together with , it is seen that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{16}
\bar{\ga}^2 \left[ |\Psi|^3 {\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}}- \left(\dot{\phi} \psi - \dot{\psi} \phi\right)^2 \right] + (\bar{\a} + 2 \bar{\la} \bar{\ga}) \left(\dot{\phi} \psi - \dot{\psi} \phi\right) |\Psi|^2 - \Delta |\Psi|^4 = 0.\end{gathered}$$ The latter, by virtue of the integral of motion and the expression for $\Delta$ now produces a nonlinear equation in the amplitude $ |\Psi|$, namely $$\begin{gathered}
{\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} + [ {{\cI}} + {{\cII}} \xi ] |\Psi| + {{\cIII}} |\Psi|^3 + {{\cIV}} |\Psi|^{2m+1} + {{\cV}} |\Psi|^{2n+1} + \frac{{{\cVI}} }{|\Psi|} + \frac{{{\cVII}}}{ |\Psi|^2}\nonumber\\
\qquad{} = \frac{\mathcal{I}^2} {(1-s)\bar{\ga}^4 |\Psi|^3}, \label{17}\end{gathered}$$ where the constants ${{\cI}},{{\cII}},\ldots,{{\cVII}}$ are given by
\[18\]$$\begin{gathered}
{{\cI}} = \dfrac{\left( \bar{\a} - {\bar{\delta}}/{\bar{\ep}} \right)^2 - \bar{\ga}^2 (\bar{\zeta} + \bar{\la}^2)} {(1-s)\bar{\ga}^4}, \qquad {{\cII}} = \dfrac{\bar{\ep}} {(s-1)\bar{\ga}^2} ,\qquad {{\cIII}} = \dfrac{\la} {(s-1)\bar{\ga}^2} ,\\
{{\cIV}} = \dfrac{\mu} {(s-1)\bar{\ga}^2} , \qquad {{\cV}} = \dfrac{\nu} {(s-1)\bar{\ga}^2} ,\qquad {{\cVI}} = \dfrac{c^2} {(s-1)\bar{\ga}^2} ,\qquad {{\cVII}} = \dfrac{2c
\mathcal{I}} {(1-s)\bar{\ga}^3} ,
\end{gathered}$$
and it is required that $s\neq1$.
Below a triad of cases is set down in which the amplitude equation reduces either directly to or to a hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation subsequently shown to be integrable.
### Case (i) $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{I}=0}$; $\boldsymbol{m=-\tfrac12}$; $\boldsymbol{n=-1}$. {#case-i-boldsymbolmathcali0-boldsymbolm-tfrac12-boldsymboln-1. .unnumbered}
In this case with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{19}
{{\cI}} = 0 ,\qquad {{\cII}} = -1 ,\qquad {{\cIII}} = -2 ,\qquad {{\cIV}} = -\a ,\qquad {{\cV}} + {{\cVI}} = 0,\end{gathered}$$ the amplitude equation reduces directly to the Painlevé II equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{20}
{\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} = 2 |\Psi|^3 + \xi |\Psi| + \a , \end{gathered}$$ corresponding to the symmetry reduction via the ansatz of the class of NLS equations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{21}
\i \Psi_t + \Psi_{xx} - \left[ (1 - \mathcal{C}) \frac{|\Psi|_{xx}}{|\Psi|} -\i c \frac{|\Psi|_{x}}{|\Psi|^2} + \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 |\Psi|^2 + \frac{\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 \a}{ |\Psi|} - \frac{c^2}{ |\Psi|^2} \right] \Psi = 0. \end{gathered}$$
### Case (ii) $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{I}=0}$; $\boldsymbol{c=0}$; $\boldsymbol{m=-\tfrac12}$; $\boldsymbol{n=0}$. {#case-ii-boldsymbolmathcali0-boldsymbolc0-boldsymbolm-tfrac12-boldsymboln0. .unnumbered}
Here, with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{22}
{{\cI}} = -{{\cV}} ,\qquad {{\cII}} = -1 ,\qquad {{\cIII}} = -2 ,\qquad {{\cIV}} = -\a, \end{gathered}$$ the equation again results, while the associated class of NLS equations becomes $$\begin{gathered}
\label{23}
\i \Psi_t + \Psi_{xx} - \left[ (1 - \mathcal{C}) \frac{|\Psi|_{xx}}{|\Psi|} + \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 |\Psi|^2 + \frac{\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 \a}{ |\Psi|} + \nu \right] \Psi = 0.\end{gathered}$$ It is remarked that in the absence of the de Broglie–Bohm term, a time-independent NLS equation of this type incorporating a nonlinearity $\sim|\Psi|^{-1}$ has been derived ‘ab initio’ in [@ysjh94] via a geometric model which describes stationary states of supercoiled DNA.
### Case (iii) $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{I}\neq0}$; $\boldsymbol{c=0}$; $\boldsymbol{m=-\tfrac12}$; $\boldsymbol{n=0}$. {#case-iii-boldsymbolmathcalineq0-boldsymbolc0-boldsymbolm-tfrac12-boldsymboln0. .unnumbered}
In this case, equation reduces to a hybrid ‘Ermakov–Painlevé II’ equation of the type $$\begin{gathered}
\label{24}
{\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} + \ep |\Psi|^3 + (\delta \xi + \zeta) |\Psi| = \frac{\sigma}{|\Psi|^{3}}, \end{gathered}$$ and which will be subsequently seen to be linked to . It is recalled that the classical Ermakov equation with roots in [@ve80], namely $$\begin{gathered}
\label{25}
{\frac{d^{2}{\bar{\mathcal{E}}}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} + \omega(\xi) \bar{\mathcal{E}} = \frac{\sigma}{\bar{\mathcal{E}}^{3}}, \end{gathered}$$ admits a nonlinear superposition principle readily derived via a Lie group approach as in [@crur89; @crwspw97].
In the subsequent application to the Korteweg capillarity system it will be the Ermakov–Painlevé II symmetry reduction that will be exploited. With a positive solution $|\Psi|$ of to hand, the corresponding class of exact solutions for $\Psi$ in the wave packet representation is obtained via the integral of motion . Thus, the latter yields $$\begin{gathered}
\bar{\ga}^2 {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}} \left[ \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\phi}{\psi} \right) \right] - \bar{\a} + \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} + \frac{c \bar{\ga}}{|\Psi|} = \frac{\mathcal{I}}{|\Psi|^2}, \end{gathered}$$ whence, on integration $$\begin{gathered}
\label{27}
\bar{\ga}^2 \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\phi}{\psi} \right) = \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi - c \bar{\ga} \int \frac{1}{|\Psi|}\,\d \xi + \mathcal{I} \int \frac{1}{|\Psi|^2}\,\d \xi, \end{gathered}$$ where use has been made of the relation . Accordingly, with $V=\phi/\psi$, it is seen that $\phi$, $\psi$ in the original wave packet representation are given by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\phi = \pm\frac{ |\Psi| V }{ \sqrt{1 + V^2}},\qquad \psi = \pm \frac{|\Psi| }{\sqrt{1 + V^2}}.\end{gathered}$$
In the sequel, the link between the Ermakov–Painlevé II equation and is used to construct novel classes of wave packet solutions of a nonlinear Korteweg capillarity system in terms of Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials or classical Airy functions via the iterated application of the Bäcklund transformation for due to Gambier [@refGambier10] and Lukashevich [@nl71].
The capillarity system
======================
In [@la96], Antanovskii derived the isothermal capillarity system with continuity equation
\[29-30\]$$\begin{gathered}
\label{29}
\rho_t + \operatorname{div} (\rho \mathbf{v}) = 0 , \end{gathered}$$ augmented by the momentum equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{30}
\mathbf{v}_t + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{v} + \nabla \left[ \frac{\delta (\rho \mathcal{E})}{\delta \rho} - \Pi \right] = \mathbf{0} ,\end{gathered}$$
where $\rho$ is the density, $\mathbf{v}$ velocity and $\mathcal{E}(\rho,|\nabla\rho|^2/\rho)$ is the specific free energy. Herein, the standard variational derivative notation $$\begin{gathered}
\dfrac{\delta \Theta}{\delta \rho} = \dfrac{\partial \Theta}{\partial \rho} - \nabla \cdot \left[ \dfrac{\partial \Theta}{\partial \mathcal{A}} \nabla \rho \right], \end{gathered}$$ is adopted with $\mathcal{A}=\tfrac12|\nabla\rho|^2$. In the above $\Pi$ is an external potential, commonly taken to be that due to gravity, in which case $\Pi=-\rho g$. The classical Korteweg capillarity system as set down in [@dk01] is retrieved in the specialisation $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{E} (\mathcal{A}, \rho) = \frac{\kappa(\rho) \mathcal{A}}{\rho} ,\qquad \kappa(\rho) > 0, \end{gathered}$$ in which case, the momentum equation becomes $$\begin{gathered}
\mathbf{v}_t + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla \mathbf{v} - \nabla \left[ \kappa(\rho) \nabla^2 \rho + \tfrac12 |\nabla \rho|^2 {\frac{d^{}{\kappa(\rho)}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} + \Pi \right] = 0.\end{gathered}$$ The classical Boussinesq capillarity system, in turn, is retrieved as the specialisation with $\kappa$ constant in this Korteweg system. A system analogous to the Boussinesq model arises ‘mutatis mutandis’ in plasma physics [@vbsv05].
In the case of irrotationality with $\mathbf{v}=\nabla\Phi$, the momentum equation admits the Bernoulli integral $$\begin{gathered}
\Phi_t + \tfrac12 |\nabla\Phi|^2 + \frac{\delta}{\delta\rho} (\rho \mathcal{E}) - \Pi = \mathcal{B}(t), \end{gathered}$$ and on introduction of the Madelung transformation [@em26] $$\begin{gathered}
\label{35}
\Psi = \rho^{1/2} \exp \left( \tfrac12{i \Phi} \right), \end{gathered}$$ the capillarity system may be encapsulated in the generalised NLS-type equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{36}
\i \Psi_t + \nabla^2 \Psi + \left[ - \frac{\nabla^2 |\Psi|}{|\Psi|} - \tfrac12 \frac{\delta (\rho \mathcal{E})}{\delta \rho} + \tfrac12{\Pi} \right] \Psi = 0, \end{gathered}$$ incorporating a de Broglie–Bohm potential term.
It was observed by Antanovskii et al. in [@lacrws87] that if $\Pi=0$ and $$\begin{gathered}
\label{37}
\mathcal{E} \left( \tfrac12 |\nabla \rho|^2, \rho \right) = \mathcal{C} \frac{ |\nabla \rho|^2}{2\rho^2} + \nu \rho + \frac{\tau}{\rho}, \end{gathered}$$ then reduces, if $\mathcal{C}=1$, to the cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{38}
\i \Psi_t + \nabla^2 \Psi - \nu |\Psi|^2 \Psi = 0.\end{gathered}$$ If, on the other hand, $\mathcal{C}\neq1$, it is seen that reduction is obtained to a ‘resonant’ NLS-type equation [@crws99] $$\begin{gathered}
\label{39}
\i \Psi_t + \nabla^2 \Psi + \left[(\mathcal{C}-1) \frac{\nabla^2 |\Psi|}{|\Psi|} - \nu |\Psi|^2 \right] \Psi = 0.\end{gathered}$$ Moreover, if $\mathcal{C}>0$ as in the present capillarity context, may be transformed to a standard cubic NLS equation with the de Broglie–Bohm term removed (see, e.g., [@cr14]). Thus, in $1+1$ dimensions with three-parameter model energy $\mathcal{E}(\tfrac12|\nabla\rho|^2,\rho)$ of the type reduction is made to a canonical integrable NLS equation. The capillarity system encapsulated in the $(1+1)$-dimensional version of then becomes amenable to established methods of soliton theory such as inverse scattering procedures and inherits admittance of invariance under a Bäcklund transformation together with concomitant nonlinear superposition principle (see, e.g., [@mapc91; @crws98; @crws02] and literature cited therein). It is noted that a gravitational potential term $\Pi=-\rho g$ is readily accommodated in the above reduction. Detailed qualitative properties of capillarity systems with model laws of the type with Kármán–Tsien-type law $$\begin{gathered}
\label{40}
\kappa(\rho) = {\mathcal{C}}/{\rho} ,\qquad \mathcal{C} > 0, \end{gathered}$$ have been recently set down in [@rcrdjs12] while travelling wave propagation in $(1+1)$-dimensional capillarity theory has been investigated in [@sg13].
Here, a more general class of model energy $\mathcal{E}(\tfrac12|\nabla\rho|^2,\rho)$ laws is considered, namely that with $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal{E} = \frac{\kappa(\rho)|\nabla \rho|^2}{2 \rho} + \frac{\mathcal{R}(\rho)}{\rho}, \end{gathered}$$ so that, with $\Pi=0$, produces the class of NLS equations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{42}
\i \Psi_t + \nabla^2 \Psi - \left[\left(1 + {\frac{d^{}{\kappa}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} |\Psi|^4\right) \frac{\nabla^2 |\Psi|}{|\Psi|} - \tfrac12 \left(\kappa(\rho) + {\frac{d^{}{\kappa}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} |\Psi|^2\right) \left(\nabla |\Psi|\right)^2 + \tfrac12 {\frac{d^{}{\mathcal{R}}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} \right] \Psi = 0. \end{gathered}$$ Thus, capillarity systems encapsulated in are isolated which may be aligned with NLS equations of the type in the case $c=0$, $m=-2$, $n=0$. This occurs for the multi-parameter class of model energy laws with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{43}
\mathcal{E} \big( \tfrac12|\nabla \rho|^2 , \rho \big) = \mathcal{C} \frac{ |\nabla \rho|^2} {2 \rho^2} + \la \rho - \frac{2 \mu}{\rho^2} + 2 \nu + \frac{\tau}{\rho}, \end{gathered}$$ where $\la$, $\mu$, $\nu$ and $\tau$ together with $\mathcal{C}>0$ are real constants. Importantly, this includes in the case $\mu=0$ the class which has been recently subject to a detailed qualitative analysis in [@rcrdjs12]. The $\kappa(\rho)$ capillarity relation is seen to be of the Kármán–Tsien type . Here, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{44}
\la = - \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 {{\cIII}} ,\qquad \mu = - \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 {{\cIV}} ,\qquad \nu = - \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 {{\cV}}, \end{gathered}$$ in accordance with the relations . The associated class of NLS equations $$\begin{gathered}
\i \Psi_t + \Psi_{xx} - \left[ (\mathcal{C}-1) \frac{|\Psi|_{xx}}{|\Psi|} + \la |\Psi|^2 + \frac{\mu}{|\Psi|^4} + \nu \right] \Psi = 0, \end{gathered}$$ hence, admits symmetry reduction via the wave packet ansatz to the hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation (cf. ) $$\begin{gathered}
\label{46}
{\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}} + \left[ {{\cI}} + {{\cV}} + {{\cII}} \xi \right] |\Psi| + {{\cIII}} |\Psi|^3 = \frac{\sigma}{|\Psi|^{3}}, \end{gathered}$$ where $$\begin{gathered}
\label{47}
\sigma = \frac{1}{\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2} \left[ \left( \frac{\mathcal{I}}{ \bar{\ga}} \right)^2 + \mu \right].\end{gathered}$$ Interestingly, this symmetry reduction to an integrable Ermakov–Painlevé II equation will be admitted by Korteweg-type capillarity systems with the particular model energy laws of the type discussed in [@rcrdjs12].
Under the translation $\xx=\xi+{({{\cI}}+{{\cV}})}/{{{\cII}}}$, with ${{\cII}}\neq0$, becomes $$\begin{gathered}
\label{48}
{\frac{d^{2}{|\Psi|}}{{d{\xx}}^{2}}} + {{\cII}} \xx |\Psi| + {{\cIII}} |\Psi|^3 = \frac{\sigma}{|\Psi|^{3}}, \end{gathered}$$ where the Madelung relation shows that, in the present capillarity context $|\Psi|=\rho^{1/2}$. Thus, $\rho^{1/2}$ is governed by a hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation while in terms of the density $\rho$ it is seen that produces $$\begin{gathered}
\label{49}
{\frac{d^{2}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{2}}} = \frac{1}{2\rho} \left({\frac{d^{}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{}}}\right)^2 - 2 {{\cIII}} \rho^2 - 2 {{\cII}} \xx \rho + \frac{2\sigma}{\rho},\end{gathered}$$ which is equivalent to (through a rescaling of the variables). This link between the Ermakov–Painlevé II equation and has been noted previously in the context of a Painlevé reduction of a classical Nernst–Planck electrodiffusion system in [@pacr15]. We remark that the special case of equation with $c_3=0$ was considered by Gambier [@refGambier10 pp. 27–28], who linearised the equation. Multiplying with $c_3=0$ by $\rho$ and differentiating gives $$\begin{gathered}
{\frac{d^{3}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{3}}} = 4\xx{\frac{d^{}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{}}}+2\rho,\end{gathered}$$ which has solution $$\begin{gathered}
\label{49b}
\rho(\xx)=C_1 \Ai^2(z)+C_2\Ai(z)\Bi(z)+C_3\Bi^2(z),\qquad z=-c_2^{1/3}\xx,\end{gathered}$$ with $C_1$, $C_2$ and $C_3$ constants. The solution $\rho(\xx)$ given by satisfies only if $c_3=0$, $\sigma=0$ and $4C_1C_2=C_3^2$.
In the sequel, it is convenient to proceed with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{50}
{{\cII}} = -\tfrac12 ,\qquad {{\cIII}} = -1 ,\qquad \sigma = -\tfrac14 \left( \a + \tfrac12 \right)^2, \end{gathered}$$ whence $$\begin{gathered}
\label{51}
\bar{\ep} = \tfrac12\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 > 0 ,\qquad \la = \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 > 0 , \qquad
\left( \a + \tfrac12 \right)^2 = - \dfrac{4}{\la} \left[ \left( \dfrac{\mathcal{I}}{\bar{\ga}} \right)^2 + \mu \right],\end{gathered}$$ where the latter requires that $\mu<-\mathcal{C}\mathcal{I}^2/\la<0$. The Ermakov–Painlevé II equation is then linked to via the relation $\rho=|\Psi|^2>0$.
The well-known connection, in turn, between and is readily derived via the Hamiltonian system $$\begin{gathered}
\label{53}
{\frac{d^{}{q}}{{d{z}}^{}}} = {\frac{\partial^{}{\mathcal{H}_{\rm II}}}{{\partial{p}}^{}}} ,\qquad {\frac{d^{}{p}}{{d{z}}^{}}} = - {\frac{\partial^{}{\mathcal{H}_{\rm II}}}{{\partial{q}}^{}}} , \end{gathered}$$ where the Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}_{\rm II} ( p, q, z; \a )$ is given by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{54}
\mathcal{H}_{\rm II} ( p, q, z; \a ) = \tfrac12 p^2 - \big( q^2 + \tfrac12z \big) p - \big( \a + \tfrac12 \big) q, \end{gathered}$$ leading to the coupled pair of nonlinear equations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{55}
{\frac{d^{}{q}}{{d{z}}^{}}} = p - q^2 - \tfrac12z ,\qquad {\frac{d^{}{p}}{{d{z}}^{}}} = 2 q p + \a + \tfrac12,\end{gathered}$$ (see [@refJMi; @refOkamotoPIIPIV]). Elimination of $p$ and $q$ successively in duly leads to the and . Thus, in the present capillarity context, the density distribution $\rho(\xx)$ is given by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{58}
\rho(\xx) = {\frac{d^{}{w}}{{d{\xx}}^{}}} + w^2 + \tfrac12{\xx}, \end{gathered}$$ where $w(\xx)$ is governed by the equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{59}
{\frac{d^{2}{w}}{{d{\xx}}^{2}}} = 2w^3 + \xx w + \a.\end{gathered}$$
Here, the concern is necessarily restricted to solutions of in regions in which $\rho$ is positive. Interestingly, the importance of positive solutions of also arises naturally in the setting of two-ion electro-diffusion. Thus, in the electrolytic context of [@lbjncrws10; @ablbcr12], the scaled electric field $Y$ was shown to be governed by the equation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{60}
{\frac{d^{2}{Y}}{{d{z}}^{2}}}= 2Y^3 + z Y + \a, \end{gathered}$$ and associated ion concentrations by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{61}
p_\pm = \pm {\frac{d^{}{Y}}{{d{z}}^{}}}+ Y^2 + \tfrac12z, \end{gathered}$$ with parameter $$\begin{gathered}
\label{62}
\a = \frac{1 - A_-/A_+}{2(1 + A_-/A_+)},\end{gathered}$$ and $A_\pm=-\Phi_\pm/D_\pm$, $\Phi_\pm$ being the fluxes of the ion concentrations and $D_\pm$ diffusivity constants arising in the Einstein relation. Thus, it is seen that the ion concentrations, which are necessarily positive, are governed by . This positivity constraint was examined in detail in [@lbjncrws10] for exact solutions in terms of either Yablonskii-Vorob’ev polynomials or classical Airy functions as induced by the iterated action of the Bäcklund transformation of [@nl71] for . The results apply ‘mutatis mutandis’ in the present capillarity context.
Iterated action of a Bäcklund transformation
============================================
Here, the consequences of the following well-known Bäcklund transformation for are applied in the present capillarity context.
\[thm41\] If $q_\a(z)=q(z;\a)$ is a solution of with parameter $\a$, then
\[64pm\]$$\begin{gathered}
\label{64p}
q_{\a+1}(z) = -q_\a(z) - \frac{2\a + 1}{2q'_{\a}(z) + 2q^2_\a(z) + z}, \\
q_{\a-1}(z) = -q_\a(z) - \frac{2\a - 1}{2q'_{\a}(z) - 2q^2_\a(z) + z}, \label{64m}\end{gathered}$$
are solution of with respective parameters $\a+1$ and $\a-1$.
See Gambier [@refGambier10] and Lukashevich [@nl71].
The iteration of the Bäcklund transformations allows the generation of all known exact solutions of .
We note that eliminating $q'_{\a}(z)$ in yields the nonlinear difference equation $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{\a+\tfrac12}{q_{\a+1}+q_{\a}}+\frac{\a-\tfrac12}{q_{\a}+q_{\a-1}}+2q_{\a}^2+z=0,\end{gathered}$$ which is known as an alternative form of discrete Painlevé I [@refFGR].
\[thm42\] If $q_\a=q(z;\a)$ and $p_\a=p(z;\a)$ are solutions of and with parameter $\a$ respectively, then $$\begin{gathered}
q_{\a+1} = -q_\a - \frac{2\a + 1}{2p_{\a}}, \\
q_{\a-1} = -q_\a + \frac{2\a - 1}{2p_{\a}- 4q^2_\a + 2z}, \\
p_{\a+1} = -p_\a +\left(q_{\a}+ \frac{2\a + 1}{2p_{\a}}\right)^2+z, \\
p_{\a-1} = -p_\a + 2q^2_\a +z.\end{gathered}$$
See Okamoto [@refOkamotoPIIPIV]; also [@refFW01].
Rational solutions
------------------
The iterative action of the above Bäcklund transformation on the seed solution $q=0$ of with $\a=0$ produces the subsequent sequence of rational solutions $$\begin{gathered}
\label{65}
q_{n}(z) = {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{z}}^{}}} \ln \frac{Q_{n-1}(z)}{Q_{n}(z)},\qquad n \in\N, \end{gathered}$$ corresponding to the Painlevé parameters $\a=n$, for $n\in\N$, where the $Q_{n}(z)$ are the *Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials* determined by the quadratic recurrence relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{66}
Q_{n+1} Q_{n-1} = z Q^2_{n} + 4\left\{\left({\frac{d^{}{Q_{n}}}{{d{z}}^{}}}\right)^2 - Q_{n} {\frac{d^{2}{Q_{n}}}{{d{z}}^{2}}}\right\} ,\end{gathered}$$ with $Q_{-1}(z) = Q_{0}(z) = 1$ [@av65; @ay59]; see also [@pc03+; @pc03; @pcem03; @refKametaka86; @refKanOch; @refTaneda00]. The $Q_{n}(z)$ are monic polynomials of degree $\tfrac12n(n+1)$ with each term possessing the same degree modulo $3$. Moreover, on use of the invariance under $$\begin{gathered}
q(z,\a)\rightarrow-q(z;-\a),\end{gathered}$$ it is seen that also admits the associated class of rational solutions $$\begin{gathered}
\label{67}
q_{-n}(z) = {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{z}}^{}}} \ln \frac{ Q_{n}(z)}{Q_{n-1}(z)} ,\qquad n \in\N, \end{gathered}$$ corresponding to the Painlevé parameters $\a=-n$, for $n\in\N$. The rational solutions of are given by $$\begin{gathered}
p_{n}(z) = \tfrac12z- 2{\frac{d^{2}{}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} \ln {Q_{n}(z)}\equiv \frac{Q_{n+1}(z)Q_{n-1}(z)}{2Q_{n}^2(z)},\qquad n \in\N, \end{gathered}$$ corresponding to the parameters $\a=n$, with $n\in\N$.
It is clear from the recurrence relation that the $Q_{n}(z)$ are rational functions, though it is not obvious that they are polynomials since one is dividing by $Q_{n-1}(z)$ at every iteration. In fact it is somewhat remarkable that the $Q_{n}(z)$ are polynomials. Taneda [@refTaneda00], used an algebraic method to prove that the functions $Q_{n}(z)$ defined by are indeed polynomials, see also [@refFOU]. The Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials $Q_{n}(z)$ can also be expressed as determinants, see [@pcem03; @refKMi; @refKO96]. Clarkson and Mansfield [@pcem03] investigated the locations of the roots of the Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials in the complex plane and showed that these roots have a very regular, approximately triangular structure; the term “approximate" is used since the patterns are not exact triangles as the roots lie on arcs rather than straight lines. Recently Bertola and Bothner [@refBB15] and Buckingham and Miller [@refBM14; @refBM15] have studied the Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials $Q_{n}(z)$ in the limit as $n\to\infty$ and shown that the roots lie in a “triangular region” with elliptic sides which meet with interior angle $\tfrac25\pi$, suggesting a limit to a solution of Painlevé I (). Indeed Buckingham and Miller [@refBM15] show that in the limit as $n\to\infty$, the rational solution $q_{n}(z)$ of tends to the *tritronquée solution* of due to Boutroux [@boutroux], which no poles (of large modulus) except in one sector of angle $\tfrac25\pi$ (see also [@refJK]).
In the sequel, attention is restricted to the case with invariants $\mathcal{I}=\mathcal{I}_{n}\neq0$ so that similarity reduction of the capillarity system via leads to consideration of a Ermakov–Painlevé II equation in the amplitude $|\Psi|$ and, in turn, density $\rho$ as determined by . Thus, the density distribution $\rho=\rho_+$ associated with the class of exact solutions of in terms of Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials with $z=\xx$ may be shown to be given by rational expressions derived via to adopt the form (see [@pc03+; @pc03; @pcem03]) $$\begin{gathered}
\label{68}
\rho_+(\xx;n) = \frac{Q_{n+1}(\xx) Q_{n-1}(\xx)}{2Q^2_{n}(\xx)} ,\qquad \rho_+(\xx;0) = \tfrac12{\xx},
\end{gathered}$$ as subsequently employed in the two-ion electolytic boundary value problems investigated in [@lbjncrws10]. Therein, the positivity of members of the class of rational solutions of on appropriate regions has been delimited. In the present capillarity context, in such regions where $\rho=\rho_+$ is positive, the class of solutions is associated with wave packet representations with
\[69\]$$\begin{gathered}
\phi(\xi) = \pm \frac{V(\xi)}{\sqrt{1+V^2(\xi)}} \sqrt{\dfrac{Q_{n+1}(\xi) Q_{n-1}(\xi)}{2Q^2_{n}(\xi)}} ,\\
\psi(\xi) = \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+V^2(\xi)}}\sqrt{\dfrac{Q_{n+1}(\xi) Q_{n-1}(\xi)}{2Q^2_{n}(\xi)}},\end{gathered}$$
where $V(\xi)$ is given by, in view of , $$\begin{gathered}
\bar{\ga}^2 \tan^{-1} V(\xi) = \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi + 2\mathcal{I}_{n} \int^{\xi} \frac{Q^2_{n}(\xii)}{Q_{n+1}(\xii) Q_{n-1}(\xii)}\,\d \xii \nonumber\\
\hphantom{\bar{\ga}^2 \tan^{-1} V(\xi)}{} = \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi + \frac{2\mathcal{I}_{n}}{2n+1}\ln \frac{Q_{n+1}(\xi)}{Q_{n-1}(\xi)},
\label{70}\end{gathered}$$ since $$\begin{gathered}
\label{70a}
\int^\xi \frac{Q^2_{n}(\xii)}{Q_{n+1}(\xii) Q_{n-1}(\xii)}\,\d \xii = \frac{1}{2n+1}\ln \frac{Q_{n+1}(\xi)}{Q_{n-1}(\xi)}.\end{gathered}$$ This result follows since the Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials $Q_{n}(\xi)$ satisfy the bilinear relation $$\begin{gathered}
{\frac{d^{}{Q_{n+1}}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}}Q_{n-1}-{\frac{d^{}{Q_{n-1}}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}}Q_{n+1}=(2n+1)Q_{n}^2,\end{gathered}$$ which is proved in [@refFOU; @refTaneda00] (see also [@refKanOch]). Likewise, there are associated classes of wave packet representations corresponding to the rational solution $q_{-n}(z)$ given by which are determined by the relations , but with the transposition $n\leftrightarrow n-1$.
Airy-type solutions
-------------------
The iterated action of the Bäcklund transformations may, in addition, be used to generate exact solutions of with parameters $\a=\pm\tfrac12, \pm\tfrac32, \ldots$ in terms of classical Airy functions [@pc16]. Thus, in particular, if $\a=\tfrac12$ then admits the exact solution $$\begin{gathered}
\label{71}
q\big(z; \tfrac12\big) = - {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{z}}^{}}} \ln \ph(z),\end{gathered}$$ where $\ph(z)$ is governed by the classical Airy function $$\begin{gathered}
\label{72}
{\frac{d^{2}{\ph}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} + \tfrac12 z \ph = 0.\end{gathered}$$ Iteration of the Bäcklund transformation with the Airy-type seed solution generates as infinite sequence of exact solutions $$\begin{gathered}
\label{73}
q\big(z;n-\tfrac12\big) = {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{z}}^{}}} \ln \frac{u_{n-1}(z)}{u_{n}(z)} ,\qquad n \in \N, \end{gathered}$$ where the sequence $\{u_\ell(z)\}$, for $\ell\geq0$, is determined by the recurrence relation (Toda equation)
\[74-75\] $$\begin{gathered}
\label{74}
u_{n+1} u_{n-1} = 4 \left\{\left( {\frac{d^{}{u_{n}}}{{d{z}}^{}}}\right)^2 - u_{n} {\frac{d^{2}{u_{n}}}{{d{z}}^{2}}}\right\}, \end{gathered}$$ with initial values $$\begin{gathered}
\label{75}
u_{0}(z) = 1 ,\qquad u_1(z) = \ph(z).\end{gathered}$$
The $u_{n}(z)$, for $n\geq2$, are homogeneous polynomials of degree $n$ in $\ph(z)$ and $\ph'(z)$, i.e., have the form $$\begin{gathered}
u_{n}(z) = \sum_{j=0}^{n}a_{n,j} \ph^j\left({\frac{d^{}{\ph}}{{d{z}}^{}}}\right)^{n-j},\end{gathered}$$ where $a_{n,j}(z)$ are polynomials in $z$ and $\ph(z)$ is the solution of given by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{76}
\ph(z) = \cos(\th) \Ai \big({-}2^{-1/3} z\big) + \sin(\th) \Bi \big({-}2^{-1/3} z\big),\end{gathered}$$ with $\Ai(\zz)$ and $\Bi(\zz)$ the Airy functions and $\th$ an arbitrary constant.
The analogous Airy-type solutions of are given by $$\begin{gathered}
p\big(z;n-\tfrac12\big) = - 2{\frac{d^{2}{}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} \ln {u_{n}} \equiv \frac{u_{n-1}u_{n+1}}{2u_{n}^2},\qquad n \in\N, \end{gathered}$$ for the parameter $\a=n-\tfrac12$.
The Airy-type solutions of and can also be expressed in terms of determinants, as described in the following theorem.
\[thm43\]Let $\tau_{n}(z)$ be the Hankel $n\times n$ determinant $$\begin{gathered}
\tau_{n}(z) = \left[{\frac{d^{j+k}{}}{{d{z}}^{j+k}}}\varphi(z) \right]_{j,k=0}^{n-1},\qquad n\geq1,\end{gathered}$$ with $\varphi(z)$ given by and $\tau_0(z)=1$, then for $n\geq1$, $$\begin{gathered}
q\big(z;n-\tfrac12\big)= {\frac{d^{}{}}{{d{z}}^{}}}\ln\frac{\tau_{n-1}(z)}{\tau_{n}(z)},\qquad
\label{pnAiry} p\big(z;n-\tfrac12\big) = - 2{\frac{d^{2}{}}{{d{z}}^{2}}} \ln {\tau_{n}(z)},\end{gathered}$$ respectively satisfy and with $\a=n-\tfrac12$.
See Flaschka and Newell [@refFN], Okamoto [@refOkamotoPIIPIV]; also [@pc16; @refFW01].
We remark that recently it was shown that Airy-type solutions of and which depend only on the Airy function $\Ai(\zz)$ have a completely different structure to those which involve a linear combination of the Airy functions $\Ai(\zz)$ and $\Bi(\zz)$, see [@pc16]. In particular, for $n\in2\N$ the solution of has no poles on the real axis when $\varphi(z)=\Ai(-2^{-1/3} z)$ and decays algebraically as $z\to\pm\infty$. This special solution arose in a study of the double scaling limit of unitary random matrix ensembles by Its, Kuijlaars, and Östensson [@refIKO08; @refIKO09], who identify the solution as a *tronquée* solution of , i.e., has no poles in a sector of the complex plane (see also [@pc16]).
The iterative application of the Bäcklund transformations to generate Airy-type solutions of has been used to solve boundary value problems associated with the classical Nernst–Planck system for two-ion electro-diffusion [@lbjncrws10; @crabws99]. The repeated action of the Bäcklund transformations in this electrolytic setting has been recently associated with quantised fluxes of ionic species in [@ablbcr12]. It is remarked that the Painlevé structure underlying a multi-ion electrodiffusion model has been systematically investigated in [@rccrws07].
In the present capillarity context, the density distributions associated with the class of exact solutions of determined by the relations , are given by [@lbjncrws10] $$\begin{gathered}
\label{77}
\rho\big(\xi;n - \tfrac12 \big) = \frac{u_{n-1}(\xi) u_{n+1}(\xi)}{2u^2_{n}(\xi)} ,\qquad \rho \big(\xi;-\tfrac12\big) = 0,\end{gathered}$$ where $u_{n}(z)$ is given by . The physical requirement of positivity of these solutions corresponding to the specialisation $\ph(z)= \Ai(-2^{-1/3}z)$ in , i.e., when $\th=0$, has been examined in detail in the electrolytic context of [@lbjncrws10]. The implications of the results carry over to the present capillarity study.
In general, with regard to the velocity magnitude $v=|\bf{v}|$, alignment of the Madelung transformation with produces the velocity potential relation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{79}
\Phi = 2\tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\psi + \phi \tan \eta}{\phi - \psi \tan \eta} \right) = 2 \left[ \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\psi}{\phi} \right) + \eta \right],\end{gathered}$$ on use of the identity $$\begin{gathered}
\tan^{-1} \left( \frac{x + y}{1 - x y} \right) \equiv \tan^{-1} x + \tan^{-1} y.\end{gathered}$$ Integration of the invariant relation where in the present context $c=0$, yields $$\begin{gathered}
-\bar{\ga}^2 \tan^{-1} \left( \frac{\psi}{\phi} \right)
= \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi +2\mathcal{I} \int^\xi \frac{u_{n}^2(\xii)}{u_{n+1}(\xii)u_{n-1}(\xii)}\,\d \xii
= \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi + \frac{\mathcal{I}}{n} \ln\frac{u_{n+1}(\xi)}{u_{n-1}(\xi)},
$$ since $$\begin{gathered}
\label{81a}
\int^\xi \frac{u^2_{n}(\xii)}{u_{n+1}(\xii) u_{n-1}(\xii)}\,\d \xii = \frac{1}{2n}\ln \frac{u_{n+1}(\xi)}{u_{n-1}(\xi)}.\end{gathered}$$ The result holds as the $u_{n}(\xi)$ satisfy the bilinear relation $$\begin{gathered}
{\frac{d^{}{u_{n+1}}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}}u_{n-1}-{\frac{d^{}{u_{n-1}}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}}u_{n+1}=2nu_{n}^2,\end{gathered}$$ which follows from Theorem \[thm42\]. Consequently yields $$\begin{gathered}
|\mathbf{v}| = -\frac{2}{\bar{\ga}^2} \left[ \bar{\ga} {\frac{\partial^{}{}}{{\partial{\xi}}^{}}} + \left( \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} t + \bar{\la} \right) {\frac{\partial^{}{}}{{\partial{\eta}}^{}}} \right] \left[ \left( \bar{\a} - \frac{\bar{\delta}}{\bar{\ep}} \right) \xi +{\mathcal{I}}\int \frac{1}{|\Psi|^2}\,\d \xi + \eta \right], \end{gathered}$$ whence, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{82}
v = - \frac{2\mathcal{I}}{\bar{\ga} \rho (\xi)} + 2 \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} t - \frac{\bar{\a}}{\bar{\ga}},\end{gathered}$$ on use of the relation . Insertion of the latter expression into the momentum equation of the capillarity system, namely $$\begin{gathered}
\label{83}
v_t + vv_x + \left[ \frac{\delta}{\delta \rho} (\rho \mathcal{E}) \right]_x = 0, \end{gathered}$$ on integration, produces the Bernoulli integral $$\begin{gathered}
\label{84}
\frac{2\mathcal{I}^2}{\bar{\ga}^2 \rho^2} + 2 \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} x + \frac{\delta}{\delta \rho} (\rho \mathcal{E}) = \mathcal{B}(t).\end{gathered}$$ Here shows that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{85}
\rho \mathcal{E} = \mathcal{C} \frac{ \bar{\ga}^2}{2\rho} \rho^2_x + \la \rho^2 + \frac{2\mu}{\rho} + 2\nu \rho + \tau , \end{gathered}$$ whence, $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{\delta}{\delta \rho} (\rho \mathcal{E}) = {\frac{\partial^{}{}}{{\partial{\rho}}^{}}} (\rho \mathcal{E}) - \mathcal{C} {\frac{\partial^{}{}}{{\partial{x}}^{}}} \left( \frac{\rho_x}{\rho} \right) = 2 \la \rho + \frac{2\mu}{\rho^2} + 2\nu + \mathcal{C} \left(\frac{\rho^2_x}{2\rho^2} - \frac{\rho_{xx}}{\rho} \right), \end{gathered}$$ in which $\rho(x,t)=R(\xi)$ with $\xi=\bar{\a}t+\bar{\b}t^2+\bar{\ga}x$ so that $\rho_x=\bar{\ga}R'(\xi)$. Thus, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{86}
\frac{2\mathcal{I}^2}{\bar{\ga}^2 R^2} + 2 \bar{\ep} \bar{\ga} x + 2 \la R + \frac{2\mu}{R^2} + 2\nu + \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2 \left[ \frac{1}{2R^2} \left({\frac{d^{}{R}}{{d{\xi}}^{}}}\right)^2- \frac{1}{R} {\frac{d^{2}{R}}{{d{\xi}}^{2}}}\right] = \mathcal{B}(t), \end{gathered}$$ and with $\mathcal{B}(t)=-2\bar{\ep}(\bar{\a}t+\bar{\b}t^2)$, an equation equivalent to for the density $\rho(\xx)$ is retrieved, namely $$\begin{gathered}
{\frac{d^{2}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{2}}} = \dfrac{1}{2\rho}\left({\frac{d^{}{\rho}}{{d{\xx}}^{}}}\right)^2 + \dfrac{2 \la\rho^2}{\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2} + \dfrac{2 \bar{\ep} \xx\rho}{ \mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^2} + \dfrac{2(\mathcal{I}^2+\gamma^2\mu)}{\mathcal{C} \bar{\ga}^4 \rho}, \qquad \xx=\xi+\dfrac{{{\cI}}+{{\cV}}}{{{\cII}}} ,\end{gathered}$$ which aligns with in view of the relations , and . Thus, it is seen that, remarkably, in the present context is associated with the density $\rho$ corresponding to a symmetry reduction of the Bernoulli integral of motion of the capillarity system.
Invariance under a reciprocal transformation
============================================
The application of reciprocal-type transformations to $(1+1)$-dimensional nonlinear physical systems has its origin in the isolation of novel invariance properties in gasdynamics and magnetogasdynamics [@cr68; @cr69]. They have been subsequently applied to both obtain analytic solution to moving boundary problems of Stefan-type [@cr86] and to link integrable systems of modern soliton theory (see, e.g., [@addhah02; @wocr93] together with [@crws02] and work cited therein). In $3+1$ dimensions, reciprocal-type transformations have been shown to have application in discontinuity wave propagation theory [@adurcr92].
In the present capillarity context, the $(1+1)$-dimensional version of the system with $\Pi=0$, namely $$\begin{gathered}
\rho_t + (\rho v)_x = 0 , \qquad v_t + vv_x + \left[ \dfrac{\delta}{\delta \rho} (\rho \mathcal{E}) \right]_x = 0,\end{gathered}$$ was recently shown in [@crws14] to be invariant under the one-parameter $(\chi)$ class of reciprocal-type transformations $$\begin{gathered}
\rho^* = \dfrac{\rho}{1 + \chi \rho} ,\qquad q^* = q ,\qquad \mathcal{E}^* (\mathcal{A}^*, \rho^*) = \mathcal{E} (\mathcal{A}, \rho) ,
\qquad \mathcal{A}^* = \dfrac{\mathcal{A}}{(1 + \chi \rho)^6} , \\
\d x^* = (1 + \chi \rho)\,\d x - \chi \rho q\,\d t ,\qquad\d t^* =\,\d t , \qquad 0 < | 1 + \chi \rho | < \infty,\end{gathered}$$ where $\mathcal{A}=\tfrac12\rho^2_x$. A direct corollary of this result is that the $(1+1)$-dimensional Korteweg-type capillarity system
\[90\] $$\begin{gathered}
\rho_t + (\rho v)_x = 0 , \\
v_t + vv_x + \left( - \kappa(\rho) \rho_{xx} - \tfrac12 {\frac{d^{}{\kappa}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} \rho^2_x + {\frac{d^{}{\mathcal{R}}}{{d{\rho}}^{}}} \right)_x = 0,\end{gathered}$$
is invariant under the one-parameter class of reciprocal transformations $$\begin{gathered}
\d x^* = (1 + \chi \rho)\,\d x - \chi \rho q\,\d t ,\qquad\,\d t^* =\d t,\qquad \rho^* = \dfrac{\rho}{1 + \chi \rho} ,\qquad q^* = q,\end{gathered}$$ augmented by the relations $$\begin{gathered}
\label{92}
\kappa^* = (1 + \chi \rho)^5 \kappa ,\qquad \mathcal{R}^* = \frac{\mathcal{R}}{1 + \chi \rho}.\end{gathered}$$ This invariant transformation may be applied to seed solutions of the capillarity system as previously determined in terms of Yablonskii–Vorob’ev polynomials or classical Airy functions to construct extended $\chi$-dependent classes of exact solutions valid for model energy laws $\mathcal{E}^*$ with $\chi$-deformed Kármán–Tsien capillarity relation $$\begin{gathered}
\label{93}
\kappa^* = \frac{\mathcal{C}}{\rho^* (1 - \chi \rho^*)^4} , \end{gathered}$$ together with $$\begin{gathered}
\label{94}
\mathcal{R}^* = \frac{\la \rho^{*2}}{1 - \chi \rho^*} - 2 \mu \frac{(1 - \chi \rho^*)^2}{\rho^*} + 2 \nu \rho^* + \tau (1 - \chi \rho^*).\end{gathered}$$ The original $\kappa(\rho)$, $\mathcal{R}(\rho)$ associated with the reduction are retrieved in the limit $\chi\rightarrow0$.
General perspectives on model laws in continuum mechanics\
and solitonic connections: conclusion
==========================================================
Here, model energy laws have been isolated for which a Korteweg-type capillarity system admits symmetry reduction to a integrable hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé equation. A Bäcklund and reciprocal transformation have been used in turn to generate novel classes of exact solutions and to extend the range of the reduction. The derivation of multi-parameter model constitutive laws for which systems in nonlinear continuum mechanics become analytically tractable via the application of Bäcklund or reciprocal transformations has an extensive literature. Thus, in gasdynamics, Loewner [@cl50; @cl52] applied matrix Bäcklund transformations to construct model constitutive laws for which the classical hodograph equations may be systematically reduced to appropriate tractable canonical forms in subsonic, transonic and supersonic flow régimes. The celebrated Kármán–Tsien two-parameter pressure-density model law of [@ht39] as extensively applied in subsonic gasdynamics, arises as a particular reduction. The Bäcklund transformations as introduced in the model gas law context of [@cl52], suitably interpreted and extended, remarkably, turn out to have application in $(2+1)$-dimensional soliton theory [@bkcr91; @bkcr93]. In nonlinear elastodynamics, model multi-parameter stress-strain laws were constructed in [@hcev74] which allow the analytic treatment of aspects of shock-less pulse propagation in bounded nonlinear elastic media. Comparison of experimental stress-strain relations with such model laws was investigated, in particular, for the dynamic compression of saturated soil, dry sand and clay silt. A Bäcklund transformation may be introduced at the level of the stress-strain laws for the uniaxial Lagrangian elastodynamic system treated in [@hcev74]. The single action of this Bäcklund transformation to the classical Hooke’s law generates the multi-parameter class of $(T, e)$ laws applied extensively therein. Moreover application of a nonlinear superposition principle associated with the Bäcklund transformation permits the construction of more general model nonlinear $(T, e)$-laws for which the $(1+1)$-dimensional elastodynamic system may be iteratively reduced to that associated with the canonical Hooke’s law. There is again a remarkable solitonic connection in that the nonlinear superposition principle acting on the $(T, e)$-laws turns out to be nothing but the permutability theorem for the potential Korteweg–de Vries hierarchy (see, e.g., [@crws02]).
In nonlinear elastostatics, model stress-deformation laws have been introduced by Neuber in [@hn58; @hn61] in connection with the problem of determining the stress-distribution in shear-strained isotropic prismatical bodies. Loewner-type Bäcklund transformations were applied in [@dccr75] to the Neuber elastostatic system to solve a class of indentation boundary value problems for both Neuber–Sokolovsky and power law model stress-deformation relations. The application of model $\bf{B}$-$\bf{H}$ and $\bf{D}$-$\bf{E}$ constitutive laws in the analysis of the propagation of plane polarised electromagnetic waves through nonlinear dielectric media has been described in [@jkrv75]. In general terms, it was shown in [@wscr98] that model constitutive laws as constructed via the Bäcklund approach introduced by Loewner, corresponds to solitonic solutions generated by a Darboux-type transformation.
With regard to reciprocal transformations and their role in the construction of model constitutive laws one may cite, in particular, the investigation of Storm in [@ms51] concerning heat conduction in simple monatomic metals. Therein, a class of model $(c_p(T),k(T))$ temperature $T$-dependent laws was introduced for which a $(1+1)$-dimensional nonlinear heat conduction equation may be reduced via a reciprocal transformation to the classical linear heat equation. The applicability of these model laws was justified in [@ms51] for appropriate specific heat $c_p(T)$ and thermal conductivity $k(T)$ over wide temperature ranges for such materials as aluminium, silver, sodium, cadium, zinc, copper and lead. This kind of reduction via a reciprocal transformation may be extended to hyperbolic systems that correspond to multi-parameter model laws that arise in Cattaneo-type conduction and nonlinear visco-elasticity (see, e.g., [@bsev84]).
The preceding attests to the importance and wide range of physical applications of model constitutive laws in nonlinear continuum mechanics together with intriguing solitonic connections. The six classical Painlevé equations arise in a wide range of physical applications and play a fundamental role in modern soliton theory (see, e.g., [@pc05; @rc99; @fikn06; @refGLS]). In the present work, model multi-parameter specific energy laws have been isolated which allow symmetry reduction of a Korteweg capillarity system to consideration of a hybrid Ermakov–Painlevé II equation and thereby to the linked integrable equation. In conclusion, it is remarked that the Ermakov–Painlevé II symmetry reduction presented here is also valid for a superfluidity model system involving a de Broglie Bohm potential as set down in [@prnb01].
[99]{}
Ablowitz M.J., Clarkson P.A., Solitons, nonlinear evolution equations and inverse scattering, [*London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series*](https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511623998), Vol. 149, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991.
Ablowitz M.J., Segur H., Solitons and the inverse scattering transform, *SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics*, Vol. 4, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, Pa., 1981.
Amster P., Rogers C., On a [E]{}rmakov–[P]{}ainlevé [II]{} reduction in three-ion electrodiffusion. [A]{} [D]{}irichlet boundary value problem, [*Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.*](https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2015.35.3277) **35** (2015), 3277–3292.
Antanovskii L.K., Microscale theory of surface tension, [*Phys. Rev. E*](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.54.6285) **54** (1996), 6285–6290.
Antanovskii L.K., Rogers C., Schief W.K., A note on a capillarity model and the nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/30/16/001) **30** (1997), L555–L557.
Assanto G., Minzoni A.A., Smyth N.F., On optical [A]{}iry beams in integrable and non-integrable systems, [*Wave Motion*](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wavemoti.2014.10.003) **52** (2015), 183–193.
Bass L., Nimmo J.J.C., Rogers C., Schief W.K., Electrical structures of interfaces: a [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} model, [*Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.*](https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2009.0620) **466** (2010), 2117–2136.
Bassom A.P., Clarkson P.A., Law C.K., McLeod J.B., Application of uniform asymptotics to the second [P]{}ainlevé transcendent, [*Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s002050050105) **143** (1998), 241–271, [solv-int/9609005](http://arxiv.org/abs/solv-int/9609005).
Belashov V.Yu., Vladimirov S.V., Solitary waves in dispersive complex media. Theory, simulation, applications, [*Springer Series in Solid-State Sciences*](https://doi.org/10.1007/b138237), Vol. 149, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005.
Benzoni-Gavage S., Planar traveling waves in capillary fluids, *Differential Integral Equations* **26** (2013), 439–485.
Bertola M., Bothner T., Zeros of large degree [V]{}orob’ev–[Y]{}ablonski polynomials via a [H]{}ankel determinant identity, [*Int. Math. Res. Not.*](https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnu239) **2015** (2015), 9330–9399, [arXiv:1401.1408](http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.1408).
Boutroux P., Recherches sur les transcendantes de [M]{}. [P]{}ainlevé et l’étude asymptotique des équations différentielles du second ordre, *Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (3)* **30** (1913), 255–375.
Bracken A.J., Bass L., Rogers C., Bäcklund flux quantization in a model of electrodiffusion based on [P]{}ainlevé [II]{}, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/10/105204) **45** (2012), 105204, 20 pages, [arXiv:1201.0673](http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0673).
Buckingham R.J., Miller P.D., Large-degree asymptotics of rational [P]{}ainlevé-[II]{} functions: noncritical behaviour, [*Nonlinearity*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/27/10/2489) **27** (2014), 2489–2578, [arXiv:1310.2276](http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.2276).
Buckingham R.J., Miller P.D., Large-degree asymptotics of rational [P]{}ainlevé-[II]{} functions: critical behaviour, [*Nonlinearity*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/28/6/1539) **28** (2015), 1539–1596, [arXiv:1406.0826](http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.0826).
Carles R., Danchin R., Saut J.-C., Madelung, [G]{}ross–[P]{}itaevskii and [K]{}orteweg, [*Nonlinearity*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/25/10/2843) **25** (2012), 2843–2873, [arXiv:1111.4670](http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4670).
Cekirge H.M., Varley E., Large amplitude waves in bounded media [I]{}. Reflexion and transmission of large amplitude shockless pulses at an interface, [*Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A*](https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1973.0001) **273** (1973), 261–313.
Clarkson P.A., Painlevé equations – nonlinear special functions, [*J. Comput. Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0427(02)00589-7) **153** (2003), 127–140.
Clarkson P.A., Remarks on the [Y]{}ablonskii–[V]{}orob’ev polynomials, [*Phys. Lett. A*](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2003.10.016) **319** (2003), 137–144.
Clarkson P.A., Painlevé equations – nonlinear special functions, in Orthogonal polynomials and special functions, [*Lecture Notes in Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36716-1_7), Vol. 1883, Springer, Berlin, 2006, 331–411.
Clarkson P.A., On [A]{}iry solutions of the second [P]{}ainlevé equation, [*Stud. Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1111/sapm.12123) **137** (2016), 93–109, [arXiv:1510.08326](http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.08326).
Clarkson P.A., Mansfield E.L., The second [P]{}ainlevé equation, its hierarchy and associated special polynomials, [*Nonlinearity*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/16/3/201) **16** (2003), R1–R26.
Clarkson P.A., McLeod J.B., A connection formula for the second [P]{}ainlevé transcendent, [*Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00251504) **103** (1988), 97–138.
Clements D.L., Rogers C., On the theory of stress concentration for shear-strained prismatical bodies with a non-linear stress-strain law, [*Mathematika*](https://doi.org/10.1112/S0025579300004472) **22** (1975), 34–42.
Conte R. (Editor), The [P]{}ainlevé property. One century later, [*CRM Series in Mathematical Physics*](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1532-5), Springer-Verlag, New York, 1999.
Conte R., Rogers C., Schief W.K., Painlevé structure of a multi-ion electrodiffusion system, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/40/48/F01) **40** (2007), F1031–F1040, [arXiv:0711.0615](http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0615).
Degasperis A., Holm D.D., Hone A.N.W., A new integrable equation with peakon solutions, [*Theoret. and Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021186408422) **133** (2002), 1463–1474, [nlin.SI/0205023](http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.SI/0205023).
Deift P.A., Zhou X., Asymptotics for the [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} equation, [*Comm. Pure Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.3160480304) **48** (1995), 277–337.
Donato A., Ramgulam U., Rogers C., The $3+1$-dimensional Monge–Ampère equation in discontinuity wave theory: application of a reciprocal transformation, [*Meccanica*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00424364) **27** (1992), 257–262.
Ermakov V.P., Second-order differential equations: conditions for complete integrability, *Univ. Izv. Kiev* **20** (1880), no. 9, 1–25, see [*Appl. Anal. Discrete Math.*](https://doi.org/10.2298/AADM0802123E) **2** (2008), 123–145.
Eslami M., Mirzazadeh M., Optical solitons with [B]{}iswas–[M]{}ilovic equation for power law and dual-power law nonlinearities, [*Nonlinear Dynam.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-015-2361-1) **83** (2016), 731–738.
Flaschka H., Newell A.C., Monodromy- and spectrum-preserving deformations. [I]{}, [*Comm. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01197110) **76** (1980), 65–116.
Fokas A.S., Grammaticos B., Ramani A., From continuous to discrete [P]{}ainlevé equations, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*](https://doi.org/10.1006/jmaa.1993.1405) **180** (1993), 342–360.
Fokas A.S., Its A.R., Kapaev A.A., Novokshenov V.Yu., Painlevé transcendents. The [R]{}iemann–[H]{}ilbert approach, [*Mathematical Surveys and Monographs*](https://doi.org/10.1090/surv/128), Vol. 128, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006.
Forrester P.J., Witte N.S., Application of the [$\tau$]{}-function theory of [P]{}ainlevé equations to random matrices: [PIV]{}, [PII]{} and the [GUE]{}, [*Comm. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s002200100422) **219** (2001), 357–398, [math-ph/0103025](http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0103025).
Fukutani S., Okamoto K., Umemura H., Special polynomials and the [H]{}irota bilinear relations of the second and the fourth [P]{}ainlevé equations, *Nagoya Math. J.* **159** (2000), 179–200.
Gagnon L., Winternitz P., Lie symmetries of a generalised nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation. [II]{}. [E]{}xact solutions, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/22/5/013) **22** (1989), 469–497.
Gambier B., Sur les équations différentielles du second ordre et du premier degré dont l’intégrale générale est a points critiques fixes, [*Acta Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393211) **33** (1910), 1–55.
Giannini J.A., Joseph R.I., The role of the second [P]{}ainlevé transcendent in nonlinear optics, [*Phys. Lett. A*](https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(89)90860-8) **141** (1989), 417–419.
Gromak V.I., Laine I., Shimomura S., Painlevé differential equations in the complex plane, [*De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics*](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198096), Vol. 28, Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 2002.
Hastings S.P., McLeod J.B., A boundary value problem associated with the second [P]{}ainlevé transcendent and the [K]{}orteweg–de [V]{}ries equation, [*Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00283254) **73** (1980), 31–51.
Its A.R., Kuijlaars A.B.J., Östensson J., Critical edge behavior in unitary random matrix ensembles and the thirty-fourth [P]{}ainlevé transcendent, [*Int. Math. Res. Not.*](https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnn017) **2008** (2008), no. 9, rnn017, 67 pages, [arXiv:0704.1972](http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.1972).
Its A.R., Kuijlaars A.B.J., Östensson J., Asymptotics for a special solution of the thirty fourth [P]{}ainlevé equation, [*Nonlinearity*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/22/7/002) **22** (2009), 1523–1558, [arXiv:0811.3847](http://arxiv.org/abs/0811.3847).
Jimbo M., Miwa T., Monodromy preserving deformation of linear ordinary differential equations with rational coefficients. [II]{}, [*Phys. D*](https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(81)90021-X) **2** (1981), 407–448.
Joshi N., Kitaev A.V., On [B]{}outroux’s tritronquée solutions of the first [P]{}ainlevé equation, [*Stud. Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9590.00187) **107** (2001), 253–291.
Kajiwara K., Masuda T., A generalization of determinant formulae for the solutions of [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} and [XXXIV]{} equations, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/32/20/309) **32** (1999), 3763–3778, [solv-int/9903014](http://arxiv.org/abs/solv-int/9903014).
Kajiwara K., Ohta Y., Determinant structure of the rational solutions for the [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} equation, [*J. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.531648) **37** (1996), 4693–4704, [solv-int/9607002](http://arxiv.org/abs/solv-int/9607002).
Kametaka Y., Noda M., Fukui Y., Hirano S., A numerical approach to [T]{}oda equation and [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} equation, *Mem. Fac. Eng. Ehime Univ.* **9** (1986), 1–24.
Kaminer I., Segev M., Christodoulides D.N., Self-accelerating self-trapped optical beams, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.213903) **106** (2011), 213903, 4 pages.
Kaneko M., Ochiai H., On coefficients of [Y]{}ablonskii–[V]{}orob’ev polynomials, [*J. Math. Soc. Japan*](https://doi.org/10.2969/jmsj/1191418760) **55** (2003), 985–993, [math.CA/0205178](http://arxiv.org/abs/math.CA/0205178).
Kazakia J.Y., Venkataraman R., Propagation of electromagnetic waves in a nonlinear dielectric slab, [*Z. Angew. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01596279) **26** (1975), 61–76.
Konopelchenko B., Rogers C., On [$(2+1)$]{}-dimensional nonlinear systems of [L]{}oewner-type, [*Phys. Lett. A*](https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(91)90680-7) **158** (1991), 391–397.
Konopelchenko B., Rogers C., On generalized [L]{}oewner systems: novel integrable equations in [$2+1$]{} dimensions, [*J. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.530377) **34** (1993), 214–242.
Korteweg D.K., Sur la forme que prennent les équations du mouvement des fluides si l’on tient compte des forces capillaires causées par des variations de densité considérables mais continues et sur la théorie de la capillarité dans l’hypothèse d’une variation continue de la densité, *Arch. Néerl.* **6** (1901), 1–24.
Lee J.-H., Pashaev O.K., Solitons of the resonant nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation with nontrivial boundary conditions: [H]{}irota bilinear method, [*Theoret. and Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11232-007-0083-3) **152** (2007), 991–1003, [nlin.SI/0611003](http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin.SI/0611003).
Lee J.-H., Pashaev O.K., Rogers C., Schief W.K., The resonant nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation in cold plasma physics. [A]{}pplication of [B]{}äcklund–[D]{}arboux transformations and superposition principles, [*J. Plasma Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022377806004648) **73** (2007), 257–272.
Loewner C., A transformation theory of the partial differential equations of gas dynamics, *Tech. Notes Nat. Adv. Comm. Aeronaut.* **1950** (1950), 1–56.
Loewner C., Generation of solutions of systems of partial differential equations by composition of infinitesimal [B]{}aecklund transformations, [*J. Anal. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02825638) **2** (1953), 219–242.
Lukashevich N.A., On the theory of [P]{}ainlevé’s second equation, *Differ. Equ.* **7** (1971), 853–854.
Madelung E., Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischen [F]{}orm, [*Z. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01400372) **40** (1926), 322–326.
Mahalov A., Suslov S.K., An “[A]{}iry gun”: self-accelerating solutions of the time-dependent [S]{}chrödinger equation in vacuum, [*Phys. Lett. A*](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2012.10.041) **377** (2012), 33–38.
Miles J.W., On the second [P]{}ainlevé transcendent, [*Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A*](https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1978.0103) **361** (1978), 277–291.
Neuber H., Kerbspannungslehre. [G]{}rundlagen für genaue [F]{}estigkeitsberechnung mit [B]{}erücksichtigung von [K]{}onstruktionsform und [W]{}erkstoff, [*Texts and Monographs in Physics*](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53069-2), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1958.
Neuber H., Theory of stress concentration for shear-strained prismatical bodies with arbitrary nonlinear stress-strain law, [*J. Appl. Mech.*](https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3641780) **28** (1961), 544–550.
Oevel W., Rogers C., Gauge transformations and reciprocal links in [$2+1$]{} dimensions, [*Rev. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129055X93000073) **5** (1993), 299–330.
Okamoto K., Studies on the [P]{}ainlevé equations. [III]{}. [S]{}econd and fourth [P]{}ainlevé equations, [$P_{{\rm II}}$]{} and [$P_{{\rm IV}}$]{}, [*Math. Ann.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01458459) **275** (1986), 221–255.
Pashaev O.K., Lee J.-H., Resonance solitons as black holes in [M]{}adelung fluid, [*Modern Phys. Lett. A*](https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732302007995) **17** (2002), 1601–1619, [hep-th/9810139](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9810139).
Pashaev O.K., Lee J.-H., Rogers C., Soliton resonances in a generalized nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/41/45/452001) **41** (2008), 452001, 9 pages.
Roberts P.H., Berloff N.G., The nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation as a model of superfluidity, in Quantum Vortex Dynamics and Superfluid Turbulence, [*Lecture Notes in Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45542-6_23), Vol. 571, Editors C.F. Barenghi, R.J. Donnelly, W.F. Vinen, Springer, Berlin, 2001, 235–257.
Rogers C., Reciprocal relations in non-steady one-dimensional gasdynamics, [*Z. Angew. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01603278) **19** (1968), 58–63.
Rogers C., Invariant transformations in non-steady gasdynamics and magnetogasdynamics, [*Z. Angew. Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01590430) **20** (1969), 370–382.
Rogers C., On a class of moving boundary problems in nonlinear heat conduction: application of a [B]{}äcklund transformation, [*Internat. J. Non-Linear Mech.*](https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7462(86)90032-6) **21** (1986), 249–256.
Rogers C., Integrable substructure in a [K]{}orteweg capillarity model. [A]{} [K]{}ármán–[T]{}sien type constitutive relation, [*J. Nonlinear Math. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1080/14029251.2014.894721) **21** (2014), 74–88.
Rogers C., Bassom A.P., Schief W.K., On a [P]{}ainlevé [II]{} model in steady electrolysis: application of a [B]{}äcklund transformation, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*](https://doi.org/10.1006/jmaa.1999.6589) **240** (1999), 367–381.
Rogers C., Malomed B., Chow K., An H., Ermakov–[R]{}ay–[R]{}eid systems in nonlinear optics, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/43/45/455214) **43** (2010), 455214, 15 pages.
Rogers C., Ramgulam U., A nonlinear superposition principle and [L]{}ie group invariance: application in rotating shallow water theory, [*Internat. J. Non-Linear Mech.*](https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7462(89)90042-5) **24** (1989), 229–236.
Rogers C., Schief W.K., Intrinsic geometry of the [NLS]{} equation and its auto-[B]{}äcklund transformation, [*Stud. Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9590.00093) **101** (1998), 267–287.
Rogers C., Schief W.K., Geodesic motion in multidimensional unified gauge theories, *Nuovo Cimento B* **114** (1999), 1409–1412.
Rogers C., Schief W.K., Bäcklund and [D]{}arboux transformations. Geometry and modern applications in soliton theory, [*Cambridge Texts in Applied Mathematics*](https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606359), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.
Rogers C., Schief W.K., The classical [K]{}orteweg capillarity system: geometry and invariant transformations, [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*](https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/47/34/345201) **47** (2014), 345201, 20 pages.
Rogers C., Schief W.K., Winternitz P., Lie-theoretical generalization and discretization of the [P]{}inney equation, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*](https://doi.org/10.1006/jmaa.1997.5674) **216** (1997), 246–264.
Schief W.K., Rogers C., Loewner transformations: adjoint and binary [D]{}arboux connections, [*Stud. Appl. Math.*](https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9590.00082) **100** (1998), 391–422.
Seymour B., Varley E., A [B]{}äcklund transformation for a nonlinear telegraph equation, in Wave Phenomena: Modern Theory and Applications, [*North-Holland Mathematics Studies*](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-0208(08)71273-8), Vol. 97, Editors C. Rogers and T.M. Moodie, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, 299–306.
Shi Y., Hearst J.E., The Kirchoff elastic rod, the nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equation, and [DNA]{} supercoiling, [*J. Chem. Phys.*](http://doi.org/10.1063/1.468506) **101** (1994), 5186–5200.
Storm M.L., Heat conduction in simple metals, [*J. Appl. Phys.*](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1700076) **22** (1951), 940–951.
Tajiri M., Similarity reductions of the one- and two-dimensional nonlinear [S]{}chrödinger equations, [*J. Phys. Soc. Japan*](https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.52.1908) **52** (1983), 1908–1917.
Taneda M., Remarks on the [Y]{}ablonskii–[V]{}orob’ev polynomials, [*Nagoya Math. J.*](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0027763000007431) **159** (2000), 87–111.
Tsien H.-S., Two-dimensional subsonic flow of compressible fluids, [*J. Aeronaut. Sci.*](https://doi.org/10.2514/8.916) **6** (1939), 399–407.
Vorob’ev A.P., On the rational solutions of the second [P]{}ainlevé equation, *Differ. Equ.* **1** (1965), 79–81.
Wagner W.G., Haus H.A., Marburger J.H., Large-scale self-trapping of optical beams in the paraxial ray approximation, [*Phys. Rev.*](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.175.256) **175** (1968), 256–266.
Xu Y., Suarez P., Milovic D., Khan K.R., Mahmood M.F., Biswas A., Belic M., Raman solitons in nanoscale optical waveguides, with metamaterials, having polynomial law non-linearity, [*J. Modern Opt.*](https://doi.org/10.1080/09500340.2016.1193240) **63** (2016), S32–S37.
Yablonskii A.I., On rational solutions of the second Painlevé equation, *Vesti AN BSSR, Ser. Fiz.-Tech. Nauk* (1959), no. 3, 30–35.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The bounds on the sum and product of chromatic numbers of a graph and its complement are known as Nordhaus-Gaddum inequalities. In this paper, some variations on this result is studies. First, recall their theorem, which gives bounds on the sum and the product of the chromatic number of a graph with that of its complement. we also provide a new characterization of the certain graph classes.'
author:
- '[**Sunny Joseph Kalayathankal[^1]**]{} and [**Susanth C [^2]**]{}'
title: '**The Sum and Product of Chromatic Numbers of Graphs and their Line Graphs**'
---
[**Keywords:**]{} Chromatic Number of a graph, Chromatic Index of a graph, Line Graph.
**Mathematics Subject Classification 2010: 05C15**.
Introduction
============
For all terms and definitions, not defined specifically in this paper, we refer to [@FH]. Unless mentioned otherwise, all graphs considered here are simple, finite and have no isolated vertices.\
Many problems in extremal graph theory seek the extreme values of graph parameters on families of graphs. The classic paper of Nordhaus and Gaddum [@KCA] study the extreme values of the sum (or product) of a parameter on a graph and its complement, following solving these problems for the chromatic number on n-vertex graphs. In this paper, we study such problems for some graphs and their associated graphs.
[ [@FH] A *coloring* of a graph is an assignment of colors to its vertices so that no two adjacent vertices have the same color. The set of all vertices with any one color is independent and is called a color class. An *$n$-coloring* of a graph G uses n colors; it thereby partitions V into n color classes. The *chromatic number* $\chi(G)$ is defined as the minimum $n$ for which $G$ has an $n$ - coloring. A graph $G$ is *$n$-colorable* if $\chi(G)\leq n$ and is *$n$-chromatic* if $\chi(G)=n$. ]{}
[ [@FH] An *edge-coloring* or *line-coloring* of a graph $G$ is an assignment of colors to its edges (lines) so that no two adjacent edges (lines) are assigned the same color. An *n-edge-coloring* of $G$ is an edge-coloring of $G$ which uses exactly $n$ colors. The *edge-chromatic number* $\chi'(G)$ is the minimum $n$ for which $G$ has an $n$-edge-coloring.]{}
Recall the following theorem, which gives bounds on the sum and the product of the chromatic number of a graph with that of its complement.
[ [@KCA] If $G$ is a graph with $V(G)=n$ and chromatic number $\chi(G)$ then]{}
$$2\sqrt{n}\leq \chi(G)+\chi(\bar{G})\leq n+1$$
$$n\leq\chi(G).\chi(\bar{G})\leq \frac{(n+1)^2}{4}$$
And there is no possible improvement of any of these bounds. In fact, much more can be said. Let $n$ be a positive integer. For every two positive integers $a$ and $b$, $$2\sqrt{n}\leq a+b \leq n+1$$ $$n \leq ab \leq \frac{(n+1)^2}{4}$$ There is a graph $G$ of order $n$ such that $\chi(G)=a$ and $\chi(\bar{G})=b$.
[[@CGT] The *chromatic index* (or *edge chromatic number*) $\chi'(G)$ of a graph $G$ is the minimum positive integer $k$ for which $G$ is $k-$edge colorable. Furthermore, $\chi'(G)=\chi(L(G))$ for every nonempty graph $G$.]{}
[[@FH] For any graph $G$, the edge-chromatic number satisfies the inequalities]{} $$\Delta\leq\chi'\leq\Delta+1$$
[[@CGT] (Konig’s Theorem) If $G$ is a nonempty bipartite graph, then $\chi'(G)=\Delta(G)$.]{}
[[@CH] Let $G=K_n$, the complete graph on $n$ vertices, $n\geq2$. Then]{} $$\chi'(G)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\Delta(G)& \text{if $n$ is even} \\
\Delta(G)+1 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
We denote the chromatic number of a graph $G$ is denoted by $\chi(G)$ and the complement of G is denoted by $\bar{G}$.\
This work is motivated by the inspiring talk given by Dr. J Paulraj Joseph, Department of Mathematics, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli - 627012, TamilNadu, Titled **Bounds on sum of graph parameters - A survey**, at the National Conference on Emerging Trends in Graph Connections (NCETGC-2014), on January 8-10, 2014, at the Department of Mathematics, University of Kerala, Kariavattom, Kerala.
New Results
===========
[[@DBW] The *line graph* of a graph $G$, written $L(G)$, is the graph whose vertices are the edges of $G$, with $ef\in{E(L(G))}$ when $e=uv$ and $f=vw$ in G.]{}
With the above background, we now prove the following.
For a Complete graph $K_n$, $n\geq 2$, $$\chi(K_n)+\chi(L(K_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
2n-1 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
2n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ $$\chi(K_n).\chi(L(K_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n^2 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
We know that $\chi(K_n)= n$ for all positive integer $n$. Let $L(K_n)$ denotes the line graph of $K_n$. Then, $K_n$ is $(n-1)$ regular and by definition, $\chi(L(K_n))= \chi'(K_n)$. By theorem [@CH], $$\chi'(K_n)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\Delta=n-1 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
\Delta + 1=n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ ie, $$\chi(L(K_n))= \chi'(K_n)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\Delta=n-1 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
\Delta + 1=n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ Therefore $$\chi(K_n)+\chi(L(K_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n+n-1=2n-1 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n+n=2n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ Similarly, $$\chi(K_n).\chi(L(K_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n.n=n^2 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
For a Complete bipartite graph $K_{m,n}$, $m,n\geq 0$,\
$\chi(K_{m,n})+\chi(L(K_{m,n}))= 2+max~(m,n)$ and
\
$\chi(K_{m,n}).\chi(L(K_{m,n}))=
2~max~(m,n)$
We know that $\chi(K_{m,n})= 2$ for all positive integer $m,n$. Let $L(K_{m,n})$ denotes the line graph of $K_{m,n}$. Then, by definition, $\chi(L(K_{m,n}))= \chi'(K_{m,n})$.\
Therefore By theorem [@CGT], $\chi(L(K_{m,n}))= \chi'(K_{m,n})=max~(m,n)$.\
\
Then $\chi(K_{m,n})+\chi(L(K_{m,n}))= 2+max~(m,n)$ and\
$\chi(K_{m,n}).\chi(L(K_{m,n}))= 2~max~(m,n)$
For a star graph $K_{1,n}$,\
$\chi(K_{1,n})+\chi(L(K_{1,n}))=n+2$ and
\
$\chi(K_{1,n}).\chi(L(K_{1,n}))=2n$
Since any two edges of a star graph $K_{1,n}$ are adjacent each other, then its line graph is a complete graph with $n$ vertices. We know $\chi(K_{1,n})=2$ and $\chi(L(K_{1,n}))=n$.\
Therefore $\chi(K_{1,n})+\chi(L(K_{1,n}))= n+2$ and\
$\chi(K_{1,n}).\chi(L(K_{1,n}))=2n$.
A *bistar graph* $(B_{m,n})$ is a graph obtained by attaching $m$ pendent edges to one end point and $n$ pendent edges to the other end point of $K_2$.\
The following result establishes the sum and product of chromatic numbers of a bistar graph and its line graph.
For a bistar graph $B_{m,n}$,\
$\chi(B_{m,n})+\chi(L(B_{m,n}))= 2+max~(m,n)$ and
\
$\chi(B_{m,n}).\chi(L(B_{m,n}))= 2~ max~(m,n)$
Let $u$, $v$ be two vertices of $K_2$. Let $m$ edges be attached to $u$ and $n$ edges be attached to $v$. Since all $m$ edges at $u$ are adjacent to each other and all $n$ edges at $v$ are adjacent to each other, its line graph is the one point union of 2 complete graphs $K_m$ and $K_n$.\
Then $$\chi(L(B_{m,n}))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
m & \text{if $m>n$} \\
n & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.$$ Therefore\
$\chi(B_{m,n})+\chi(L(B_{m,n}))= 2+max~(m,n)$ and
\
$\chi(B_{m,n}).\chi(L(B_{m,n}))= 2~ max~(m,n)$
Let $G$ be a bipartite graph with a bipartition $(X,Y)$ with $|X|=m$ and $|Y|=n$, then $4\leq\chi(G)+\chi(L(G)\leq2+max~(m,n)$ and\
$4\leq\chi(G).\chi(L(G)\leq2~max~(m,n)$
The minimal connected bipartite graph of $m,n$ vertices will be $P_{m+n-1}$ and that of its line graph is $P_{m+n-2}$. Chromatic number of $G$ and $L(G)$ is 2.\
\
Therefore $\chi(G)+\chi(L(G))= 4$ and $\chi(G).\chi(L(G))= 4$ then\
$$4\leq\chi(G)+\chi(L(G))\leq2+max~(m,n)$$ $$4\leq\chi(G).\chi(L(G))\leq2~max~(m,n)$$
[ [@FH] For $n\geq4$, a *wheel graph* $W_n$ is defined to be the graph $K_1+ C_{n-1}$.]{}
The chromatic index of a wheel graph $W_n$ with $n$ vertices is $n-1$.
A wheel graph $W_n$ with $n$ vertices is $K_1+ C_{n-1}$. Suppose $K_1$ lies inside the circle $C_{n-1}$. Let $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_{n-1}$ be the edges incident with the vertex $K_1$ and we need $n-1$ colors to color this $n-1$ edges. Let $u_1,u_2,u_3,...,u_{n-1}$ be the end vertices of $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_{n-1}$, which form the cycle $C_{n-1}$. Then, there exists $q_1,q_2,q_3,...,q_{n-1}$ edges incident to $u_1,u_2,u_3,...,u_{n-1}$. For any edge $q_j$ in the cycle $C_{n-1}$, there exists an edge $e_i$ which is not adjacent to $q_j$. Therefore $e_i$ and $q_j$ can have the same color. That is using the same set of $n-1$ colors, we can color the edges $q_1,q_2,q_3,...,q_{n-1}$. That means we can color the edges of a wheel graph $W_n$ with $n-1$ colors or the chromatic index of $W_n$ is $n-1$.
For a wheel graph $W_n$ on $n$ vertices and $2(n-1)$ edges, $n\geq 4$, $$\chi(W_n)+\chi(L(W_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n+3 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n+2 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ $$\chi(W_n).\chi(L(W_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
We know that $$\chi(W_n)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ for all positive integer $n\geq4 $. Let $L(W_n)$ denotes the line graph of $W_n$. Then, $\chi(L(W_n))= \chi'(W_n) = (n-1)$ Therefore $$\chi(W_n)+\chi(L(W_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4+(n-1)=n+3 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3+(n-1)=n+2 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ Similarly, $$\chi(W_n).\chi(L(W_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3(n-1) & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
[ [@JAG] *Helm graphs* are graphs obtained from a wheel by attaching one pendant edge to each vertex of the cycle.]{}
[ The chromatic index of a helm graph $H_n$ with $2n+1$ vertices and $3n$ edges is $n$.]{}
Let $u_1$ is the central vertex and $v_1,v_2,v_3,...,v_n$ be the vertices of the cycle. Let $w_1,w_2,w_3,...,w_n$ be the pendent vertices attached to $v_1,v_2,v_3,...,v_n$ respectively. Let $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_n$ be the edges incident on the vertex $u_1$. Let $l_1,l_2,l_3,...,l_n$ be the edges of the cycle formed by the vertices $v_1,v_2,v_3,...,v_n$. Let $q_1,q_2,q_3,...,q_n$ be the pendent edges. Since each $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_n$ are adjacent to each other, to color the edges $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_n$, we need atleast $n$ colors. For every edge $l_i$, we can find atleast one edge $e_j$ such that $l_i$and$e_j$ are non-adjacent. Color the edge $l_i$ with the same color of $e_j$. Using the same set of $n$ colors, we can color all the edges $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_n$ and $l_1,l_2,l_3,...,l_n$. For any edge $q_k$, there will be atleast one edge $e_j$ and alteast one edge $l_i$ with the same color and are non-adjacent to $q_k$. Now assign this color to $q_k$. Hence we color all the vertices of helm graph using the same set of $n$ colors.
For a helm graph $H_n$ on $2n+1$ vertices, and $3n$ edges, $n\geq 3$, $$\chi(H_n)+\chi(L(H_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n+4 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n+3 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ $$\chi(H_n).\chi(L(H_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4n & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
We know that $$\chi(H_n)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ for all positive integer $n\geq4 $. Let $L(H_n)$ denotes the line graph of $H_n$. Then, $\chi(L(H_n))= \chi'(H_n) = n$\
Therefore $$\chi(H_n)+\chi(L(H_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
n+4 & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
n+3 & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$ Similarly, $$\chi(H_n).\chi(L(H_n))=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
4n & \text{if $n$ is even} \\
3n & \text{if $n$ is odd}
\end{array}\right.$$
[ [@DBW] Given a vertex $x$ and a set $U$ of vertices, an $x$, $U-$fan is a set of paths from $x$ to $U$ such that any two of them share only the vertex $x$.]{}
The chromatic index of a fan graph $F_{1,n}$ with $n+1$ vertices is $n$.
The fan graph $F_{1,n}$ with $n+1$ vertices is $K_1+ P_{n-1}$. Let $e_1,e_2,e_3,...,e_n$ be the edges incident with the vertex $K_1$ and we need $n$ colors to color this $n$ edges. Let $q_1,q_2,q_3,...,q_{n-1}$ be the edges in the path $P_{n-1}$. For any edge $q_j$ in the path $P_{n-1}$, there exists an edge $e_i$ which is not adjacent to $q_j$. Therefore $e_i$ and $q_j$ can have the same color. That is, by taking $(n-1)$ colors out of $n$ colors, we can color the edges $q_1,q_2,q_3,...,q_{n-1}$. That is we can color the edges of a fan graph $F_{1,n}$ with $n$ colors or the chromatic index of $F_{1,n}$ is $n$.
For a fan graph $F_{1,n}$,\
$\chi(F_{1,n})+\chi(L(F_{1,n}))=n+4$ and
\
$\chi(F_{1,n}).\chi(L(F_{1,n}))=3(n+1)$
For a fan graph $F_{1,n}$, with $e\geq1$, we have $\chi(F_{1,n})=3$ for all positive integer $n\geq2$. Let $L(F_{1,n})$ denotes the line graph of $F_{1,n}$. Then $\chi(L(F_{1,n}))=\chi'(F_{1,n})=n$.\
Therefore $\chi(F_{1,n})+\chi(L(F_{1,n}))=3+n=n+3$ and\
$\chi(F_{1,n}).\chi(L(F_{1,n}))=3n$.
Conclusion
==========
The theoretical and experimental results obtained in this research may provide a better insight into the problems involving chromatic number by improving the known lower and upper bounds on sums and products of chromatic numbers of a graph $G$ and an associated graph of $G$. More properties and characteristics of operations on chromatic number and also other graph parameters are yet to be investigated. The problems of establishing the inequalities on sums and products of chromatic numbers for various graphs and graph classes still remain unsettled. All these facts highlight a wide scope for further studies in this area.
[25]{} J A Bondy and U S R Murty, [**Graph Theory**]{}, Springer, (2008). G Chartrand, Ping Zhang, [**Chromatic Graph Theory**]{}, CRC Press, Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, MI, U.S.A. J Clark and D A Holton, **A First Look At Graph Theory**, Allied Pub., India (1991). K L Collins, Ann Trenk, **Nordhaus-Gaddum theorem for the distinguishing chromatic number**, The electronic journal of combinatorics 16 (2009), arXiv:1203.5765v1 \[math.CO\], 26 March 2012. N Deo, [**Graph Theory with Applications to Engineering and Computer Science**]{}, PHI Learning, (1974). J A. Gallian, **A Dynamic survey of Graph Labeling**, the electronic journal of combinatorics 18, (2011). F Harary, **Graph Theory**, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc, (1994). Douglas B West, [**Introduction to Graph Theory**]{}, Pearson Education Asia, (2002).
[^1]: Department of Mathematics, Kuriakose Elias College, Mannanam, Kottayam - 686561, Kerala, email:[*sunnyjoseph2014yahoo.com*]{}
[^2]: Department of Mathematics, Vidya Academy of Science & Technology, Thalakkottukara, Thrissur - 680501, email: [*susanth\[email protected]*]{}
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'A droplet ejection mechanism in planar two-phase mixing layers is examined. Any disturbance on the gas-liquid interface grows into a Kelvin-Helmholtz wave and the wave crest forms a thin liquid film that flaps as the wave grows downstream. Increasing the gas speed, it is observed that the film breaks-up into droplets which are eventually thrown into the gas stream at large angles. In a flow where most of the momentum is in the horizontal direction, it is surprising to observe these large ejection angles. Our experiments and simulations show that a recirculation region grows downstream of the wave and leads to vortex shedding similar to the wake of a backward-facing step. The ejection mechanism results from the interaction between the liquid film and the vortex shedding sequence: a recirculation zone appears in the wake of the wave and a liquid film emerges from the wave crest; the recirculation region detaches into a vortex and the gas flow over the wave momentarily reattaches due to the departure of the vortex; this reattached flow pushes the liquid film down; by now, a new recirculation vortex is being created in the wake of the wave—just where the liquid film is now located; the liquid film is blown-up from below by the newly formed recirculation vortex in a manner similar to a bag-breakup event; the resulting droplets are catapulted by the recirculation vortex.'
author:
- J John Soundar Jerome
- Sylvain Marty
- 'Jean-Philippe Matas'
- Stéphane Zaleski
- Jérôme Hoepffner
title: Vortices catapult droplets in atomization
---
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
Atomisation is the process by which a liquid stream fragments into droplets. It is a common phenomenon in nature and industry (for instance, see Chapter $1$ in *Atomization and Sprays* by @Lefebvre_1989). One of the ways to make droplets or sprays is to form waves on the gas-liquid interface by a fast-moving gas on a liquid surface, for example, air-blast injectors systems. The textbook *Liquid Atomization* by @Bayvel_n_Orzechowski_1993 provides a detailed study of such injector systems. The waves on the gas-liquid interface grow by extracting the kinetic energy of the liquid and gas stream and if the kinetic energy is sufficiently large, thin liquid sheets or films are formed which break into droplets [@Eggers_1997]. This step is called primary atomization. During the final and secondary atomization, these droplets form a fine spray via collision and stretching. While the latter process determines the size and distribution of the droplets, the former plays an important role in determining the rate at which droplets are produced and the initial conditions for the extent of the dispersed two-phase flow. The physical mechanisms of primary atomization are often complex, nonlinear and hence, are poorly understood. This is true not only for co-flowing gas-liquid mixing layers but also for jets [@Lin_n_Reitz_1997; @Lasheras_n_Hopfinger_2000; @Eggers_n_Villermaux_2008], planar sheets [@Duke_2012], etc. In this article, the primary atomization process in a co-flowing gas-liquid mixing layer is illustrated, in particular, when the horizontal gas flow is fast.
@Rayleigh_1879 showed that in a single-phase mixing layer, the Kelvin-Helmholtz ($KH$) type instability wavelength and growth rate is directly related to the thickness of the shear layer. In the case of two phase mixing layers, thanks to a large body of experimental evidence [@Villermaux_thesis_1993; @Raynal_1997; @Villermaux_1998; @Raynal_thesis_1997; @Rayana_2006; @Rayana_thesis_2007; @Matas_2011], it is now well-established that the instability wavelength is governed by the gas boundary layer thickness $\delta_{g}$. Combining both experimental and numerical investigations, @Otto_2013 & @Fuster_2013 show that depending on the momentum ratio $M = {\rho_{g}U_{g}^{2}}/{\rho_{l}U_{l}^{2}}$ (where $\rho_{g}$, $\rho_{l}$ represent the gas and liquid density and $U_{g}$, $U_{l}$ represent the gas and liquid freestream velocity), such an instability leads to a noise amplifier or a nonlinear global mode [@Huerre_n_Rossi_1998] that beats at a particular frequency. A two-stage mechanism for interface destabilization has been demonstrated by @Marmottant_2004 for co-axial gas-liquid jets. They showed that, at first, the instability leads to waves whose length scale is directly related to the gas boundary layer thickness and the density ratio. Later, the transient acceleration of the liquid surface induced by the waves can promote a Rayleigh-Taylor type instability at the wave crests forming liquid ligaments. A similar two-step mechanism is also put forward for the case of planar two-phase mixing layers by @Hong_2003 who proposed that the transient accelerations due to the primary destabilization (Kelvin-Helmholtz instability) should be modified to account for the aerodynamic acceleration of thin ligaments due to the drag exerted by the air flow in the horizontal direction. On the other hand, optimal growth studies in two-phase mixing layers [@Yecko_n_Zaleski_2005] also suggest that ligament formation could be related to large transient growth resulting in strong liquid up-flows and high-speed streamwise gas jets near the interface. However, @Boeck_2007 later showed via direct numerical simulations that relatively large Reynolds and Weber numbers are necessary to observe the nonlinear development of perturbations into growing ligaments. Despite the evidence for $3D$ dimensional structures in planar mixing layer experiments [@Hong_2003], there is relatively good agreement between linear stability analysis based on parallel flow assumptions. For instance, by taking into account the liquid velocity deficit at the gas-liquid interface, @Matas_2011 demonstrated a good agreement of the measured frequency with the frequency predicted by the inviscid stability analysis. Similarly, @Otto_2013 and @Fuster_2013 also provided relatively good comparisons between experiments and viscous linear spatio-temporal stability results.
In the present work, the various mechanisms of such interfacial pattern formations are not considered. However, the interaction between these interfacial patterns and the gas flow field is particularly analysed. For example, bag break-up is known to occur in round liquid jets exposed to a gas flow at gas Weber numbers (based on the diameter of the jet and the gas speed) less than $30$. The jet first deforms into a curved sheet due to aerodynamic drag, followed by the formation of one or more bags, along the jet-streamwise direction. These bags expand and ultimately burst. A detailed account on the formation and breakup of such bags is given by @Sankarakrishnan_Sallam_2008 Recently, @Scharfman_n_Techet_2012 identified multiple bag-breakup in such flows when the jet diameter is larger than the capillary length of the liquid. One can also expect a strong interaction between gas-liquid interfacial patterns and the gas flow. Such interactions determine how droplets are created in the primary atomization and so, the initial droplet distribution to determine the final dispersed state via the secondary atomization. Hence, it is central to understand such processes.
. \[fig:Schematic\]
Consider for example figure \[fig:Schematic\]b which shows interfacial patterns and complex gas flow structures during the atomization process in a planar two-phase mixing layer. It is taken by a high-speed camera (Photron SA1.1) in the splitter plate experimental set-up illustrated in the schematic (figure \[fig:Schematic\]a). The set-up uses a Argon LASER sheet across an air-water mixing layer past a thin splitter plate in order to observe the two-dimensional structures in the flow (see @Matas_2011 for more details on the experimental set-up). The gas flow is visualized using airborne smoke particles while fluorescein is mixed with water so that the air-water interface can be distinctly captured under LASER sheet illumination. In figure \[fig:Schematic\]b, the LASER sheet illuminates the liquid surface showing two waves: the active wave which grows while remaining attached to the splitter plate and the passive wave which is the previous active wave that has left the plate. Between these waves, there is a recirculation region and just above it, a liquid film is readily visible. As the liquid film develops, it flaps and droplets are violently extracted from the crest of the active wave. @Raynal_thesis_1997 carried out measurements of the maximum droplet ejection angles $\alpha_{max}$ on an older version of the same experimental set-up. Figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a displays the variation of $\alpha_{max}$ as a function of air speed at four different liquid velocities. When the air speed $U_{g}$ is increased progressively, the angle $\alpha_{max}$ increases steeply until about a critical value (as large as $50^\circ$) and then decreases monotonically, however slowly, with further increase in $U_{g}$ (see also @Rayana_thesis_2007). When the liquid speed is increased the same behaviour is observed, but the maximum angles are shifted to larger values. @Raynal_1997 used superposition of images (for example, see figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]b) in order to measure the maximum ejection angles given in figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a. We see clearly that the ejection angles vary non-monotonically with air speed.
In order to gain insight into the statistics of ejection angles, we measured the angle of ejection $\alpha$ by carefully observing individual ejection events. We carried out measurements of individual ejection angles for a fixed liquid velocity $U_{l} = 0.23 ms^{-1}$ at four different air speeds. For each of these conditions, about $50$ ejection events are identified and analysed to build an approximate probability density function $P\left(\alpha\right)$. It is presented in figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]c. We observe that maximum values of $\alpha$ reach up to $50$ degrees for $U_{g} = 20 ms^{-1}$ and $U_{g} = 25 ms^{-1}$, but decrease down to $25$ degrees for $U_{g} = 70 ms^{-1}$. This trend is consistent with the data of figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a since these maximum angles should fall between the data of $U_{l} = 0.19 ms^{-1}$ and $U_{l} = 0.28 ms^{-1}$. Note that figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]c clearly indicates that large ejection angles are not rare events: for $U_{g} = 25 ms^{-1}$, around $40$% of ejection events correspond to maximum ejection angles larger than $20^{\circ}$.
Thus, we observe that droplets are thrown into the air stream at a considerable angle with respect to the horizontal axis. In a flow system with large horizontal momentum, it is intriguing to find that droplets move in an oblique trajectory. The aim of the present work is to understand the physical mechanisms causing such a phenomenon.
The experimental results of @Raynal_thesis_1997 in figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a correspond to the case where the velocity of the air-flow (the lighter fluid) is large compared to that of water (the heavier fluid) with an air-flow recirculation region as identified in figure \[fig:Schematic\]b. The interaction of this zone with the wave crest and hence its influence on primary atomization processes have rarely been considered. However, similar situations in which air-flow separation and the resulting recirculation region play a significant role are well-known for the case of wind-induced waves in ocean: wave breaking and “freak” waves (“rogue” waves or extreme wave events). @Jeffreys_1925 [@Jeffreys_1926] showed that surface waves in the ocean are formed mainly due to the pressure difference created by the air-flow over the water surface. Wave breaking corresponds to the initial stage of overturning motion of the wave crest that creates sea-sprays (even jets in most cases) and foams [@Peregrine_1983]. The presence of air-flow separation during wave breaking was shown by @Banner_n_Melville_1976 and @Banner_1990. Later, @Reul_1999 described the instantaneous velocity field of separated air-flow over breaking waves. It is now recognised that air-flow separation over breaking waves enhances momentum transport from air to water [@Melville_2002; @Alexakis_2004; @Reul_2008; @Sullivan_n_McWilliams_2010].
During the last decade, considerable work had been done to throw light upon the importance of such flow separation on freak waves (giant waves appearing sporadically on the sea surface). @Touboul_2006 and @Kharif_2008 showed that the time duration of freak wave mechanism is increased by the presence of a recirculation region behind the wave. They also demonstrated an increase in the freak wave height. It is thus expected that the recirculation vortex can show strong interactions with the wave crest and hence, play an important role in the atomization process. However, the influence of vortices on the dynamics of gas-liquid interface is not well known, largely due to the fact that such events are complex and involve a large variety of scales. It is precisely the objective of this work to demonstrate such vortex-interfacial wave interactions.
Vortex shedding as a driving mechanism for droplet ejection {#sec:VortexSheddingExpeObserv}
===========================================================
A series of snapshots of the air-water interface and smoke visualisation of the airflow past it is displayed in figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]a. In order to render the interface and the flow visualization more visible, a scale-to-scale schematic of these snapshots is given in figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]b. Here, thick lines with arrows represent the air flow and, in particular, the emphasis is put on the recirculation vortex (see *Movies 1* & *2* in the supplementary video [@SuppMovie] for more details). The interface (red online) and air flow evolve as we march down the time axis from top to bottom in both figures. As the wave grows in amplitude, a thin liquid film is formed. Smoke visualization shows the presence of a separated flow with a recirculation zone just below the liquid film. The recirculation zone grows in time and blows upward on the liquid film above it. Note that the size of the zone compares with the height of the wave. The recirculation vortex is eventually shed. During the entire process, the wave moves much slower than the air stream and hence, acts as an obstacle to the air flow. This implies that the air flow past the wave is similar to the flow past a backward facing step (analogous to the case of breaking waves [@Reul_1999] and freak waves [@Touboul_2006]). This is the reason why the air flow over the interface wave separates and the separated flow reattaches after a small recirculation zone in figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\].
We may now proceed to the detailed description of the events shown in the figure. We may call this sequence the *droplet catapult mechanism*:
1. A recirculation appears in the wake of the wave and a liquid film emerges from the wave crest.
2. The recirculation region detaches into a vortex. The departure of the recirculation vortex leads to a momentary reattachment of the gas flow along the wave. This reattached flow, in turn, pushes the thin liquid film downward.
3. A new recirculation region appears in the wake of the wave—precisely where the liquid film is now located. Thus, the liquid film is, eventually, blown-up from below by the nascent recirculation vortex, similar to a bag-breakup event. The resulting droplets are catapulted by the shed vortex.
We refer the reader to *Movie 2* of the supplementary material [@SuppMovie] where these droplet catapult events via vortex shedding are shown for various air speeds. We observe that the droplets that are ejected at large angles originate from the liquid film growing at the crest of the wave. It is clear from *Movie 2* [@SuppMovie] that the thin liquid film is blown-up from *below* by none but the recirculating air flow. We, hereafter, refer to this break-up as *bag-breakup from below* whereby a thin liquid sheet attached to a liquid rim breaks-up (similar to a soap film attached to a ring) as it is blown-up by the recirculation vortex into a bag. Bag-breakup is well-known to be a violent event, see for instance @Pilch_n_Erdman_1987 [@Villermaux_2007; @Sankarakrishnan_Sallam_2008; @Scharfman_n_Techet_2012]. It also leads to a wide distribution of droplet sizes. This is shown for instance in @Villermaux_2009 where it is the key element to explain the statistics of raindrops.
Localized self-similar wave {#sec:SelfSimKHwave}
===========================
It is clear from figures \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]a$-$b and supplementary videos (*Movies 1*–*4* [@SuppMovie]), that the air-flow visualization of such a shedding process is difficult because of the $3D$ nature of the two-phase mixing layer due to the influence of capillary waves and side walls. These effects mask the visualization of the vortex behind the wave. Moreover, due to the presence of a large number of droplets during the droplet catapult process, it is cumbersome to identify the air-water interface using the LASER sheet as it is reflected unequally by the droplets. Direct Numerical Simulations ($DNS$) can be used to visualise the gas and liquid flow fields. However, $DNS$ computations of such complex three dimensional two-phase flows at the experimental density ratios, gas and liquid speeds are currently not feasible. Thus, we consider, instead, the evolution of a localized initial disturbance in an infinite two-phase $2D$ mixing layer. This study, as we shall see later, illustrates that the *droplet catapult mechanism* can be identified in other two-phase flow configurations as well. Direct numerical simulations of this two–fluid system is implemented via the open source Gerris Flow Solver. A finite volume scheme is used to discretize the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations whereas the interface is traced in the framework of the Volume Of Fluid ($VOF$) method via a quadtree adaptive grid refinement. @Popinet_2003 and @Popinet_2009 provide a comprehensive description of this numerical technique. For a detailed review on various numerical methods in free-surface and interfacial flows, we refer the reader to @Scardovelli_Zaleski_1999 [@Tryggvason_2011]
An initial impulse disturbance in such flows eventually develops into a nonlinear Kelvin-Helmholtz wave that grows and propagates downstream in a self-similar manner, see for example @Hoepffner_2011 and @Orazzo_2012. This flow situation is a simple configuration whereby the catapult mechanism in a planar two-phase mixing layer can be readily examined numerically. Here, only the dynamics of the active wave and the effect of fast gas flow are investigated while the role of the passive wave, the splitter plate dimensions, the boundary layer thickness of the incoming flow and gravity are neglected.
Our numerical investigation consists of an infinite two-phase $2D$ mixing layer with a fast gas flow (density $\rho_{g}$) on top of a liquid at rest (density $\rho_{l}$). Sufficiently far away from the gas-liquid interface, the gas flows at a speed $U_{g} = 1$ in the horizontal x-direction. The viscosity of the two fluids is taken to be the same. Thus, the initial velocity field in the liquid and gas streams is built from error functions that satisfy the stress continuity at the interface. The non-dimensional parameters that characterize this analysis are, namely, the Reynolds number $Re = U\delta/\nu$ where $\delta$ and $\nu$ are the mixing layer thickness and the kinematic viscosity, respectively, and the Weber number $We = \rho_{g}U_{g}^{2}\delta/\sigma$ where $\sigma$ is the surface tension of the liquid. For our simulations, we chose large enough Reynolds and Weber numbers ($Re = 100$ and $We = 1000$) so that they do not play a deciding role on the droplet catapult phenomenon.
The size of the numerical domain is $500\delta$ in length (x-direction) and $250\delta$ in height (y-direction). Simulations are performed with periodic boundary conditions in the streamwise direction and symmetry boundary conditions at the top and bottom boundaries. The initial condition for the computations consists of a small amplitude vertical impulse disturbance of extent $\delta$ in the x-direction. The amplitude of this disturbance is kept small enough so that it does not create a vertical jet but initiates, instead an isolated nonlinear Kelvin-Helmholtz wave. This initial amplitude is large enough so that it can bypass linear growth of disturbances into a packet of waves. Several spatial discretization levels were tested to validate the results and a mesh size of approximately $0.06 \delta$ units is chosen for which the error in the location of the wave is found to be lesser than $1\%$.
If one neglects viscosity and capillarity (large Reynolds and Weber numbers), the only length scales are $U_{g}t$ and $\delta$. After a short transient, the initial impulse disturbance grows larger than the thickness of the mixing layer $\delta$. If the vorticity field $\omega$ is considered as a function of $x$, $y$, $t$, $U_{g}$ and $\delta$, at sufficiently large time $t >> \delta/U_{g}$, it can be shown that $\omega = U/\delta f\left(x/U_{g}t, y/U_{g}t, \rho_{g}/\rho_{l}\right)$ (see @Hoepffner_2011). Hence, in the self-similar coordinates $x^{'} = x/U_{g}t$ and $y^{'} = y/U_{g}t$, the shape, size and the dynamics of the wave depends only on a single parameter, namely, the density ratio $r = \rho_{g}/\rho_{l}$.
The evolution of such a nonlinear self-similar Kelvin-Helmholtz wave due to a localized initial disturbance is shown in figure \[fig:BagBreakUpSimu\]. It corresponds to the case $r = 0.02$. The time axis is specified in ${\delta}/{U_{g}}$ units. The thick lines (mid-gray and gray lines; see color online) denote the gas-liquid interface wave whose crest forms a liquid film which stretches, bulges-out and eventually breaks-up into droplets due to the presence of shear. Such a wave grows linearly in time as illustrated by @Hoepffner_2011 and it periodically creates droplets. As already observed in figures \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]a$-$b, the wave moves much slower than the gas particles. Note that, unless otherwise mentioned, gas particles do not refer to any tracers but *material* elements of fluid [@Batchelor_1967]. Its speed is approximately the Dimotakis speed $U_{D} = \sqrt{r}/\left( 1 + \sqrt{r} \right)$, which is a relevant measure of the propagation speed of fully-developed disturbances in $2D$ mixing layers [@Dimotakis_1986]. By following the center of recirculation vortices downstream of the wave, their trajectory is drawn as solid curved lines with large dots (blue online) in figure \[fig:BagBreakUpSimu\]. We note that the vortices are shed periodically and each shedding event coincides with a droplet ejection event. Figure \[fig:BagBreakUpSimu\] displays three such droplet ejection events at $t = 50-90$, $t = 90-140$ and $t = 150-200$.
We now point to figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]c where one complete droplet ejection event from these simulations (corresponding to $r=0.02$) is displayed side by side with that of the experimental images. Here, the time evolution of the gas–liquid interface and flow streamlines is shown as thick mid-gray lines (red online) and thin gray lines, respectively. Even though the simulation pertains to a rather different flow configuration at a moderate density ratio (a single nonlinear wave in a large periodic domain with a density ratio twenty times larger), we can nevertheless recognise the same *droplet catapult sequence*, leading once again to violent ejection of liquid droplets. The sequence is very similar to that of the air-water mixing layer experiments in figures \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\] a–b in §\[sec:VortexSheddingExpeObserv\]. Supplementary videos [@SuppMovie] are provided where $4$ such vortex shedding events and subsequent droplet catapult processes are seen in the numerical simulations (see *Movie 5* [@SuppMovie]).
Figures \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]a–c already indicate that vortex shedding is connected to droplet ejection processes. A quantitative measure of the effect of this change in gas flow dynamics on droplet ejection angles can be deduced by varying the density ratio between the gas and the liquid. From @Hoepffner_2011, we know that the density ratio affects very much the morphology of the wave: at $r=1$ the self-similar wave is symmetric with respect to its center and it is composed of two large vortices; decreasing $r$ progressively, the wave loses its symmetry and takes the shape of a liquid body upstream of a gas vortex. Thus, by following the processes of droplet creation while decreasing $r$ progressively, we may shed light upon the connection between vortex shedding and the catapult mechanism.
Figure \[fig:EjectionAngle\]a displays the variation of maximum droplet ejection angle $\alpha_{max}$ over density ratio $r$. The error bars quantify the standard error over successive ejection events for a given density ratio. This angle $\alpha_{max}$ is computed by superposing snapshots of the interface for two consecutive time units. It is then given by the maximum angle that the superposed droplets make with the streamwise direction as shown, for example, in the insets of figure \[fig:EjectionAngle\]a corresponding to $r = 0.08$, $0.025$ and $0.01$. As the density ratio $r$ decreases, $\alpha_{max}$ initially remains approximately constant and negative until $r \approx 0.04$; a negative ejection angle implies that the drops fall downward towards the interface. Thus, there is no droplet catapult when $r > 0.04$. When the density ratio is decreased further, there is a steep increase in the angle of ejection, and $\alpha_{max}$ as high as $\approx 40^\circ$ is observed. A linear extrapolation of the angle of ejection data predicts $\approx 50^\circ$ for the case of air-water. This prediction matches the maximum angle of ejection (see figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a) obtained in the experiments of @Raynal_thesis_1997.
Figure \[fig:EjectionAngle\]b presents the spatio-temporal evolution of the wave/vortex system for various density ratios. Here, the wave centre (thick continuous line) refers to the location where the nonlinear $KH$ wave crosses the centreline $y = 0$. The wave and vortex centres are determined via manual inspection of the interface and the flow streamlines from the beginning to the end of the simulation. As expected from @Hoepffner_2011, the wave center moves downstream at a constant speed close to the Dimotakis speed $U_D$ (dotted line). As for the vortex motion (denoted by [$\circ$]{}), we may distinguish two regimes: regime for $r>0.04$ where the speed of the vortex is constant, it remains attached to the wake of the wave, and regime for $r<0.03$ where the wave is very slow and its recirculation region is unstable: the vortex is shed and is periodically replaced by new vortices.
In both regimes and , the thin liquid film oscillates and breaks-up into droplets. During one complete flapping cycle, the liquid film displaces first vertically downward and then upward. The droplets are formed at the end of each flapping cycle. This implies that the time between ejection events is equal to the flapping period. In regime , numerical simulations show that the flapping motion and eventual break-up of the liquid film is synchronised with the vortex shedding process (see for example, *Movie 5* [@SuppMovie]). Therefore, in this case, the droplet ejection period, the flapping period and the vortex shedding period are the same.
Figure \[fig:EjectionPeriod\] displays these characteristic time periods as a function of density ratio $r$. It is measured by observing the time evolution of the gas-liquid interface and droplets in the self-similar coordinates, namely, $x^{'} = x/U_{g}t$ and $y^{'} = y/U_{g}t$. The measured period is taken to be the time between newly formed droplets to cross the line $x^{'} = x/U_{g}t = constant$. The errorbars quantify the standard error between each such events at a given density ratio. As the density decreases from $r = 0.12$, the droplet formation period remains more or less constant. However, at $r \leq 0.03$, it increases rapidly. The rapid increase in droplet ejection period coincides with the onset of vortex shedding.
In a backward-facing step, the vortex shedding period is independent of the fluid density. In the case of a localized $KH$ wave, however, the wave height (which represents the characteristic length scale of the obstacle) depends on the density ratio [@Hoepffner_2011]. Hence, it is not surprising that the measured period $TU_{g}/\delta_{g}$ depends on the density ratio.
If $a_{d}$ denotes the acceleration due to the aerodynamic force $F_{d}$ experienced by a thin liquid film of mass $m_{f}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
a_{d} &= \frac{F_{d}}{m_{f}}, \\ \notag
a_{d} &= \frac{\frac{1}{2} C_{d}\left( \rho_{g} U_{g}^2 A_{f} \right)}{\rho_{l}(A_{f} \times b)},
\label{eq:acceleration}\end{aligned}$$ where $C_{d}$ is the coefficient of drag, $b$ is the thickness of the film, $A_{f}$ is the projected frontal area of the film and it is equal to the length of the film times its width. The thickness of the film $b$ can be taken as proportional to the fastest growing wavelength of the Kelvin-Helmholtz instability $\sim \delta_{g}/\sqrt{r}$ [@Rayleigh_1879; @Drazin_n_Reid_1981; @Hong_2003; @Marmottant_2004]. The aerodynamic acceleration of the film is $\mathcal{O}(\Delta l/T^{2})$, where $\Delta l$ is the distance covered by the liquid film in time $T$ before it breaks into droplets. Since a liquid film breaks when the aerodynamic pressure due to the recirculation region is too large to be supported by the surface tension forces on the liquid film, $\Delta l$ should depend only on the Weber number. So, as a first approximation, it is a constant with respect to the density ratio $r$ and hence, we obtain $$\frac{T U_{g}}{\delta_{g}} \propto r^{-3/4},
\label{eq:droplet_formation_time}$$ where the proportionality constant depends on the gas Reynolds number via $C_{d}$ and the gas Weber number. The inset of the figure \[fig:EjectionPeriod\] compares this prediction with $DNS$ computations. We observe that the theoretical exponent $-3/4$ based on aerodynamic force argument shows an overall agreement with the time taken for droplet formation in the simulations.
Discussion {#sec:Discuss}
==========
We have, thus, identified the *droplet catapult mechanism* in two configurations, namely, the splitter plate experiment and numerical simulations. In the following, we first, briefly point out how the simulations differ from the experimental set-up. Using videos from high-speed camera imaging, we comment on the variation of $\alpha_{max}$ with air and water speed in experiments. Thereby, we provide an explanation for the results of @Raynal_thesis_1997 (figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a).
Difference between our splitter plate experiments and $DNS$ computations {#subsec:Discuss1}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We examined the *droplet catapult mechanism* in a relatively simple flow situation consisting of a nonlinear localized Kelvin-Helmholtz wave in two-phase mixing layers. Direct Numerical Simulations allowed us to readily extract quantitative information. The experimental flow is a spatially-developing air-water shear layer wherein large liquid waves are periodically formed at the trailing edge of a splitter plate, whereas the simulations correspond to the spatio-temporal evolution of an infinite $2D$ shear layer excited initially by a localised impulse. Here, the only control parameter is the density ratio $r$.
In addition, a single nonlinear wave performs the catapult sequence repeatedly (see figure \[fig:BagBreakUpSimu\]): it is not simply one event per wave as in the case of splitter plate experiments. There are, in general, as many successive events per wave as the computational box can afford (see for example, *supplementary video 5* [@SuppMovie]). The process ends only when the wave has grown to an extent when the computational box becomes too small compared to its size. Note that a few instances of successive catapult sequences on a single wave can also be observed in the videos (*Movie 3* [@SuppMovie]) from experiments when the air speed is sufficiently large. In the experiments, waves are formed periodically at the trailing edge of the splitter plate and so, the first wave is soon shadowed by the appearance of a nascent wave at the trailing edge. Thus, the first wave loses its wind and thus becomes a collapsing passive wave.
Effect of air and water speed on $\alpha_{max}$. {#subsec:Discuss2}
------------------------------------------------
In the case of experiments, our observations (figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]a–b) in section §\[sec:VortexSheddingExpeObserv\] correspond to the air speed $U_{g} = 25.5 ms^{-1}$. This is approximately the speed when the maximum angle of ejection $\alpha_{max}$ is the largest (see figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]). At the same water speed $U_{l} = 0.23 ms^{-1}$, if the air speed is smaller we find that the droplet catapult mechanism is absent. For instance, consider the case displayed in figure \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\]a where $U_{g} = 15 ms^{-1}$. We observe waves in the form of small bumps that appear periodically at the splitter plate and move progressively downstream at a constant speed. At this air speed, the liquid film does not form from the crest of the wave. The air flow over the air-water interface shows the presence of a recirculation region. However, the recirculation region remains attached to the wave and moves at approximately same speed as the wave.
Similarly, the case corresponding to a slightly larger air speed ($19.8 ms^{-1}$) is shown in figure \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\]b. In contrast with the case in figure \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\]a, the air-water interface wave forms a thin liquid film. The incoming air flow and the recirculation zone act on the liquid film. This results in the up and down motion of the film that is observed in figure \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\]b. Nevertheless, after the first vortex shedding event, the second recirculation vortex remains steady. We observe that this vortex does not cause *bag-breakup from below*. Instead, the liquid film forms a hole that develops and ruptures as seen for $17-18 \times 10^{-3} s$ in figure \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\]b.
At the same water speed $U_{l} = 0.23 ms^{-1}$, if the air speed is much faster ($U_{g} > 25.5 ms^{-1}$) compared to that in figures \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\] & \[fig:ExpeUgasSequence\], the wave originating from the splitter plate is much smaller and forms droplets close to the trailing edge of the plate. Since still images from the experiments are not very easy to interpret, we provide the viewer with *Movies 3 $\&$ 4* [@SuppMovie]. They correspond to airspeeds of $30 ms^{-1}$ and $32.5 ms^{-1}$. Instead of the droplet catapult sequence, we observe that the liquid film suddenly bursts to form droplets. There is not enough time for the droplet catapult sequence to be performed step by step to project the resulting liquid drops at a large angle. Since this happens when the wave is small, the film is very thin. So, the quantity of water that can be ejected is small as well. The reader is referred to *supplementary videos 3* & *4* where the air flow visualization is clearer (a wider range of air velocities is presented in these videos) [@SuppMovie].
These observations imply that, at a given liquid speed, if the wind is low, a steady recirculation zone is formed in the wake of the wave. In this case, the liquid film is pushed by the incoming air flow and is trapped in the recirculation region. It eventually segments into droplets that are not catapulted by the recirculation vortex. This corresponds to a negative ejection angle. The situation resembles the case of our simulations for density ratio $r=0.08$ (and above) as shown in the inset of figure \[fig:EjectionAngle\]a. Now, if we progressively increase the wind speed, the recirculation region becomes unstable and vortex shedding occurs. Figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a shows that this starts to happen at about $U_{g} = 20 ms^{-1}$. This is the value of the wind speed at which we start to be able to measure a drop ejection angle. From this value the maximum ejection angle increases quickly, until a maximum for a gas speed of about $25ms^{-1}$. At larger air speeds, however, the ejection angle is smaller and it decreases progressively with $U_{g}$. This explains the data from Raynal’s experiments[@Raynal_thesis_1997], as presented above in figure \[fig:AngleExperimental\]a, for water speed up to $1.11ms^{-1}$.
However, for $1.11ms^{-1}$ the first peak is lost and we see a much flatter peak at an air velocity of about $50ms^{-1}$. We have not studied this regime in detail, but we observed that when the liquid velocity is large, the shape of the waves and their frequency change. The departure of each nonlinear wave carries a large mass of water away from the trailing edge of the splitter plate. This leads to a local depletion, and a new wave can be born only once the stream is refilled from the water inlet supply. Thus, for slow liquid, the waves are fewer and larger, which leaves plenty of time for the catapult sequence to play its role, whereas for fast liquid, the waves are many and smaller, with hardly any time for the synchronised sequence.
Conclusion {#sec:Conclu}
==========
We studied the process of *droplet catapult* in two-phase mixing layer via experiments and simulations. First, a nonlinear wave grows under the Kelvin–Helmholtz instability. This wave moves slowly downstream and is an obstacle to the gas stream. Thus, a recirculation region appears in wake of the wave. Because of the gas shear on top of the wave, a thin liquid film emerges from the crest of the wave. The fate of this liquid film now depends on the behaviour of the recirculation zone: if the recirculation remains attached to the wave (fast wave or slow gas), the film is trapped into the stationary recirculation zone and breaks-up into drops that fall towards the gas-liquid interface. This is the case in the splitter plate experiment for low air speeds and, also, in the numerical simulation for density ratios $r$ close to one. If on the other hand, the recirculation is unstable and vortex shedding occurs, we observe the catapult sequence due to a synchronised motion of the liquid film and the gas flow streamlines. This sequence is itemized in the abstract of this article. The liquid film is very thin and hence, it is advected by the evolution of gas flow configuration of the departing vortex, as observed on figure \[fig:ExpeVortexShedding\]c. The departure of the vortex implies a momentary reattachment of the gas flow and eventually, the formation of a new recirculation vortex. This new vortex blows-up the liquid film such that the droplet ejection occurs via the violent event of *bag-breakup from below*.
Ejection angles in mixing layers provide only a hint of where the liquid stripped from the perturbed mixing layer is sent. On the other hand, droplet size distribution is a more precise and useful quantity in order to completely quantify the dispersed two-phase flow. It is expected that our present study would provide more insight on further research in that direction. @Orazzo_2012 showed that the evolution of localized Kelvin-Helmholtz wave in the presence of gravity is relevant to spontaneous creation of large oceanic waves. In this context, our results imply that air recirculation zones could influence spray formation. But, in general, large oceanic waves are far from fully developed Kelvin-Helmholtz waves and hence, our conclusions cannot be directly translated to such situations.
J. J. S. J. and J. Hoepffner acknowledge Gilles Agbaglah, Daniel Fuster, Pierre-Yves Lagrée and Pascal Ray of the Institut D’Alembert for useful discussions on using Gerris. We also thank Antoine Delon’s kind assistance during our visit to LEGI.
This project has been supported by the ANR VAA (ANR-2010-BLAN-0903) program, the ANR DYNAA (ANR-2005-BLAN-0213) program and the FIRST (Fuel Injector Research for Sustainable Transport) project supported by the European Commission under the $7$th Framework Programme.
[49]{}
Arthur H. Lefebvre. *Atomization and Sprays*. Taylor $\&$ Francis, Bristol, PA, USA, 1989.
L. P. Bayvel and Z. Orzechowski. *Liquid Atomization*. Taylor $\&$ Francis, Washington DC, USA, 1993.
J. Eggers. Nonlinear dynamics and breakup of free-surface flows. *Rev. Mod. Phys.*, 69:0 865–929, 1997.
S. P. Lin and R. D. Reitz. Drop and spray formation from a liquid jet. *Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*, 30:0 85–105, 1998.
J. C. Lasheras and E. J. Hopfinger. Liquid jet instability and atomization in a coaxial gas stream. *Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*, 32:0 275–308, 2000.
J. Eggers and E. Villermaux. Physics of liquid jets. *Rep. Prog. Phys.*, 71:0 036601, 2008.
D. Duke, D. Honnery, and J. Soria. Experimental investigation of nonlinear instabilities in annular liquid sheets. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 691:0 594–604, 2012.
. On the stability, or instability, of certain fluid motions. *Proc. Lond. Math. Soc.*, 11, 1879.
E. Villermaux. *Auto-oscillation et mélange dans les écoulements recirculants*. PhD thesis, Paris VI, France, 1993.
L. Raynal, E. Villermaux, J. C. Lasheras, and E. J. Hopfinger. Primary instability in liquid gas shear layers. In *11th Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows*, volume 3, pages 27.1–27.5. INP-CNRS-UJF, Grenoble, France, OCLC 270349721, 7-10 Sept. 1997.
E. Villermaux. On the role of viscosity in shear instabilities. *Phys. Fluids*, 10:0 368–373, 1998.
L. Raynal. *Instabilité et entraînement à l’interface d’une couche de mélange liquide-gaz*. PhD thesis, Université J. Fourier, Grenoble I, France, 1997.
F. [Ben Rayana]{}, A. Cartellier, and E. J. Hopfinger. Assisted atomization of a liquid layer: investigation of the parameters affecting the mean drop size prediction. In *International Conference on Liquid Atomization and Spray Systems (ICLASS), Kyoto, Japan*. Academic Publication and Printings Co. Ltd., Osaka, Japan, ISBN 4-9902774-1-4, 27 Aug.-1 Sept. 2006.
F. [Ben Rayana]{}. *Contribution à l’étude des instabilités interfaciales liquide-gaz en atomisation assistée et tailles de gouttes*. PhD thesis, INP Grenoble, France, 2007.
J-P. Matas, S. Marty, and A. Cartellier. Experimental and analytical study of the shear instability of a gas-liquid mixing layer. *Phys. Fluids*, 23:0 094112, 2011.
T. Otto, M. Rossi, and T. Boeck. Viscous instability of a sheared liquid-gas interface: Dependence on fluid properties and basic velocity profile. *Physics of Fluids*, 250 (3):0 032103, 2013.
D. Fuster, J-P. Matas, S. Marty, S. Popinet, J. Hoepffner, A. Cartellier, and S. Zaleski. Primary atomization regimes in two planar coflowing fluid sheets. *in press J. Fluid Mech*, 2013.
P. Huerre and M. Rossi. . In C. Godreche and P. Manneville, editors, *Hydrodynamics and Nonlinear instabilities*, pages 81–386. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998.
P. Marmottant and E. Villermaux. On spray formation. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 498:0 73–111, 2004.
M. Hong. *Atomization et mélange dans les jets coaxiaux liquide-gaz*. PhD thesis, INP Grenoble, France, 2003.
P. Yecko and S. Zaleski. Transient growth in two-phase mixing layers. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 528:0 43–52, 2004.
T. Boeck, J. Li, E. [López-Pagés]{}, P. Yecko, and S. Zaleski. Ligament formation in sheared liquid–gas layers. *Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics*, 210 (1):0 59–76, 2007.
C.-L. Ng, R. Sankarakrishnan, and K.A. Sallam. Bag breakup of nonturbulent liquid jets in crossflow. *Int. J. of Mult. Flow*, 340 (3):0 241 – 259, 2008.
B. E. Scharfman and A. H. Techet. Bag instabilities. *Physics of Fluids*, 240 (9):0 091112, 2012.
H. Jeffreys. On the formation of water waves by wind. *Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A*, 107:0 189–206, 1925.
H. Jeffreys. On the formation of water waves by wind. *Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A*, 110:0 241–247, 1926.
D. H. Peregrine. Breaking waves on beaches. *Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*, 15:0 149–178, 1983.
M. L. Banner and W. K. Melville. On the separation of air flow over water waves. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 77:0 825–842, 1976.
M. L. Banner. The influence of wave breaking on the surface pressure distribution in wind-wave interactions. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 211:0 463–495, 1990.
N. Reul, H. Branger, and J. P. Giovanageli. Air flow separation over unsteady breaking waves. *Phys. Fluids*, 11:0 1959–1961, 1999.
W. K. Melville, F. Veron, and C. J. White. The velocity field under breaking waves: coherent structures and turbulence. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 454:0 203–233, 2002.
A. Alexakis, A. C. Calder, L. J. Dursi, R. Rosner, J. W. Truran, B. Fryxell, M. Zingale, F. X. Timmes, K. Olson, and P. Ricker. On the nonlinear evolution of wind-driven gravity waves. *Physics of Fluids*, 160 (9):0 3256–3268, 2004.
N. Reul, H. Branger, and J. P. Giovanageli. Air flow structure over short gravity breaking waves. *Boundary-Layer Meteorology*, 126:0 477–505, 2008.
P. P. Sullivan and J. C. McWilliams. Dynamics of winds and currents coupled to surface waves. *Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*, 42:0 19–42, 2010.
J. Touboul, J. P. Giovanangeli, C. Kharif, and E. Pelinovsky. Freak waves under the action of wind: experiments and simulations. *Eur. J. Mech. B/Fluids*, 25:0 662–676, 2006.
C. Kharif, J. P. Giovanangeli, J. Touboul, L. Grare, and E. Pelinovsky. Influence of wind on extreme wave events: experimental and numerical approaches. *J. Fluid Mech.*, 594:0 209–247, 2008.
M. Pilch and C. Erdman. Use of breakup time data and velocity history data to predict the maximum size of stable fragments for acceleration-induced breakup of a liquid drop. *Int. J. Multiph. Flow.*, 13:0 41–57, 1987.
E. Villermaux. Fragmentation. *Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.*, 39:0 419–446, 2007.
E. Villermaux and B. Bossa. Single-drop fragmentation determines size distribution of raindrops. *Nature Physics*, 5:0 697–702, 2009.
S. Popinet. Gerris: a tree-based adaptive solver for the incompressible euler equations in complex geometries. *J. Comp. Phys.*, 190:0 572–600, 2003.
S. Popinet. An accurate adaptive solver for surface-tension-driven interfacial flows. *J. Comp. Phys.*, 228:0 5838–5866, 2009.
R. Scardovelli and S. Zaleski. Direct numerical simulation of free-surface and interfacial flow. *Annu. Rev. of Fluid Mech.*, 310 (1):0 567–603, 1999.
G. Tryggvason, R. Scardovelli, and S. Zaleski. *Direct numerical simulations of gas-liquid multiphase flows*. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2011.
J. Hoepffner, R. Blumenthal, and S. Zaleski. Self-similar wave produced by local perturbation of the kelvin-helmholtz shear-layer instability. *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, 1060 (10):0 104502, 2012.
A. Orazzo and J. Hoepffner. The evolution of a localized nonlinear wave of the kelvin?helmholtz instability with gravity. *Phys. Fluids*, 24:0 112106, 2012.
G. K. Batchelor. *An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics*. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
P. E. Dimotakis. Two-dimensional shear-layer entrainment. *AIAA J.*, 240 (6):0 885–889, 1986.
P. G. Drazin and W. H. Reid. *Hydrodynamic Stability*. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1981.
See supplementary material at (URL to be supplied by AIP) for *Movies 1 – 4*: *movie 1* displays air-water interfacial waves behind a splitter splate under ambient light; *movie 2* shows air-water interfacial waves under smoke visualization; *movie 3* compares these waves at different air-speeds; *movie 4* presents *movie 3* with color filter in order to avoid reflections.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We investigate the relation between Trees of Fragmenting Granules (TFGs) and the locations of concentrated magnetic flux in internetwork areas. The former have previously been identified with mesogranulation. While a relationship has been suggested to exist between these features, no direct evidence has yet been provided. We present some preliminary results that show that concentrated magnetic flux indeed collects on the borders of TFGs.'
author:
- 'Alfred G. de Wijn'
- Daniel Müller
title: On the relationship between magnetic field and mesogranulation
---
Introduction
============
Magnetic field in the quiet solar photosphere, while ubiquitously present, is concentrated at the edges of convective cells. We refer the interested reader to [@SSSMF] for a comprehensive review of small-scale magnetism in the lower solar atmosphere. The convective flows expunge field from the interiors of granules and concentrate it as “magnetic elements” (MEs) in the intergranular downdrafts. Supergranular flows advect field to supergranular boundaries where it forms the magnetic network. Gas motions are also expected to push field to the edges of cells of an intermediate, so-called mesogranular scale. This scale has indeed been observed in the positions of photospheric magnetic elements in internetwork areas . [@1998ApJ...495..973B] also observed “voids” in active network. However, no evidence has been presented that the observed cells outlined by MEs correspond to mesogranular cells. Mesogranules have been associated with so-called “Trees of Fragmenting Granules” (, called “active granules” by [@2001SoPh..203..211M]). TFGs consist of repeatedly splitting granules that originate from a single granule. They may live for several hours, much longer than the lifetime of an individual granule. Flow fields derived from granular motions also show convergence at the borders of TFGs. One would thus expect MEs to lie predominantly on TFG boundaries.
Data and Analysis
=================
{width="130mm"}
An image sequence spanning several hours of moderately quiet sun was recorded using the Solar Optical Telescope on the Hinode spacecraft [@2007SoPh..243....3K; @2008SoPh..249..167T; @2008SoPh..249..197S; @2008SoPh..249..233I; @2008SoPh..249..221S] on March 30, 2007. The Narrowband Filter Imager was used to record Stokes I and V in the photospheric Fe <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> line at 630.2 nm. More details can be found in [@2008ApJ...684.1469D]. Their study of magnetism in quiet-sun internetwork yielded the locations of strong concentrations of magnetic flux that we use in this analysis.
To reduce noise, the Fe <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> intensity data is initially filtered using an optimum filter, and averaged over 3 frames in time. To ensure proper segmentation and separation of granules, the data is scaled up spatially by a factor of two. Noise is further reduced through convolution with a 8-pixel Gaussian. We identify granules by computing the curvature $C = 2 I_n - I_{n-1} - I_{n+1}$ in each pixel in 4 directions. If the minimum curvature is positive, the pixel is labeled as part of a granule. The granule mask is then extended to values of curvature up to $-2.5\times10^{-4}$, following the CST algorithm . We apply erosion-dilation processing with a 3-pixel +-shaped kernel to remove very small features. Finally, granules are grouped into families by following them in space and time. Two granules are considered to be members of the same family if there is a path through the granule mask forward in time that connects them. At the start of the sequence, all families consist of a single granule. As time progresses, some families die out, others grow, and new families appear. If two granules of different families merge, we keep the oldest family. The lifetime of TFGs is on the order of several hours, so one must expect to wait a similar amount of time before the TFG pattern is established. Here, we will study a single frame taken about 5 hours after the start of the sequence.
The segmentation of the granules and the subsequent grouping into families has been performed for several variations of the number of frames over which is averaged in time, the width of the Gaussian, and the level to which the masks are extended to negative curvature values. The chosen parameters appear to be fairly robust, i.e., the resulting pattern does not change much within some range of the chosen values for the parameters. The process is most sensitive to the amount that the mask is extended. Too much extension may merge separate granules, causing larger TFGs, while too little extension results in very limited grouping.
{width="100mm"}
Results and Discussion
======================
Frame number 524 in the Fe <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> sequence, recorded at 05:25:33, is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig1\]. It shows the granular pattern, with the borders of TFGs overlaid in black, and the positions of MEs overlaid as white diamonds. The granular pattern is shaded in dark gray in network areas. The segmentation there is not good, because of the confusion between granules and bright points. As a result, the TFG pattern there is not trustworthy. Also, the analysis by [@2008ApJ...684.1469D] did not identify MEs in the network. This is not a problem for our analysis, because our interest is primarily in the internetwork.
A closeup of the white box is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig2\]. Many MEs appear to lie preferentially near the borders of TFGs. The interiors of large TFGs are mostly devoid of MEs. These preliminary results are encouraging. It thus seems highly likely that the cells described by, e.g., and the “voids” in maps made with the Hinode SP instrument found by [@2008ApJ...672.1237L] correspond to mesogranules.
Further statistical study is required to quantify the relationship between the borders of TFGs and the positions of MEs. While these preliminary results are encouraging, it must be verified that MEs lie statistically closer to the borders of TFGs than, e.g., to the border of randomly placed cells of similar size.
MEs that emerge in TFG interiors are expected to migrate to the borders in a matter of perhaps an hour, then along the borders of TFGs to the network. In this context it is of interest to study the motions of MEs in detail and to quantify the contribution of TFGs to the formation of the magnetic network and the diffusion of magnetic field.
*Hinode* is a Japanese mission developed and launched by ISAS/JAXA, with NAOJ as domestic partner and NASA and STFC (UK) as international partners. It is operated by these agencies in co-operation with ESA and NSC (Norway).
[16]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
, T. E., [L[ö]{}fdahl]{}, M. G., [Shine]{}, R. S., & [Title]{}, A. M. 1998, , 495, 973
, A. G., [Lites]{}, B. W., [Berger]{}, T. E., [et al.]{} 2008, , 684, 1469
, A. G., [Rutten]{}, R. J., [Haverkamp]{}, E. M. W. P., & [S[ü]{}tterlin]{}, P. 2005, , 441, 1183
, A. G., [Stenflo]{}, J. O., [Solanki]{}, S. K., & [Tsuneta]{}, S. 2009, Space Science Reviews, in press
, I. 2003, , 412, L65
, K., [Lites]{}, B., [Elmore]{}, D., [et al.]{} 2008, , 249, 233
, T., [Matsuzaki]{}, K., [Sakao]{}, T., [et al.]{} 2007, , 243, 3
, B. W., [Kubo]{}, M., [Socas-Navarro]{}, H., [et al.]{} 2008, , 672, 1237
, D. A. N., [Steiner]{}, O., [Schlichenmaier]{}, R., & [Brandt]{}, P. N. 2001, , 203, 211
, M., [Roudier]{}, T., [Roques]{}, S., & [Ducottet]{}, C. 2007, , 471, 687
, T., [Ligni[è]{}res]{}, F., [Rieutord]{}, M., [Brandt]{}, P. N., & [Malherbe]{}, J. M. 2003, , 409, 299
, T. & [Muller]{}, R. 2004, , 419, 757
, T., [Nagata]{}, S., [Tsuneta]{}, S., [et al.]{} 2008, , 249, 221
, Y., [Tsuneta]{}, S., [Ichimoto]{}, K., [et al.]{} 2008, , 249, 197
, A., [Schmidt]{}, W., [Uitenbroek]{}, H., & [Wedemeyer-B[ö]{}hm]{}, S. 2007, , 462, 303
, S., [Ichimoto]{}, K., [Katsukawa]{}, Y., [et al.]{} 2008, , 249, 167
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present a high-resolution study of five high-velocity clouds in the Magellanic Leading Arm region. This is a follow-up study of our widefield Parkes survey of the region in order to probe the multiphase structures of the clouds and to give an insight to their origin, evolution and distance. High-resolution data were obtained from the Australia Telescope Compact Array. By combining with single-dish data from the Galactic All-Sky Survey (GASS), we are able to probe compact and diffuse emission simultaneously. We identify resolved and unresolved clumps. Physical parameters were derived for both diffuse structure and compact clumps. The latter are cold with typical velocity linewidths of 5 . We find a gradient in thermal halo pressure, hydrogen density and column density of HVC as a function of Galactic latitude. This is possibly the first observational evidence of varying distance in the Leading Arm region, with the leading part of the Leading Arm (LA II and III) probably being closer to the Galactic disc than the trailing end (LA I).'
author:
- |
B.-Q. For$^{1}$[^1], L. Staveley-Smith$^{1}$, N. M. McClure-Griffiths$^{2}$, T. Westmeier$^{1}$, K. Bekki$^{1}$\
$^{1}$ICRAR, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, 6009, Australia\
$^{2}$Research School of Astronomy & Astrophysics, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2611, Australia
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
date: 'Accepted 27 May 2016. Received 7 April 2016'
title: The Distance and Properties of Hydrogen Clouds in the Leading Arm of the Magellanic System
---
\[firstpage\]
radio lines: ISM – ISM: structure – ISM: kinematics and dynamics – ISM: clouds
INTRODUCTION\[intro\]
=====================
High-velocity clouds (HVCs; [@Muller63]) are neutral atomic hydrogen gas clouds distributed across the entire sky as large, homogeneous complexes, and include the Magellanic Stream [@Mathewson74], as well as numerous compact and isolated clouds. They are characterised by a high radial velocity that is forbidden by a simple Galactic rotation model. To classify HVCs, @Wakker91 introduced the so-called “deviation velocity”, which is defined as the smallest difference between the velocity of the cloud and that of the Galactic disc gas along the line-of-sight, and suggested a deviation velocity of at least 50 for HVCs.
The origin of HVCs has been under debate for decades. A hypothesis of an extragalactic origin was put forward by @Blitz99. They argued that the observed properties of HVCs are consistent with a distribution across the entire Local Group. In fact, numerical simulations by @Klypin99 and @Moore99 suggested that HVCs, excluding some of the large HVC complexes and the Magellanic Stream (MS), might even be the missing dark matter satellites as predicted by cosmological dark matter models. @BB99 conducted a study using the Leiden/Dwingeloo Survey of Galactic neutral hydrogen (LDS; [@HB97]). They identified a subclass of HVCs, namely compact high-velocity clouds (CHVCs), which are isolated, have an angular diameter of $\leq2\degr$ and column densities above $1.5\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$. These CHVCs were again claimed to be at extragalactic distance. However, surveys of local galaxy groups showed no detection of similar clouds [@Zwaan01; @Pisano04]. A more detailed study of a subsample of CHVCs concluded that they are most likely circumgalactic objects with distances of the order of 100 kpc [@Westmeier05].
Many CHVCs have a head-tail morphology [@Bruns00; @Putman11], suggesting that gas has been stripped via ram-pressure interaction with the ambient medium. A recent simulations of @Salem15 has shown such ram-pressure effect on the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC). Some of the head-tail clouds have been studied in detail, such as HVC 125+41-207 [@Bruns01], HVC 289+33+251 [@Bruns04], HVC 291+26+195 and HVC 297+09+253 ([@NBB06], hereafter BBKW06). In many cases, they reveal two-component line profiles consisting of a cold core surrounded by a warm envelope. Nevertheless, numerical studies are somewhat inconclusive about the existence of two-phase structures in HVCs with $z$ greater than $\sim20$ kpc in a $T\sim10^{6}$ K halo [@Wolfire95]. Observationally, two-phase HVCs have been found in the Magellanic Stream and Leading Arm (LA) (e.g. see [@Stan08; @For13; @For14]), which have estimated distances between 20 and 100 kpc. This implies that the thermal pressure and halo density beyond 10 kpc is not well understood.
In this paper, we study the multiphase structure of a subsample of HVCs in the region of the LA ([@For13], hereafter FSM13). The aims are (1) to resolve any multiphase structure, (2) derive physical parameters, (3) study physical properties, in particular the thermal pressure in different regions to probe environmental effects. The paper is organised as follows: in §2, we list the selection criteria for the targets. §3 gives a decription of our observational setup, data acquisition and reduction process. §4 describes the analysis methodology. Our results and interpretation are presented in §5. We compare the results with previous studies and discuss the implications for the Galactic halo by comparing our results with a model in §6 and §7. Finally, a summary is given in §8.
TARGET SELECTION\[selection\]
=============================
We selected five HVCs from the FSM13 catalog. The selection criteria are based on the following: (a) the peak brightness temperature of the HVC is $\sim10\sigma$ above the brightness temperature sensitivity for the instrument setup and array configuration (see §3); (b) the HVC has a velocity linewidth of less than 10 ; (c) the HVC has a distinct morphological type of head-tail, bow-shock or symmetric as described in FSM13; (d) the HVCs are over a range of different Galactic latitudes. Figure \[position\] shows the integrated column density map of the LA region studied by FSM13, and the observed targets are marked with red circles.
OBSERVATIONS AND DATA\[obs\]
============================
Both single-dish and interferometer data are used for this study. While single-dish data probe the diffuse emission, the interferometer data allow us to probe small-scale structures. We employed data from the second data release of the single-dish Parkes Galactic All-Sky Survey (GASS; [@NMG09]) in this study. This has been corrected for stray radiation and radio frequency interference [@Kalberla10]. GASS is an HI survey of the entire sky south of declination +$1\degr$ using the 20-cm multibeam receiver on the Parkes radio telescope. GASS covers $V_{\rm LSR}$ between $-$400 and +500 . The data have a channel width of 0.82 , a spectral resolution of 1 , a brightness temperature ($T_{B}$) rms sensitivity of 57 mK, and an angular resolution of 16$\arcmin$. We refer the reader to detailed descriptions of GASS and data processing in @NMG09 and @Kalberla10.
The high-resolution observations were carried out at the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) in Narrabri using the EW367 and EW352 configurations in November 2012 and January 2013, respectively. Only five out of the six antennas were used for the analysis. The inner five antennas of the EW367 configuration cover baselines between 92 m and 367 m. The EW352 configuration covers baselines between 31 m and 352 m. We used the zoom mode option of the Compact Array Broadband Backend (CABB; [@Wilson11]) for the observations, which has a total bandwidth of 2 GHz with 1 MHz (coarse) and 0.5 kHz (fine) resolutions. We centered the zoom band on 1420 MHz. This configuration results in a velocity resolution of 0.1 .
We observed the primary flux calibrator PKS 1934-638 at the beginning of each observing session. A secondary phase calibrator, which is located nearby the target field, was observed for 3 min every hour. Each observing session was about 10–12 h long, so achieved good $uv$-coverage. We also adopted the strategy of obseving two targets per observing session by alternating between them. The beam was centered on the coordinates listed in the FSM13 catalog.
The data reduction was performed in a standard manner using MIRIAD [@Sault95]. To create dirty images, we adopted robust weighting of 0 for four of the HVCs, which optimizes resolution and sensitivity. For HVC 310+08+167, a robustness parameter of 2 was used in order to match for its low surface brightness. A small selected region with emission in each dirty cube was deconvolved using the Steer CLEAN algorithm [@Steer84]. The final data cubes were corrected for primary beam attenuation and have an rms noise of about 10 mJy per beam.
To circumvent the short-spacing problem of the interferometer data, we combined the ATCA data with the single-dish data from GASS. We adopted the linear method, merging in the Fourier domain [@Stan02]. With this method, the GASS data were converted to Jy per beam with a conversion factor of 0.658, regridded spatially and in velocity to match the ATCA image, and then the residual primary beam attenuation present in the ATCA data was applied to the GASS data prior to combining them. We smoothed the combined data cube spatially using the CONVOL task. The cubes are smoothed to full width half maxima (FWHM) of 150, 150, 160, 200 and 300 for HVC 252.2$-$20.5+310, HVC 266.0$-$18.7+338-18, HVC 276.3$-$09.0+277, HVC 297.1+08.5+253, HVC 310.3+08.1+167, respectively. We also smoothed the cubes spectrally over 3 channels using a Hanning function and extracted the channels that contain emission. As the sensitivity drops off quickly toward the outer edge of the beam, we used the ATCA primary beam model to mask out the noise at the outer edge of the data cube. Then, we created the integrated column density maps of 5 clouds as shown in Figure \[merged\_GASScon\].
    
Analysis\[analysis\]
====================
We analyze the GASS and the combined ATCA and GASS data separately for each cloud. For the GASS data, spectra are extracted along the symmetry axis of each cloud to derive the physical parameters of peak column density ($N_{\rm HI}$), velocity in the Local Standard of Rest frame ($V_{\rm LSR}$) and velocity linewidth ($\Delta v$). In Figures \[Gcomb1\]–\[Gcomb5\], we show the extracted spectra (left), integrated column density map (top right) and the derived physical parameters along the symmetry axis (bottom right) for each cloud. The white crosses in the integrated column density map represent the positions of individual spectra along the sliced axis. The series of extracted spectra are fitted with either a single or double Gaussian profile, in which amplitude, velocity center and variance are set as free parameters. Examples of double Gaussian fits are shown in Figure \[dgauss\]. We calculate the integrated column density using $N_{\rm HI}=1.823\times10^{18}\int T_{\rm B} dv= 1.823\times10^{18}\cdot T_{\rm B} \cdot \sigma\sqrt{2\pi}$, where $T_{\rm B}$ is peak brightness temperature in K, $v$ is the velocity in , and $\sigma$ is the standard deviation in . The velocity linewidth is calculated using the derived $\sigma$, $\Delta v$ = $\sigma \sqrt{8\ln(2)}$. The derived results are shown in the bottom right panel of Figures \[Gcomb1\]–\[Gcomb5\], with red crosses indicating the narrow linewidth component of the cloud. The derived physical parameters using GASS data are summarized in Table \[GASSpar\].
For the combined data, we run a 3-dimensional version of CLUMPFIND, which is an automatic routine for analyzing clumpy structure in spectral line data cubes [@Williams94]. The routine searches the local peaks of the emission and follows them down to the user defined intensity level. We note that CLUMPFIND has its limitations if the data cube contains significant background noise. After running CLUMPFIND, we inspect the output manually to eliminate false detections. Identified clumps in each cloud are shown in Figure \[clumps\] with crosses and labels. We perform a similar analysis as for the GASS data by extracting the spectra of the clumps at peak column density and deriving their physical parameters. A summary of the derived physical parameters of these clumps is given in Table \[clumps\_tab\].
    
    
--------------------- ---------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ---------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ----------------
Name Position $T_{\rm B_{1}}$ $T_{\rm B_{2}}$ $V_{\rm LSR_{1}}$ $V_{\rm LSR_{2}}$ $N_{\rm HI_{1}}$ $N_{\rm HI_{2}}$ $\Delta v_{1}$ $\Delta v_{2}$
$\#$ (K) (K) () () ($10^{18}$cm$^{-2}$) ($10^{18}$cm$^{-2}$) () ()
HVC 252.2-20.5+310 1 … 0.06 … 306.1 … 3.30 … 30.7
2 … 0.10 … 308.1 … 4.09 … 22.1
3 … 0.18 … 310.1 … 5.71 … 16.5
4 0.22 0.11 311.1 308.7 4.07 6.70 9.7 30.4
5 0.29 0.14 310.8 309.8 5.38 7.24 9.4 26.5
6 0.26 0.23 310.2 309.9 3.19 9.55 6.4 21.2
7 0.18 0.23 310.6 309.2 1.67 6.98 4.8 15.6
8 0.20 0.13 311.1 308.2 2.07 4.77 5.4 19.0
9 0.14 0.10 310.4 305.3 2.34 6.57 8.5 35.5
10 0.08 0.08 309.9 309.7 1.29 4.81 7.9 32.1
11 0.07 0.07 310.7 309.6 0.63 3.87 4.7 28.3
12 … 0.08 … 307.8 … 4.08 … 24.9
HVC 266.0-18.7+338 1 0.20 … 340.5 … 3.61 … 9.4 …
2 0.20 0.21 339.6 341.5 1.63 4.71 4.2 11.3
3 0.30 0.30 339.8 340.5 2.48 7.13 4.3 12.2
4 0.46 0.26 339.8 339.0 4.68 8.94 5.3 18.0
5 0.48 0.27 339.1 337.6 6.22 11.21 6.7 21.3
6 0.49 0.22 338.1 335.5 8.56 12.09 9.1 27.8
7 0.35 0.24 336.9 334.7 6.11 12.49 9.0 27.3
8 0.24 0.29 336.2 334.0 2.24 12.71 4.9 23.0
9 0.18 0.23 336.1 333.4 1.34 9.51 3.9 21.3
10 0.13 0.13 335.6 332.8 1.35 6.06 5.5 23.7
11 … 0.13 … 333.7 … 4.68 … 18.3
HVC 276.03-09.0+277 1 … 0.16 … 277.6 … 4.64 … 14.6
2 0.18 0.20 280.0 277.4 2.21 6.84 6.5 17.4
3 0.37 0.09 279.5 272.4 7.10 2.80 10.0 16.2
4 0.27 … 278.0 … 5.20 … 9.9 …
5 0.45 0.07 277.2 273.4 6.27 2.59 7.1 19.6
6 0.65 0.20 277.2 274.9 8.26 7.12 6.5 18.2
7 0.65 0.10 277.1 274.4 8.80 4.13 7.0 21.3
8 0.30 … 276.8 … 4.52 … 7.7 …
HVC 297.1+08.5+253 1 … 0.17 … 249.7 … 7.31 … 22.1
2 … 0.30 … 251.1 … 13.30 … 23.0
3 … 0.44 … 253.1 … 19.92 … 23.4
4 … 0.47 … 253.8 … 20.05 … 21.8
5 … 0.57 … 254.0 … 24.23 … 22.0
6 … 0.64 … 253.3 … 26.46 … 21.4
7 0.21 0.70 252.9 252.5 2.55 29.74 6.1 22.0
8 0.46 0.76 252.7 252.9 3.81 31.90 4.3 21.6
9 1.15 0.67 252.6 252.9 8.69 20.31 3.9 15.5
10 1.82 0.69 252.6 253.1 14.52 26.57 4.1 19.7
11 1.99 0.54 252.6 252.9 15.28 17.92 4.0 17.3
12 2.02 0.38 252.6 252.7 12.92 13.54 3.3 18.4
13 1.03 0.22 252.5 252.5 6.45 5.87 3.2 13.6
14 0.35 0.27 252.0 252.9 1.62 3.05 2.4 5.8
HVC 310.3+08.1+167 1 0.07 0.08 161.3 160.0 0.46 1.99 3.4 13.2
2 … 0.14 … 160.7 … 3.39 … 12.2
3 … 0.17 … 161.1 … 6.93 … 21.3
4 0.06 0.12 160.1 163.6 0.86 4.95 7.0 21.3
5 … 0.15 … 163.7 … 4.07 … 14.4
6 … 0.16 … 165.0 … 4.56 … 14.5
7 0.11 0.14 164.7 166.5 1.77 4.97 8.6 18.2
8 0.10 0.12 166.7 165.9 0.79 4.41 4.0 18.4
9 … 0.20 … 166.6 … 4.98 … 13.1
10 … 0.36 … 168.3 … 7.05 … 10.1
11 0.17 0.42 168.9 168.1 0.67 7.63 2.1 9.4
12 0.42 0.06 167.9 161.0 5.69 3.16 7.0 25.3
13 0.20 0.08 168.3 164.0 2.36 2.38 6.1 15.3
--------------------- ---------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ---------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ----------------
-------------------------- ------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
Name Clump RA Dec $T_{\rm B_{1}}$ $T_{\rm B_{2}}$ $V_{\rm LSR_{1}}$ $V_{\rm LSR_{2}}$ $N_{\rm HI_{1}}$ $N_{\rm HI_{2}}$ $\Delta v_{1}$ $\Delta v_{2}$ $T_{\rm k}$ $\theta$ $n^{b}$ $P/k_{\rm B}^{b}$
(K) (K) () () ($10^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$) ($10^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$) () () (K) ($\degr$) (cm$^{-3}$) (K cm$^{-3}$)
HVC 252.2-20.5+310 A 06$^{h}$38$^{m}$42.26$^{s}$ $-43\degr22\arcmin14.43\arcsec$ 3.49 1.27 312.5 313.4 1.89 1.82 2.80 7.38 … … … …
B 06$^{h}$38$^{m}$20.27$^{s}$ $-43\degr29\arcmin14.73\arcsec$ 2.78 … 310.8 … 2.50 … 4.65 … 471.37 0.144 0.13 60.78
HVC 266.0-18.7+338 A 07$^{h}$16$^{m}$36.77$^{s}$ $-55\degr05\arcmin14.92\arcsec$ 3.29 … 340.9 … 4.04 … 6.33 … 872.96 0.052 0.58 503.19
B 07$^{h}$16$^{m}$01.82$^{s}$ $-55\degr05\arcmin16.69\arcsec$ 3.78 … 341.3 … 4.34 … 5.92 … 764.99 0.040 0.80 610.84
C 07$^{h}$15$^{m}$44.38$^{s}$ $-55\degr07\arcmin17.20\arcsec$ 3.52 … 339.5 … 4.37 … 6.40 … 893.88 0.048 0.68 604.95
D 07$^{h}$14$^{m}$38.03$^{s}$ $-54\degr59\arcmin46.95\arcsec$ 1.24 … 338.2 … 2.51 … 10.41 … 2361.77 0.056 0.33 779.77
E 07$^{h}$13$^{m}$55.98$^{s}$ $-55\degr06\arcmin15.34\arcsec$ 2.07 … 336.0 … 5.28 … 13.16 … 3772.62 0.049 0.80 3017.05
HVC 276.03-09.0+277 A 08$^{h}$53$^{m}$26.09$^{s}$ $-58\degr54\arcmin57.38\arcsec$ 6.67 … 276.5 … 7.95 … 6.14 … 823.07 0.056 1.05 864.63
B 08$^{h}$55$^{m}$46.20$^{s}$ $-59\degr08\arcmin54.81\arcsec$ 3.69 … 281.0 … 4.70 … 6.56 … 937.18 0.042 0.83 781.87
C 08$^{h}$54$^{m}$08.70$^{s}$ $-58\degr45\arcmin56.93\arcsec$ 2.39 5.99 273.5 275.5 4.39 3.78 9.44 3.25 … … … …
HVC 297.1+08.5+253 A 12$^{h}$12$^{m}$51.88$^{s}$ $-53\degr37\arcmin28.63\arcsec$ 20.29 4.38 252.8 249.5 12.99 1.88 3.30 2.21 … … … …
B 12$^{h}$12$^{m}$38.40$^{s}$ $-53\degr39\arcmin29.49\arcsec$ 11.69 … 252.9 … 11.13 … 4.91 … 524.91 0.028 3.00 1572.20
HVC 310.3+08.1+167$^{a}$ A 13$^{h}$42$^{m}$50.09$^{s}$ $-54\degr00\arcmin33.46\arcsec$ 0.72 0.23 165.5 172.3 0.70 0.15 5.02 3.31 … … … …
B 13$^{h}$42$^{m}$32.98$^{s}$ $-53\degr57\arcmin34.32\arcsec$ 0.30 0.61 172.2 166.2 0.21 0.70 3.56 5.94 … … … …
C 13$^{h}$42$^{m}$32.80$^{s}$ $-53\degr51\arcmin33.45\arcsec$ 0.29 0.57 163.5 169.5 0.26 0.59 4.69 5.34 … … … …
D 13$^{h}$42$^{m}$29.65$^{s}$ $-54\degr00\arcmin04.75\arcsec$ 0.29 0.55 172.5 166.6 0.20 0.63 3.42 5.86 … … … …
E 13$^{h}$42$^{m}$09.20$^{s}$ $-53\degr58\arcmin05.56\arcsec$ 0.32 0.12 171.9 167.1 0.28 0.11 4.56 4.63 … … … …
F 13$^{h}$40$^{m}$02.87$^{s}$ $-54\degr15\arcmin34.20\arcsec$ 0.28 0.16 167.4 161.6 0.31 0.17 5.57 5.47 … … … …
-------------------------- ------- ----------------------------- --------------------------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------------- ----------------------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
$a$: Parameters are derived from a spatially and spectrally smoothed data cube.\
$b$: Assuming a distance of 25 kpc.
OVERALL PROPERTIES OF THE HVCS
==============================
Four of the HVCs studied here are classified as head-tail clouds. The only exception, HVC 266.0$-$18.7+338, is classified as a symmetric cloud by FSM13. However, the outer diffuse envelope makes the classification ambigious. It may also be a head-tail cloud.
The head-tail morphology suggests ram-pressure interaction with the ambient medium. FSM13 reveal multiphase structures, which resemble broad and narrow components. We consider the broad component to be $>$10 in this study. On average, the velocity linewidths for the broad and narrow component are 20 and 6.2 , respectively. Most of the identified clumps only have a cold core. There are also unresolved clumps showing multiphase structures with broad and cold components or cold components only.
HVC 252.2$-$20.5+310
--------------------
HVC 252.2-20.5+310 is part of the LA IV. The tail is pointing away from the Galactic Plane. In Figure \[Gcomb1\], we show the spectral line profiles and derived physical parameters along the sliced axis of the cloud. The cloud is sliced from south to north with a designated position number. Multiphase structures of warm (broad) and cold (narrow) components at the head of the cloud are seen in the series of spectral line profiles. The rise and fall of the column density is gradual. There is no obvious velocity gradient across this cloud. We find that the cold component (red crosses) has a fairly consistent $V_{\rm LSR}\sim311$ . The FWHM of the warm component (black circles) varies in different parts of the cloud. The cold component has a typical linewidth of 7 .
Figure \[merged\_GASScon\]a shows the peak column density map of the combined image. The overlaid contour provides the spatial size of the cloud as observed by GASS. As seen in the figure, the head of the cloud has been resolved into two clumps. The morphology of these two clumps is outlined with contours in Figure \[clumps\]a. Clumps A and B morphologically look like head-tail clouds which are pointing in the opposite direction. The derived physical parameters at the peak column density of both clumps are presented in Table \[clumps\_tab\]. Clump A has two unresolved components, which have $\Delta v$ of 2.80 and 7.38 . Clump B is resolved with a single peak $T_{\rm B}$ of 2.78 K.
HVC 266.0$-$18.7+338
--------------------
HVC 266.0-18.7+338 is also part of the LA IV. It is classified as a symmetric cloud in FSM13. The cloud is sliced from east to west, which corresponds to the spectral line profiles from top to bottom in Figure \[Gcomb2\]. The cloud shows a clear velocity gradient with velocity decreasing from about 340 to 332 . In general, the cold component has a velocity larger than the warm component. The effect can be seen in the series of asymmetric spectral line profiles. The $\Delta v$ of the warm component increases from the east end of the cloud and reaches a maximum at the center before flattening it out to $\sim25$ . A similar trend is seen in $\Delta v$ of the cold component. The linewidth and velocity gradients indicate that this cloud is probably a head-tail cloud rather than a symmetric cloud.
The ATCA primary beam almost covers the entire cloud (see Figure \[merged\_GASScon\]b). The combined image reveals a complex structure. Figure \[clumps\] shows a total of 5 distinct clumps identified via CLUMPFIND, named A–E. All clumps are resolved. These clumps have a fairly similar $V_{\rm LSR}$ (336–341 ). Clump D and E are considered warm with $\Delta v >$ 10 . Both of them are also isolated from the main concentration of other clumps. None of them has a distinct morphology.
HVC 276.3$-$09.0+277
--------------------
HVC 276.3-09.1+277 is the third HVC in this study that is located in LA IV. This head-tail cloud has two main cores with one being at the head of the cloud and the other at the tail (see Figure \[Gcomb3\]). The analysis is performed by slicing the cloud diagonally from south-east to north-west. The cloud does not show a clear velocity gradient. Its head is rather compressed. The average $\Delta v$ for all of the cold components is 7.5 . The $V_{\rm LSR}$ values of the cold components decrease gradually and are larger than the warm components. The peak $T_{\rm B}$ is $\sim$0.7 K at the main core of the cloud.
In Figures \[merged\_GASScon\]c and \[clumps\]c, we show the resolved clumps in the combined image. Three clumps are identified. Clump A is located in the main core of the cloud but clump B is displaced slightly from the second core of the cloud as seen in the diffuse emission. Both clump A and B are morphologically similar to head-tail clouds. Clump C is relatively smaller than clump A and B. It is unresolved and consists of two cold components, which have $\Delta v$ of 3.25 and 9.44 .
HVC 297.1+08.5+253
------------------
HVC 297.1+08.5+253 is situated in the vicinity between LA I and II, closer to the south-eastern part of LA II. This head-tail cloud is morphologically slightly different from HVC 252.2$-$20.5+210. The contours show a typical head-tail structure (see Figure \[Gcomb4\]). The tail of HVC 297.1+08.5+253 is pointing away from the Galactic plane.
In Figure \[Gcomb4\], the spectral line profiles (top to bottom) represent the sliced positions of the cloud from south-west to north-east. As expected, the peak column density increases toward the head of the cloud. Interestingly, the derived column density of the warm component reaches its maximum (position 8) before the maximum column densities as shown in the GASS integrated column density map at positions 9 and 10. The cold component also shows the same rise and fall pattern in column density but with the maximum at position 11. The $V_{\rm LSR}$ shows a small gradient at the tail of the cloud and then becomes constant at 253 for both cold and warm component. Half of the cloud consists of warm component only, with an average velocity linewidth of 20.1 . At position 14, two components are detected (refer bottom panel of Figure 6). These two components on avarage have a velocity linewidth of 4.1 .
The cloud is relatively diffuse as shown in the combined image (Figure \[merged\_GASScon\]d). The main resolved feature is offset and leading the diffuse core of the cloud as seen in the GASS image. This explains why the column density of the cold component peaks at position 11 in the analysis of the GASS image. Figure \[clumps\]d shows the resolved feature and two detected clumps. Unfortunately, the feature is detected fairly close to the edge of the ATCA beam, where sensitivity drops off significantly. Thus, extended features cannot be seen.
Clump A has the highest $T_{\rm B}$ ($\sim$20.3 K) amongst the detected clumps in this study. Clump A is resolved and reveals sub-components as seen in its spectral line profile (not shown here). The resolved clump B has $\Delta v$ of $\sim5$ .
HVC 310.3+08.1+167
------------------
HVC 310.3+08.1+167 is located north of LA I. It is pointing in the general direction of motion of LA I. This cloud is quite diffuse compared to the other clouds in this study, It has a very long diffuse tail, which spans nearly 1.5$\degr$, and a slight kink at the end (see Figure \[Gcomb5\]). While this cloud has a lower $V_{\rm LSR}$ than other selected HVCs in this study, it is assumed to be part of the LA based on the constraints listed in FSM13 to exclude the Galactic emission.
The analysis is performed by slicing along the symmetry axis from south-west to north-east. The spectral line profiles show that the cloud has a fairly low brightness temperature of $\sim$0.4 K. The multiple peaks of column density indicate numerous components. Apart from the two deviating points at position 12 and 13 in the velocity plot, the gradual increase of $V_{\rm LSR}$ suggests that the cloud has a velocity gradient.
The contours in Figure \[merged\_GASScon\]e show that the size of the cloud is a lot larger than the ATCA beam. Since its coordinates were derived at the axis center of the cloud, the core structure was not observed at the center of the ATCA beam, where sensitivity is highest. The low surface brightness nature of the cloud also makes clump idenfication harder. The identification and derivation of physical parameters of the clumps were performed on the smoothed cube. Six distinct clumps have been identified (see Figure \[clumps\]e). All of them are unresolved and have sub-components. The sub-components are cold as well.
The structure near the head is complex with five clumps being detected within the sensitivity cutoff. They have $V_{\rm LSR}$ ranging from 165 to 172 . Clump F has a lower $V_{\rm LSR}$ of 161.6 . They all appear to have an irregular shape.
COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES\[comp\]
========================================
Two additional compact HVCs, HVC 291+26+195 and HVC 297+09+253, were observed and studied in high-resolution by BBKW06. Both clouds are associated with the LA. BBKW06 analyzed the data obtained from the Parkes survey of the Magellanic System [@Bruns05] and interferometer data observed with the 750D configuration of the ATCA. By comparing with our integrated column density map of the ATCA data alone (not shown here), we find similar resolved structures as seen in Figure 4 of BBKW06. They identified seventeen clumps, which is more than detected in our study, although the method of identification is different. They did not analyze the combined Parkes and ATCA data.
Another high-resolution study of a compact HVC (HVC 289+33+251) has been carried out by @Bruns04. This cloud is also in the vicinity of LA but a distance of 150 kpc was assumed, which is further than the typical distance of the Magellanic Clouds (50 kpc). This cloud is significantly brighter than our observed targets and has the typical head-tail morphology. It is relatively compact as well. A direct quantitative comparison cannot be achieved due to different resolutions of the two studies.
DISCUSSION\[diss\]
==================
HVC Phase Diagram\[phase\]
--------------------------
HVCs may exist as a stable two-phase medium if the halo pressure lies within a certain range, $P_{\rm min} < P < P_{\rm max}$, where $P_{\rm min}$ and $P_{\rm max}$ are a function of height, $z$, above the Galactic plane [@Wolfire95]. The phase diagram of thermal pressure, $P$, vs. hydrogen density, $n$, can be used to examine the stability of HVCs. To calculate the thermal pressure of the resolved clumps, we apply the ideal gas law, $P$/k = $nT_{\rm k}$, where k is the Boltzmann constant, $n$ is the hydrogen density and $T_{\rm k}$ is the kinetic gas temperature. The upper limit of the kinetic gas temperature can be derived from the velocity linewidth assuming the observed linewidth is dominated by Doppler broadening, $T_{\rm k} = m_{\rm H}\Delta v^{2}$ / (8 k $\ln$2) = 21.8 ($\Delta v/$)$^{2}$, where $m_{\rm H}=1.674\times10^{-27}$ kg. Assuming spherical symmetry for the clump, $n = N_{\rm HI}$ / ($d$ tan$\theta$), where $\theta$ is the angular diameter of the clump and $d$ is the distance to the cloud. The hydrogen density is calculated by assuming distances to the cloud of 25 kpc and 50 kpc. The former distance is close to the kinematic distance derived in @NM08. The latter is close to a the measured distance of the LMC [@P13]. Calculated values are presented in Table \[clumps\_tab\].
Figure \[phase\_dia\] shows the phase diagram at different heights $z$ above the Galactic plane overplotted with our derived $P$/k and $n$ for the resolved clumps. Filled and non-filled symbols correspond to the calculated data points by assuming a distance of 25 and 50 kpc, respectively. The inferred $z$ with the assumed distance for each HVC clump is listed next to each symbol. We note that the phase diagram is sensitive to the metallicity ($Z$) and dust-to-gas ratio ($D/G$). We adopt the model of $Z = D/G = 0.3$, which is appropriate for stripped LMC gas [@Wolfire95].
To estimate the effects of uncertainties in our derived $P/k$ and $n$, we consider various scenarios. Assuming the observed clump is not of spherical shape but an ellipsoid, viewing along the major axis gives a larger angular diameter. Twice the size in angular diameter will result in a decrease in hydrogen gas density by a factor of two. The derived $T_{\rm k}$ is an upper limit given by the velocity linewidth. A decrease of $T_{\rm k}$ by 100 K will result in +0.1 change in $\log P$/k. Ignoring the two data points near the 50 kpc curve and taking into account the uncertainties, we find that majority of the data points fall onto their corresponding $z$ for the phase diagram. Also, the data points lie in the instability valley of the two-phase medium.
![Thermal pressure, $P$/k, vs. hydrogen density, $n$, for various heights, $z$, above the Galactic plane in kpc. The model of $Z = D/G =0.3$ is taken from @Wolfire95. Filled and non-filled symbols represent the calculated data points by assuming a distance of 25 and 50 kpc, respectively. The value next to the symbols in the legend are the calculated heights $z$, in kpc.[]{data-label="phase_dia"}](pn_new.eps)
Halo Environment as a Function of Galactic Latitude\[haloenv\]
--------------------------------------------------------------
If we assume that the clumps are in hydrostatic equalibrium, the thermal pressure of the clump is equal to the external halo thermal pressure. In Figure \[gal\_par\], we show the average physical parameters of the resolved clumps for each cloud as a function of Galactic latitude. In this case, Galactic latitude is a proxy for $z$. The height $z$ decreases from negative to positive Galactic latitude. Interestingly, we find a trend of increasing halo thermal pressure, hydrogen density and column density with increasing Galactic latitude. This suggests that the clouds reside in a denser halo environment at more positive Galactic latitude. While it has been suggested that the LA is closer to the Galactic centre than the LMC, [@NM08], this is the first evidence showing a possible distance gradient in the LA region using compact HVCs that span over $\sim80\degr$ in Galactic longitude. The leading part of the LA (LA II and LA III) is most likely closer to our Galaxy than the LA I, which has a kinematic distance of $\sim$21 kpc [@NM08]. The study of @Venzmer12 also showed a similar distance gradient using a different approach. Their investigation was based on the velocity structure of three subpopulations in LA I. Future simulations would be useful to assess the likelihood of such a scenario. We note that $P$/k and $n$ are sensitive to various scenarios as discussed in §7.1. The positive Galactic latitude cloud (HVC 297.14+08.5+253) will have a lower $n$ if it is not spherical but twice the size. The trend of $n$ vs. Galactic latitude becomes less significant in this case.
In FSM13, the formation of the LA IV remains a mystery. It has a very different morphology than its counterpart (LA I–III). This suggests that LA IV might be formed via a different mechanism or has a different origin. The recent discoveries of ultra-faint dwarf galaxies in the vicinity of the Magellanic System [@Koposov15; @Bechtol15; @D15] has renewed theoretical and observational interest (see [@C15; @Westmeier15]). The model of @C15 confirms that the locations of these ultra-faint dwarf galaxies are associated with the MCs previously as part of a loose group and shows how they are processed by the Galactic halo upon accretion. This suggests that the clumpy LA IV might be the debris from such an accretion event, which might explain why the three HVCs (part of the LA IV) are further away than the two HVCs near LA I and II. This supports the radial distance estimate of 74 kpc for LA IV in @Venzmer12.
![Thermal pressure, $P$/k, hydrogen density, $n$, and column density, $N_{\rm HI}$, as a function of Galactic latitude (as a proxy of $z$). Each data point represents the average physical parameters of all resolved clumps for each cloud. A distance of 25 kpc is assumed here. Uncertainties of $P$/k and $n$ are discussed in §7.1. A systematic uncertainties of 10$\%$ is assumed for $N_{\rm HI}$. Significantly deviating values, such as the ones for clump D and E of HVC 266.0-18.7+338, are excluded from the calculation. Physical parameters are listed in Table \[clumps\_tab\].[]{data-label="gal_par"}](par_gal.eps)
Star Formation in the Leading Arm Region\[starform\]
----------------------------------------------------
Theoretical models and observational evidence show that both the MS and LA were formed via ram-pressure stripping and tidal interaction between the LMC and SMC (see e.g. [@DB11; @For13]). Both of these mechanisms are known to trigger star formation in galaxies (e.g., galaxy pair NGC 1512/1510, [@Koribalski09] and NGC 4522 in the Virgo cluster, [@Kenney04]). Star formation in the MS and LA has been postulated but there was no success in the hunt for stars being formed in situ in early years (e.g., [@RC82; @GR98]). @DM09 conducted a search for star formation in the MS regions using cold atomic gas as an indicator. Two absorption components were identified toward a background radio source, J0119$-$6809. The corresponding column density is $\sim2\times10^{20}$ cm$^{-1}$. Follow up observation shows no detection of CO($J=1\rightarrow0$) molecular gas associated with the cool gas implying that star formation does not occur at that location within the MS.
Neutral hydrogen gas, dust and molecular hydrogen gas (H$_{\rm 2}$) act as a reservoir for fuelling star formation activities. This is particularly prominent in high gas density regions. Stars are formed when the dense gas clouds reach the Jeans instability and collapse. Measurements of dust and H$_{\rm 2}$ are fairly limited in the LA region. An attempt for measuring dust, H$_{\rm 2}$ and metallicity in the LA has been made by [@Sembach01] on a compact HVC (HVC 287.5+22.5+240). They find that the metallicity of this HVC is similar to the SMC, and the detection of H$_{\rm 2}$ suggests that either the H$_{\rm 2}$ formed in situ or within the SMC and survived tidal stripping. They prefer the latter scenario given that the formation timescale of H$_{\rm 2}$ is long ($\sim10^{8}$ yr). If the LA is stripped from the SMC as suggested by simulations (e.g., [@DB11]), we would expect the LA region has a similar H$_{\rm 2}$ and metallicity content as the SMC, and star formation potentially could occur. In fact, a recent attempt to search for stellar components has been carried out at the optical wavelength by @CD14 in the LA region. Five young stars has been successfully identified and they believed to have formed in the LA for the first time, using kinematics information, stellar parameters and distance moduli. We examine the location of these 5 young stars and nearby gas content. Four of them are in close proximity of dense clouds with $N_{\rm HI}$ in the range of $1.5\times10^{19}$ to $1.8\times10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. Clouds with these column densities exist everywhere in the LA region and yet the search only resulted in five young stars that were born in situ. Where are the missing stars?
The result from §\[phase\] suggests the possibility of different halo environments in the LA region, which might explain the lack of star formation if a special condition is required to form stars. However, without further information on dust and metallicity properties in the entire LA region, it is very hard to assess the conditions that are needed for star formation to occur. The optical search for young stars is currently limited to specific regions. It would be interesting if future optical studies included candidates located in the vicinity of HVC 287.5+22.5+240 to verify if star formation is plausible with the given conditions.
Metallicity and dust might not be the only factors for the star formation in the region. Observational evidence of interaction between the LA I and Galactic disc gas suggests the gas is being compressed by the Galactic halo gas at low $z$ and star formation could also be triggered.
SUMMARY\[sum\]
==============
We have studied five HVCs in the vicinity of the Magellanic Leading Arm. The targets were selected from the FSM13 catalog, and high-resolution observations were carried out at the ATCA. We analyzed the combined single-dish GASS and interferometric ATCA data. Clumps were identified and physical parameters were derived for both clumps and diffuse structure of the HVCs. Most of the clumps have a cold component ($\Delta v < 10$ ). The unresolved clumps generally consist of a warm component only.
Three of the clouds are part of the LA IV, which lies south of the Galactic plane, and have a head-tail like morphology. The other two are located north the Galactic plane and in close proximity to LA I and LA II. HVC 266.0-18.7+338 is the only cloud that shows a clear velocity gradient. It also consists of many clumps. The $V_{\rm LSR}$ of cold clumps is generally larger than the diffuse (warm) component.
In the case of HVC 276.3-09.0+277, its head is compressed and it does not show any velocity gradient. The velocity of the cold component decreases gradually and is larger than that of warm component. Two clumps are located in the two main cores of the cloud. The third clump is relatively small and unresolved. It is located slightly offset from one of the clumps.
HVC 297.1+08.5+253 has been studied by BBKW06. They analyzed the single-dish and interferometer data separately. Their analysis focuses on the core of the head-tail structure and many clumps have been identified. We, on the other hand, carried out the analysis by using the combined image. This allows us to probe large and small scale structures simultaneously. In our analysis, the $N_{\rm HI}$ increases toward the head of the cloud and decreases afterward. The cold component shows the same $N_{\rm HI}$ pattern except that it peaks at a slightly different position from the warm component. There is a small velocity gradient at the tail of the cloud. Otherwise, velocity is constant for both cold and warm components.
The analysis of the combined image of HVC 310.3+08.1+167 was carried out on a smoothed cube due to it being very diffuse and low in surface brightness. It consists of many clumps, and all of them are unresolved with cold components. Overall, the velocity linewidth of both the cold and warm component follows the same trend as the $N_{\rm HI}$.
We discussed the HVC phase diagram (log $P/k$ vs log $n$) using the model of @Wolfire95. The model has metallicity and gas-to-dust ratio of 0.3, which is based on the assumption that the gas was stripped from the LMC. All the clouds are in the instability valley where they can maintain their two-phase structures. Interestingly, there is an offset between the data points and their corresponding height above the Galactic plane. A lower metallicity model is a better fit for the majority of the data points, which suggests that the gas was likely stripped from the SMC. This is consistent with various simulations (e.g. [@DB11]). We find a gradient in thermal halo pressure, hydrogen density and column density as a function of Galactic latitude. This is the first possible observational evidence of an increasing Galactocentric distance from the trailing end to the leading part of the LA, although further observations may be needed to confirm. A different halo environment might explain the low star formation rate in the LA region. Special conditions such as additional dust and atomic hydrogen gas are needed in order to trigger star formation. Future studies of the atomic hydrogen gas content in the region and the search for more stars will be important to understand the star formation history in the region of the LA.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
B.-Q. F. was the recipient of a John Stocker Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Science and Industry Research Fund. N. Mc-G acknowledges CSIRO Astronomy & Space Science where this work was commenced. This publication made use of data products from the Parkes and ATCA radio telescopes. The Australia Telescope Compact Array/Parkes radio telescope is part of the Australia Telescope National Facility, which is funded by the Commonwealth of Australia for operation as a National Facility managed by CSIRO.
[^1]: E-mail:[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper we consider the Newton polygons of $L$-functions coming from additive exponential sums associated to a polynomial over a finite field ${\ensuremath{\mathbb{F}}}_q$. These polygons define a stratification of the space of polynomials of fixed degree. We determine the open stratum: we give the generic Newton polygon for polynomials of degree $d\geq 2$ when the characteristic $p$ is greater than $3d$, and the Hasse polynomial, i.e. the equation defining the hypersurface complementary to the open stratum.'
address:
- ' Équipe “Géométrie Algébrique et Applications à la Théorie de l’Information”, Université de Polynésie Française, BP 6570, 98702 FAA’A, Tahiti, Polynésie Française'
- ' Équipe “Géométrie Algébrique et Applications à la Théorie de l’Information”, Université de Polynésie Française, BP 6570, 98702 FAA’A, Tahiti, Polynésie Française'
author:
- Régis Blache
- Éric Férard
title: 'Newton stratification for polynomials: the open stratum.'
---
Introduction
============
Let $k:=\F_q$ be the finite field with $q:=p^m$ elements, and for any $r\geq 1$, let $k_r$ denote its extension of degree $r$. If $\psi$ is a non trivial additive character on $\F_q$, then $\psi_r:=\psi\circ \Tr_{k_r/k}$ is a non trivial additive character of $k_r$, where $\Tr_{k_r/k}$ denotes the trace from $k_r$ to $k$. Let $f\in k[X]$ be a polynomial of degree $d\geq 2$ prime to $p$; then for any $r$ we form the additive exponential sum $$S_r(f,\psi):=\sum_{x\in k_r}\psi_r(f(x)).$$ To this family of sums, one associates the $L$-function $$L(f,T):=\exp\left(\sum_{r\geq 1} S_r(f,\psi)\frac{T^r}{r}\right).$$ It follows from the work of Weil on the Riemann hypothesis for function fields in characteristic $p$ that this $L$-function is actually a polynomial of degree $d-1$. Consequently we can write $$L(f,T)=(1-\theta_1T)\dots(1-\theta_{d-1}T).$$ Another consequence of the work of Weil is that the reciprocal roots $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_{d-1}$ are [*$q$-Weil numbers of weight $1$*]{}, i.e. algebraic integers all of whose conjugates have complex absolute $q^{\frac{1}{2}}$. Moreover, for any prime $\ell\neq p$, they are $\ell$-adic units, that is $|\theta_i|_\ell=1$.
A natural question is to determine their $q$-adic absolute value, or equivalently their $p$-adic valuation. In other words, one would like to determine the Newton polygon $NP_q(f)$ of $L(f,T)$ where $NP_q$ means the Newton polygon taken with respect to the valuation $v_q$ normalized by $v_q(q)=1$ ([*cf.*]{} [@ko], Chapter IV for the link between the Newton polygon of a polynomial and the valuations of its roots). There is an elegant general answer to this problem when $p\equiv 1~[d]$, $p\geq 5$: then the Newton polygon $NP_q(f)$ has vertices ([*cf.*]{} [@ro], Theorem 7.5) $$\left(n,\frac{n(n+1)}{2d}\right)_{1\leq n\leq d-1}.$$ This polygon is often called the [*Hodge polygon*]{} for polynomials of degree $d$, and denoted by $HP(d)$.
Unfortunately, if we don’t have $p\equiv 1~[d]$, there is no such general answer. We know that $NP_q(f)$ lies above $HP(d)$. This polygon can vary greatly depending on the coefficients of $f$, and it seems hopeless to give a general answer to the question above, as show the known examples ([*cf.*]{} [@sp] for degree $3$ polynomials, [@ho1] and [@ho2] for degree $4$ and degree $6$ polynomials respectively). On the other hand, we have asymptotic results ([*cf.*]{} [@zhu1], [@zhu2]): in these papers, Zhu proves the one-dimensional case of Wan’s conjecture ([*cf.*]{} [@wan] Conjecture 1.12), i.e. that there is a Zariski dense open subset $\U$ of the space of polynomials of degree $d$ over $\overline{\Q}$ such that when $p$ tends to infinity, for any $f\in \U$, the polygon $NP_q(f)$ obtained from the reduction of $f$ modulo a prime above $p$ in the field defined by the coefficients of $f$, we have $\lim_{p\rightarrow \infty} NP_q(f)=HP(d)$.
A general result concerning Newton polygons is [*Grothendieck’s specialization theorem*]{}. In order to quote it, let us recall some results about crystals. Let $\L_\psi$ denote the [*Artin Schreier crystal*]{}; this is an overconvergent $F$-isocrystal over $\A^1$ ([*cf.*]{} [@els] 6.5), and for any polynomial $f\in k[x]$ of degree $d$, we have an overconvergent $F$-isocrystal $f^*\L_\psi$ with ([*cf.*]{} [@bou]) $$L(f,T)=\det\left(1-T\phi_c|H^1_{\rm rig,c}(\A^1/K,f^*\L_\psi)\right).$$ Now if we parametrize the set of degree $d$ monic polynomials without constant coefficient by the affine space $\A^{d-1}$, associating the point $(a_1,\dots,a_{d-1})$ to the polynomial $f(X)=X^d+a_{d-1}X^{d-1}+\dots+a_1X$, we can consider the family of overconvergent $F$-isocrystals $f^*\L_\psi$. Now for a family of $F$-crystal $(\M,F)$ of rank $r$ over a $\F_p$-algebra $A$, we have Grothendieck’s specialization theorem ([*cf.*]{} [@gr], [@ka] Corollary 2.3.2)
[*Let $P$ be the graph of a continuous $\R$-valued function on $[0,r]$ which is linear between successive integers. The set of points in ${\ensuremath{\mbox{\rm{Spec }}}}(A)$ at which the Newton polygon of $(\M,F)$ lies above $P$ is Zariski closed, and is locally on ${\ensuremath{\mbox{\rm{Spec }}}}(A)$ the zero-set of a finitely generated ideal.*]{}
In other words, this theorem means that when $f$ runs over polynomials of degree $d$ over $\F_q$, then there is a Zariski dense open subset $U_{d,p}$ (the [*open stratum*]{}) of the (affine) space of these polynomials, and a [*generic Newton polygon*]{} $GNP(d,p)$ such that for any $f\in U_{d,p}$, $NP_q(f)=GNP(d,p)$, and $NP_q(f)\geq GNP(d,p)$ for any $f\in \F_q[X]$, $f$ monic of degree $d$ (where $NP\geq NP'$ means $NP$ lies above $NP'$).
The aim of this article is to determine explicitely both the generic polygon $GNP(d,p)$ and the associated [*Hasse polynomial*]{} $H_{d,p}$, i.e. the exact polynomial such that $U_{d,p}$ is the complementary of the hypersurface $H_{d,p}=0$. To be more precise, let $p\geq 3d$ be a prime; a [*normalized*]{} polynomial of degree $d$ over $\F_q$ is $f(x)=x^d+a_{d-2}x^{d-2}+\dots+a_1x\in \F_q[x]$; we identify the space of normalized polynomials with the affine space $\A^{d-2}(\F_q)$. Then the generic polygon $GNP(d,p)$ has vertices $$\left(n,\frac{Y_n}{p-1}\right)_{1\leq n\leq d-1},~Y_n:=\min_{\sigma\in S_n} \sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pk-\sigma(k)}{d}\rceil,$$ and we have $NP_q(f)=GNP(d,p)$ exactly when $H_{d,p}(a_1,\dots,a_{d-2})\neq 0$, with $H_{d,p}$ the Hasse polynomial, that we determine explicitely. Note that both $GNP(d,p)$ and $H_{d,p}$ do not depend on $q$, but only on $p$.
The above results improve recent works of Scholten-Zhu ([*cf.*]{} [@sch]) and Zhu ([*cf.*]{} [@zhu1], [@zhu2]). In [@sch], Scholten and Zhu determine the first generic slope and the polynomials having this slope, and our work is a generalization of this result to the whole Newton polygon. In [@zhu1], the generic Newton polygon is determined, but its $n$-th vertex depends on an intricated constant $\varepsilon_n$; moreover, Zhu doesn’t need to give the exact equation defining $U_{d,p}$ since she just wants to prove its non emptyness.
We use $p$-adic cohomology, following the works of Dwork, Robba and others. To be more precise, we use Washnitzer-Monsky spaces of overconvergent series $\H^\dagger(A)$; one can define a linear operator $\beta$ on $\H^\dagger(A)$ and a differential operator $D$ with finite index on this space such that $\beta$ and $D$ commute up to a power of $p$. Then the linear map $\overline{\alpha}=\overline{\beta}^{\tau^{m-1}}\overline{\beta}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots\overline{\beta}$ ($\tau$ being the Frobenius) on the quotient $\H^\dagger(A)/D\H^\dagger(A)$ has characteristic polynomial (almost) equal to $L(f,T)$. Using a monomial basis of $\H^\dagger(A)/D\H^\dagger(A)$, we are able to give congruences for the coefficients of the matrix $M:={\ensuremath{\mbox{\rm{Mat}}}}_\B(\overline{\beta})$ in terms of the coefficients of a lift of $f$. We deduce congruences for the minors of $N:={\ensuremath{\mbox{\rm{Mat}}}}_\B(\overline{\alpha})$, i.e. for the coefficients of the function $L(f,T)$.
The paper is organized as follows: in section 1, we recall the results from $p$-adic cohomology we use, reducing the calculation of the $L$-function to the calculation of the matrix $N$. Section 2 is the technical heart of our work: we give congruences for the coefficients and the minors of $\Gamma$, a submatrix of $M$. Note that these results are sufficient to determine the generic Newton polygon in case $q=p$; moreover we deduce a congruence on exponential sums. In section $3$ we come to the general case: we give congruences for the minors of a submatrix $A$ of the matrix $N$, whose characteristic polynomial is $L(f,T)$. Finally we show the main results of the article in section 4, defining the generic Newton polygon for normalized polynomials of degree $d$ and the Hasse polynomial associated to this polygon ([*cf.*]{} Theorem 4.1).
$p$-adic differential operators and exponential sums.
=====================================================
In this section, we recall well known results about $p$-adic differential operators, and their application to the evaluation of the $L$-function of exponential sums. The reader interested in more details and the proofs should refer to [@ro].
We denote by $\Q_p$ the field of $p$-adic numbers, and by $\K_m$ its (unique up to isomorphism) unramified extension of degree $m$. Let $\O_m$ be the valuation ring of $\K_m$; the elements of finite order in $\O_m^\times$ form a group $\T_m^\times$ of order $p^m-1$, and $\T_m:=\T_m^\times\cup\{0\}$ is the [*Teichmüller*]{} of $\K_m$. Note that it is the image of a section of reduction modulo $p$ from $\O_m$ to its residue field $\F_q$, called the [*Teichmüller lift*]{}. Let $\tau$ be the Frobenius; it is the generator of ${\ensuremath{\mbox{\rm{Gal }}}}(\K_m/\Q_p)$ which acts on $\T_m$ as the $p$th power map. Finally we denote by $\C_p$ a completion of a fixed algebraic closure $\overline{\Q}_p$ of $\Q_p$.
Let $\pi \in \C_p$ be a root of the polynomial $X^{p-1}+p$. It is well known that $\Q_p(\pi)=\Q_p(\zeta_p)$ is a totally ramified extension of degree $p-1$ of $\Q_p$. We shall frequently use the valuation $v:=v_\pi$, normalized by $v_\pi(\pi)=1$, instead of the usual $p$-adic valuation $v_p$, or the $q$-adic valuation $v_q$.
Index of $p$-adic differential operators of order $1$.
------------------------------------------------------
In this paragraph, we denote by $\Omega$ an algebraically closed field containing $\C_p$, complete under a valuation extending that of $\C_p$, and such that the residue class field of $\Omega$ is a transcendental extension of the residue class field of $\C_p$. For any $\omega \in \Omega$, $r\in \R$, we denote by $B(\omega,r^+)$ ([*resp.*]{} $B(\omega,r^-)$) the closed ([*resp.*]{} open) ball in $\Omega$ with center $\omega$ and radius $r$.
Let $f(X):=\alpha_dX^d+\dots+\alpha_1X$, $\alpha_d\neq 0$ be a polynomial of degree $d$, prime to $p$, over the field $\F_q$, and let $g(x):=a_dX^d+\dots+a_1X \in \O_m[X]$ be the polynomial whose coefficients are the Teichmüller lifts of those of $f$. Let $A:=B(0,1^+)\backslash B(0,1^-)$. We consider the space $\H^\dagger(A)$ of overconvergent analytic functions on $A$.
Define the function $H:=\exp(\pi g(X))$; note that since $X\mapsto \exp(\pi X)$ has radius of convergence $1$, $H$ is not an element of $\H^\dagger(A)$. Now let $D$ be the differential operator (where a function acts on $\H^\dagger(A)$ by multiplication) $$D:=X\frac{d}{dX}-\pi Xg'(X)~\left(=H^{-1}\circ
X\frac{d}{dX}\circ H\right).$$ Since $H$ is not in $\H^\dagger(A)$, $D$ is injective in $\H^\dagger(A)$. Thus the index of $D$ in $\H^\dagger(A)$ is the dimension of its cokernel. By ([@ro] Proposition 5.4.3 p226), this dimension is $d$.
On the other hand, since $D$ can be seen as a differential operator acting on $\C_p[X,\frac{1}{X}]$, Theorem 5.6 of [@ro] ensures that a complementary subspace of $D\C_p[X,\frac{1}{X}]$ in $\C_p[X,\frac{1}{X}]$ is also a complementary subspace of $D\H^\dagger(A)$ in $\H^\dagger(A)$. Now an easy calculation gives, for any $n\in \Z$ $$DX^{n-d}=(n-d)X^{n-d}+\pi\sum_{i=1}^di\alpha_iX^{i+n-d},$$ and since this function is clearly in $D\H^\dagger(A)$, we get, for $n\geq d$ $$X^n\equiv -\frac{n-d}{\pi}X^{n-d}-\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} i\alpha_i
X^{i+n-d}\quad [D\H^\dagger(A)],$$ and for $n<0$, $X^n\equiv -\frac{\pi}{n} \sum_{i=1}^di\alpha_iX^{i+n}
~[D\H^\dagger(A)]$. Thus $\B:=\{1,\dots,X^{d-1}\}$ forms a basis of a complementary subspace of $D\H^\dagger(A)$ in $\H^\dagger(A)$, and for every $n\in \Z$, $X^n$ can be written uniquely as $$X^n\equiv \sum_{i=0}^{d-1} a_{ni}X^i \quad [D\H^\dagger(A)],$$ for some $a_{ni}\in \K_m(\pi)$, $1\leq i\leq d-1$. We need more precise estimates for these coefficients and their $\pi$-adic valuations
[**Lemma 1.1.**]{}
*We have the relations*
i\) $a_{ni}=\delta_{ni}$ if $0\leq n\leq d-1$,
ii\) $v(a_{ni})\geq -\left[\frac{n-i}{d}\right]$ for $n\geq d$ and $i=1$
iii\) $a_{n0}=0$ for any $n>0$.
[*Proof.*]{} Part [*i)*]{} is trivial, and part [*ii)*]{} is just Lemma 7.7 in [@ro]. It remains to show part [*iii)*]{}; from the discussion above the lemma and the definition of the $a_{ni}$, we get for any $n\geq d$ $$a_{n0}= -\frac{n-d}{\pi}a_{n-d,0}-\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} i\alpha_i
a_{i+n-d,0}.$$ Thus $a_{d0}=0$ from part [*i)*]{}, and the result follows recursively.
L-functions of exponential sums as characteristic polynomials.
--------------------------------------------------------------
We define the power series $\theta(X):=\exp(\pi X-\pi X^p)$; this is a [*splitting function*]{} in Dwork’s terminology ([*cf.*]{} [@dw] p55). Its values at the points of $\T_1$ are $p$-th roots of unity; in other words this function represents an additive character of order $p$. It is well known that $\theta$ converges for any $x$ in $\C_p$ such that $v_p(x)>-\frac{p-1}{p^2}$, and in particular $\theta \in \H^\dagger(A)$. We will need the following informations on the coefficients of the power series $\theta$
[**Lemma 1.2.**]{}
*Set $\theta(X):= \sum_{i\geq 0} b_iX^i$; then we have*
i\) $b_i=\frac{\pi^i}{i!}$ if $0\leq i\leq p-1$;
ii\) $v(b_i)\geq i$ for $0\leq i\leq p^2-1$;
iii\) $v(b_i)\geq \left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^2i$ for $i\geq p^2$.
We define the functions $F(X):=\prod_{i=1}^d
\theta(a_iX^i):=\sum_{n\geq0} h_nX^n$, and $G(X):=\prod_{i=0}^{m-1}
F^{\tau^i}(X^{p^i})$; since $\theta$ is overconvergent, $F$ and $G$ also, and we get $G\in \H^\dagger(A)$.
Consider the mapping $\psi_q$ defined on $\H^\dagger(A)$ by $\psi_qf(x):=\frac{1}{q}\sum_{z^q=x}f(z)$; if $f(X)=\sum b_nX^n$, then $\psi_q f(X)=\sum b_{qn}X^n$. Let $\alpha:=\psi_q \circ G$; as operators on $\H^\dagger(A)$, $D$ and $\alpha$ commute up to a factor $q$, and we get a commutative diagram with exact rows $$\xymatrix{
0 \ar[r]& \ar[d]_{q\alpha} \H^\dagger(A) \ar[r]^{D} & \ar[d]_{\alpha}
\H^\dagger(A) \ar[r] & \ar[d]_{\overline{\alpha}} \H^\dagger(A)/D\H^\dagger(A) \ar[r] & 0\\
0 \ar[r]& \H^\dagger(A) \ar[r]^{D} & \H^\dagger(A) \ar[r] & \H^\dagger(A)/D\H^\dagger(A) \ar[r] & 0\\
}$$ Let $L^*(f,T)$ be the $L$-function associated to the sums $S_r^*(f):=\sum_{x\in k_r^\times} \psi_r(f(x))$; Dwork’s trace formula (cf [@ro]) gives the following $$L^*(f,T)=\frac{\det(1-T\alpha)}{\det(1-qT\alpha)}=\det(1-T\overline{\alpha}).$$ We have thus rewritten the $L$-function associated to the family of exponential sums as the characteristic polynomial of an endomorphism in a $p$-adic vector space.
Let $\beta$ be the endomorphism of $\H^\dagger(A)$ defined by $\beta=\psi_p\circ F$; then $\tau^{-1}\circ\beta$ commutes with $D$ up to a factor $p$, and passes to the quotient, giving an endomorphism $\overline{\tau^{-1}\circ\beta}$ of $W$, the $\K_m(\zeta_p)$-vector space with basis $\B$. Thus $\beta$ induces $\overline{\beta}$ from $W$ to $W^\tau$, the $\K_m(\zeta_p)$-vector space $W$ with scalar multiplication given by $\lambda\cdot w=\lambda^\tau w$. On the other hand we have $\alpha=\beta^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots \beta^{\tau}\beta$. This gives the following relation between the endomorphism $\overline{\alpha}$ of $W$ and the semilinear morphism $\overline{\beta}$ (note that $W^{\tau^m}=W$) $$\overline{\alpha}=\overline{\beta}^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots
\overline{\beta}^{\tau}\overline{\beta}.$$
Let $M:=Mat_\B(\overline{\beta})$ ([*resp.*]{} $N$) be the matrix of $\overline{\beta}$ ([*resp.*]{} $\overline{\alpha}$) in the basis $\B$, and $m_{ij}$ ([*resp.*]{} $n_{ij}$), $0\leq i,j\leq d-1$ be the coefficients of $M$ ([*resp.*]{} $N$). From the description of $F$, we can write $m_{ij}=h_{pi-j}+\sum_{n\geq d} h_{np-j}a_{ni}$ (cf [@ro] 7.10). Since we have $h_0=1$, and $h_n=0$ for negative $n$, we see from Lemma 1.2 [*iii)*]{} that $m_{00}=1$, and $m_{0j}=0$ for $1\leq j\leq
d-1$. Since $N=M^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots M$, the same is true for the $n_{0i}$; thus the space $W'=Vect(X,\dots,X^{d-1})$ is stable under the action of $\overline{\alpha}$, ([*resp.*]{} $\overline{\beta}$ induces a morphism from $W'$ to $W'^\tau$) and the matrix $\Gamma$ ([*resp.*]{} $A$) defined by $\Gamma:=\left(m_{ij}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq d-1}$, ([*resp.*]{} $A:=\left(n_{ij}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq d-1}$) is the matrix of the restriction of $\overline{\beta}$ ([*resp.*]{} $\overline{\alpha}$) with respect to the basis $\{X,\dots,X^{d-1}\}$. These matrices satisfy $A=\Gamma^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots \Gamma$, and $\det(1-T\overline{\alpha})=(1-T)\det(\I_{d-1}-TA)=(1-T)\det(\I_{d-1}-T\Gamma^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots
\Gamma)$. Finally, since we assumed $f(0)=0$, we have $S_r^*(f)=S_r(f)-1$ for any $r\geq 1$, and $L^*(f,T)=(1-T)L(f,T)$. From this we deduce the following result, which we will use to evaluate the valuations of the coefficients of the $L$-function associated to $f$
[**Proposition 1.1.**]{} [*Let $\Gamma$ be as above; then we have $$L(f,T)=\det(\I_{d-1}-T\Gamma^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots \Gamma).$$*]{}
[**Remark 1.1.**]{} We have chosen to work over a ring of overconvergent series, the Washnitzer-Monsky dagger space; one can check that if $K:=\K_m(\gamma)$ is the totally ramified extension of $\K_m$ containing a fixed root of $X^d-\pi$, then the space $W'\otimes K$ with $W'$ as above is isomorphic to the space $H_0(SK_{\bullet}(B,D))$ constructed in [@as], and under this isomorphism the operator $\overline{\alpha}$ corresponds to $H_0(\alpha)$ there. Moreover, these spaces are isomorphic to the first rigid cohomology group $H^1_{\rm rig,c}(\A^1/K,f^*\L_\psi)$ ([*cf.*]{} [@bou]).
Congruences for the coefficients and the minors of the matrix $\Gamma$.
=======================================================================
In this section, we express the “principal parts" of the coefficients $m_{ij}$ in terms of certain coefficients of the powers of the lifting $g$ of the polynomial $f$. Then we use these results to give the principal parts of the coefficients of the $L$-function.
The coefficients.
-----------------
Recall that we can express the coefficients $m_{ij}$ from the coefficients $h_n$ of the power series $F$ and the $a_{ni}$ in the following way $$m_{ij}=h_{pi-j}+\sum_{n\geq d} h_{np-j}a_{ni}.$$ We begin by a congruence on the coefficients of $F$.
[**Notation.**]{} Let $P$ be a polynomial; we denote by $\left\{P\right\}_n$ its coefficient of degree $n$.
[**Lemma 2.1**]{} [*Assume $p\geq d$, and let $0\leq n\leq (p-1)d$; then we have the following congruence for the coefficients of the power series $F$ $$h_n\equiv
\sum_{k=\lceil\frac{n}{d}\rceil}^{p-1}\left\{g^{k}\right\}_n\frac{\pi^{k}}{k!}\quad
[p\pi],$$ where $\lceil r\rceil$ is the least integer greater or equal than $r$.*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} From the definition of $F$, we get $$h_n=\sum_{m_1+\dots+dm_d=n}a_1^{m_1}\dots a_d^{m_d}b_{m_1}\dots b_{m_d}.$$ Since $m_1+\dots+dm_d=n$, we get $d(m_1+\dots+m_d)\geq n$, and $m_1+\dots+m_d\geq \lceil\frac{n}{d}\rceil$; on the other hand we clearly have $m_1+\dots+m_d\leq n$, and we write $$h_n=\sum_{k=\lceil\frac{n}{d}\rceil}^n h_{n,k},\qquad
h_{n,k}=\sum_{m_1+\dots+dm_d=n\atop{m_1+\dots+m_d=k}}a_1^{m_1}\dots
a_d^{m_d}b_{m_1}\dots b_{m_d}.$$ From Lemma 1.2 [*ii)*]{}, since $n<pd\leq p^2$, we have $m_i<p^2$, and $v(b_{m_i})\geq m_i$; thus $v(h_{n,k})\geq
k$, and $h_n\equiv \sum_{k=\lceil\frac{n}{d}\rceil}^{p-1}
h_{n,k}~\left[p\pi\right]$. Since $k\leq p-1$, the same is true for the $m_i$ appearing in the expression of $h_{n,k}$: from Lemma 1.2 [*i)*]{}, we know the $b_{m_i}$ explicitely, and we get $$h_{n,k} =
\sum_{m_1+\dots+dm_d=n\atop{m_1+\dots+m_d=k}}\frac{a_1^{m_1}\dots
a_d^{m_d}\pi^{k}}{m_1!\dots m_d!} =
\frac{\pi^{k}}{k!}\sum_{m_1+\dots+dm_d=n\atop{m_1+\dots+m_d=k}}\binom{k}{m_1,\dots,m_d}a_1^{m_1}\dots
a_d^{m_d}$$ where $\binom{k}{m_1,\dots,m_d}:=\frac{k!}{m_1!\dots m_d!}$ denotes a multinomial coefficient. On the other hand, developing the polynomial $g^{k}$ yields $$g^{k}(X)=\left(\sum_{i=1}^d a_iX^i\right)^{k}=\sum_{m_1+\dots+m_d=k}
\binom{k}{m_1,\dots,m_d}a_1^{m_1}\dots a_d^{m_d}X^{\sum im_i},$$ and we get the result.
We now give a congruence on the coefficients $m_{ij}$ of $\Gamma$.
[**Proposition 2.1**]{} Assume that $p\geq d+3$. Let $1\leq i,j\leq d-1$; we have $$m_{ij}\equiv h_{pi-j}~[p\pi].$$
[*Proof.*]{} From the expression of $m_{ij}$, we are reduced to show that for any $n\geq d$, we have $v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})\geq p$.
Assume first that $n\leq p$; from the expression of $h_n$, we see that the $m_i$ appearing in $h_{np-j}$ are all less than $p^2-1$, and we have $v(h_{np-j})\geq \frac{np-j}{d}$. Let $d\leq n< d+i$; from Lemma 1.1, we have $v(a_{ni})\geq -\left[\frac{n-i}{d}\right]\geq 0$, and $v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})\geq\frac{np-j}{d}\geq \frac{dp-j}{d}>p-1$. On the other hand, if $n\geq d+i$, $v(a_{ni})\geq -\left[\frac{n-i}{d}\right]\geq
\frac{i-n}{d}$, and $v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})\geq\frac{np-j}{d}+\frac{i-n}{d}=\frac{n(p-1)+i-j}{d}\geq
p-1 +\frac{i(p-1)+i-j}{d}>p-1$ since $p\geq d$.
Suppose now that $n>p$; in this case we have $v(h_{np-j})\geq
\frac{np-j}{d}\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^2$ (cf [@ro] Lemma on p242). Thus $$v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})\geq
\frac{np-j}{d}\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^2-\frac{n-i}{d}=\frac{n}{d}\left(\frac{(p-1)^2}{p}-1\right)-\frac{1}{d}\left(\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^2j-i\right).$$ We have $\left(\frac{p-1}{p}\right)^2j-i\leq d$, thus $v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})\geq \frac{n}{d}\left(\frac{(p-1)^2}{p}-1\right)-1$. Since $n>p$, we get $\frac{n}{p}>1$ and $v(h_{np-j}a_{ni})>\frac{p^2-3p+1}{d}-1>p-1$ for $p\geq d+3$.
[**Corollary 2.1**]{} Assume that $p\geq d+3$. Let $1\leq i,j\leq d-1$; we have $$m_{ij}\equiv\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-j}\frac{\pi^{\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil}}{\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil!}\quad
\left[\pi^{\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil+1}\right].$$
Another consequence of the above evaluations is a congruence on exponential sums associated to polynomials over the prime field: since $S_1(f)$ is the trace of the matrix $\Gamma$, we deduce from proposition 2.1
[**Corollary 2.2**]{}
*Assume $p\geq d+3$, and let $f\in \F_p[X]$ be a polynomial of degree $d$; then we have the following congruence on the exponential sum $S_1(f)$*
$$S_1(f)\equiv
\sum_{k=\lceil\frac{p-1}{d}\rceil}^{p-1}\sum_{i=1}^{d-1}\left\{g^k\right\}_{(p-1)i}\frac{\pi^k}{k!}~[p\pi].$$
The minors.
-----------
Our aim here is to give estimates for the principal parts of certain minors of the matrix $\Gamma$. Recall the following expression of a characteristic polynomial $$\det(\I_{d-1}-T\Gamma )=1+\sum_{n=1}^{d-1} M_nT^n,$$ where $M_n=\sum_{1\leq u_1<\dots<u_n\leq d-1} \sum_{\sigma\in S_n}
\sgn(\sigma) \prod_{i=1}^n m_{u_iu_{\sigma(i)}}$ is the sum of the $n\times n$ minors centered on the diagonal of $\Gamma$. We use the results of paragraph 2.1 to give a congruence for the coefficients $M_n$.
[**Definition 2.1**]{}
*[*i)*]{} Set $Y_n:= \min_{\sigma\in S_n}
\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pk-\sigma(k)}{d}\rceil$, and $$\Sigma_n:=\{\sigma\in S_n,~\sum_{k=1}^n
\lceil\frac{pk-\sigma(k)}{d}\rceil=Y_n\}.$$*
[*ii)*]{} For every $1\leq i \leq d-1$, set $j_i$ be the least positive integer congruent to $pi$ modulo $d$, and for every $1\leq n \leq d-1$, let $B_n:=\{1\leq i\leq n,~j_i\leq n\}$.
Note that since $p$ is coprime to $d$, the map $i\mapsto j_i$ is an element of $S_{d-1}$, the $d-1$-th symetric group. We can use the set $B_n$ to describe $\Sigma_n$ precisely
[**Lemma 2.2.**]{} [*Let $1\leq n\leq d-1$; we have $\Sigma_n=\{
\sigma\in S_n,~\sigma(i)\geq j_i~\forall i\in B_n\}$, and $Y_n=\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pk}{d}\rceil-\#B_n$.*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} It is easily seen that for any $1\leq j\leq j_i-1$, we have $\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil=\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil$, and for $j_i\leq
j\leq n$, $\lceil\frac{pi-j}{d}\rceil=\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1$. From this we deduce $$\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pk-\sigma(k)}{d}\rceil=\sum_{k=1}^n
\lceil\frac{pk}{d}\rceil-\#\{1\leq k\leq n,~\sigma(k)\geq j_k\}.$$ Now we have the inclusion $\{1\leq k\leq n,~\sigma(k)\geq j_k\}\subset
B_n$. Finally the set $\{ \sigma\in S_n,~\sigma(i)\geq j_i~\forall i\in
B_n\}$ is not empty, since $i\mapsto j_i$ is an injection from $B_n$ into $\{1,\dots,n\}$; we get $Y_n=\sum_{k=1}^n
\lceil\frac{pk}{d}\rceil-\#B_n$, and that the permutations reaching this minimum are exactly the ones with $\sigma(i)\geq j_i$ for all $i\in
B_n$. This is the desired result.
We are now ready to give a congruence for the coefficients $M_n$ of the polynomial $\det(\I_{d-1}-T\Gamma)$.
[**Definition 2.2.**]{} [*Recall that we have set $g(X)=\sum_{i=1}^d
a_iX^i$. For any $1\leq n\leq d-1$ let $\P_n$ be the polynomial in $\Z[X_1,\dots,X_d]$ defined by $$\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d):=\sum_{\sigma\in \Sigma_n} \sgn(\sigma)
\prod_{i=1}^n\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}.$$*]{}
[**Lemma 2.3**]{} [*Let $1\leq u_1<\dots<u_n= n+s$ and $1\leq v_1<\dots<v_n= n+t$ be integers; then we have the following inequality $$\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pu_k-v_k}{d}\rceil\leq Y_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-1\right)t-s.$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} We first rewrite the sum as in the proof of lemma 2.2 $$\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pu_k-v_k}{d}\rceil=\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pu_k}{d}\rceil-\#\{v_i,~v_i\geq j_{u_i}\}.$$ We know that there are $\#B_n$ integers in $\{1,\dots,n\}$ such that $j_i\leq n$ ; thus there are at most $\#B_n+s$ integers in $\{1,\dots,n\}$ such that $j_i\leq n+s$ since $i\mapsto j_i$ is a bijection. On the other hand, there are at most $t$ elements in $\{n+1,\dots,n+t\}$ such that $j_i\leq n+s$; thus the set $\#\{v_i,~v_i\geq j_{u_i}\}$ contains at most $\#B_n+s+t$ elements, and we get $$\begin{array}{rcl}
\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pu_k-v_k}{d}\rceil & \geq &
\sum_{k=1}^n \lceil\frac{pu_k}{d}\rceil-\#B_n-s-t\\
& \geq & \sum_{k=1}^{n}
\lceil\frac{pk}{d}\rceil+\lceil\frac{p(n+t)}{d}\rceil-\lceil\frac{pn}{d}\rceil-\# B_n -s-t\\
& \geq & Y_n+\lceil\frac{p(n+t)}{d}\rceil-\lceil\frac{pn}{d}\rceil-s-t.\\
\end{array}$$ Now for any $a,b\geq 0$ we have $\lceil a+b\rceil\geq \lceil
a\rceil+[b]$, and the sum above is greater than $Y_n+\left[\frac{pt}{d}\right]-t-s$. Moreover, $[ab]\geq [a][b]$, and the sum is greater than $Y_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-1\right)t-s$. This proves the lemma.
[**Proposition 2.2**]{} [*Assume $p\geq 3d$; then for any $1\leq n\leq
d-1$, we have $$M_n\equiv \frac{\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d)}{\prod_{i\notin
B_n}\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil!\prod_{i\in
B_n}\left(\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1\right)!}\pi^{Y_n}\quad[\pi^{Y_n+1}].$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} We first choose a term in the development of $M_n$ with $\{u_1,\dots,u_n\}\neq\{1,\dots,n\}$; let $u_n=n+t$, $t\geq 1$. From Corollary 2.1, we have $$v(\prod_{k=1}^n m_{u_ku_{\sigma(k)}})\geq \sum_{k=1}^n
\lceil\frac{pu_k-u_{\sigma(k)}}{d}\rceil.$$ Applying Lemma 2.3 to the $u_i$ and $v_i:=u_{\sigma(i)}$, we get that the valuation is greater than $Y_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-2\right)t$. Finally since $p\geq 3d$ and $t\geq 1$, the valuation of the term above is greater than $Y_n+1$ and we need only consider the terms in the development of $M_n$ with $u_1=1,\dots,u_n=n$ to get the result.
From Corollary 2.1 and the description of $M_n$, we get $$M_n\equiv \sum_{\sigma\in S_n} \sgn(\sigma)
\prod_{i=1}^n\left\{\frac{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}}{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil!}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}\pi^{\sum_{i=1}^n\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\quad[\pi^{Y_n+1}],$$ and we can restrict the sum to $\Sigma_n$ from the definition of $Y_n$. Finally for any $\sigma\in \Sigma_n$, we have $\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil=\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil$ if $i\notin B_n$, and $\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil=\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1$ else; thus the product $\prod_{i=1}^n \lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil!$ is independent of the choice of $\sigma$ in $\Sigma_n$. This ends the proof of Proposition 2.2.
Congruences for the minors of $A$.
==================================
In this section, we give congruences for the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial of: $$A=\Gamma^{\tau^{m-1}}\Gamma^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots\Gamma.$$ Recall $A:=(n_{ij})_{1\leq i,j\leq d-1}$, and set $\det(\I_{d-1}-TA):=\sum_{n=0}^{d-1} \M_nT^n$, with: $$\M_n=\sum_{1\leq u_1<\dots<u_n\leq d-1} \sum_{\sigma\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n n_{u_i,u_{\sigma(i)}}.$$ Let us give an expression for $n_{ij}$: $$n_{ij}=\sum_{1\leq k_1,\dots,k_{m-1}\leq
d-1}m_{ik_1}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{k_1k_2}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots m_{k_{m-1}j}.$$ Fix $U=\{u_1,\dots,u_n\}$; replacing the above in $S_U:=\sum_{\sigma\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n n_{u_i,u_{\sigma(i)}}$, we get (where the inner sum in the first line taken over $1\leq j\leq n$, and the other ones over $1\leq i\leq m-1$, $1\leq j\leq n$): $$S_U = \sum_{\sigma\in S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n \sum_{1\leq
k_{ij}\leq
d-1}m_{u_ik_{1i}}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{k_{1i}k_{2i}}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{k_{m-1i}u_{\sigma(i)}}$$ $$\qquad = \sum_{1\leq k_{ij}\leq d-1}\sum_{\sigma\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{u_ik_{1i}}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{k_{1i}k_{2i}}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{k_{m-1i}u_{\sigma(i)}}$$ $$\qquad = \sum_{1\leq k_{ij}\leq d-1}\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{u_ik_{1i}}^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots
m_{k_{m-2i}k_{m-1i}}^{\tau}\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{k_{m-1i}u_{\sigma(i)}}$$
[**Lemma 3.1**]{} [*If the map $i\mapsto k_{m-1i}$ is not injective, we have: $$S':=\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{k_{m-1i}u_{\sigma(i)}}=0.$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} Assume that $k_{m-1i}=k_{m-1j}$ for some $i\neq j$. Then $\sigma\mapsto \sigma'=\sigma\circ(i,j)$ is a bijection from $A_n$ to $S_n\backslash A_n$, and we write $$S'=\sum_{\sigma\in A_n} \left(\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{l=1}^n
m_{k_{m-1l}u_{\sigma(l)}}+\sgn(\sigma')\prod_{l=1}^n
m_{k_{m-1l}u_{\sigma'(l)}}\right)~;$$ Since $\sgn(\sigma')=-\sgn(\sigma)$, the sum above is zero for any $\sigma$.
Thus we can write $k_{m-1i}=\theta_{m-1}(i)$ for some injective map $\theta_{m-1}:\{1,\dots,n\}\rightarrow\{1,\dots,d-1\}$. Let $\II_n$ be the set of such maps. We get a new expression for $S$ (where the first sum is taken over $1\leq i\leq m-2$, $1\leq j\leq n$) $$S_U=\sum_{1\leq k_{ij}\leq d-1}\sum_{\theta_{m-1}\in
\II_n}\sum_{\sigma\in S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{u_ik_{1i}}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{k_{1i}k_{2i}}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{\theta_{m-1}(i)u_{\sigma(i)}},$$
Now we show that each of the maps $\theta_j:i\mapsto k_{ji}$ must be in $\II_n$:
[**Lemma 3.2**]{} [*Assume that the maps $\theta_l:i\mapsto k_{li}$ are in $\II_n$ for any $1\leq t<l\leq m-1$, but that the map $i\mapsto k_{ti}$ is not injective; then we have the equality: $$S'':=\sum_{(\theta_{t+1},\dots,\theta_{m-1},\sigma)\in
\II_n^{m-t-1}\times S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{l=1}^n
m_{k_{tl}\theta_{t+1}(l)}^{\tau^{m-1-t}}\dots
m_{\theta_{m-1}(l)u_{\sigma(l)}}=0.$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} Assume that $k_{ti}=k_{tj}$ for $i\neq j$; consider the disjoint union $$\II_n^{m-t-1}\times S_n=\II_n^{m-t-1}\times
A_n\coprod\II_n^{m-t-1}\times S_n\backslash A_n.$$ The map $(\theta_{t+1},\dots,\theta_{m-1},\sigma)\mapsto(\theta_{t+1}\circ(i,j),\dots,\theta_{m-1}\circ(i,j),\sigma\circ(i,j))$
is a bijection from $\II_n^{m-t-1}\times A_n$ to $\II_n^{m-t-1}\times
S_n\backslash A_n$. Since $k_{ti}=k_{tj}$ and $\sgn(\sigma)=-\sgn(\sigma\circ(i,j))$, the terms in $S''$ coming from $(\theta_{t+1},\dots,\theta_{m-1},\sigma)$ and $(\theta_{t+1}\circ(i,j),\dots,\theta_{m-1}\circ(i,j),\sigma\circ(i,j))$ cancel each other and we are done.
Summing up, we get a new expression for $S_U$ $$S_U=\sum_{(\theta_1,\dots,\theta_{m-1})\in \II_n^{m-1}}\sum_{\sigma\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{u_i\theta_1(i)}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{\theta_1(i)\theta_2(i)}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{\theta_{m-1}(i)u_{\sigma(i)}}.$$
We are ready to prove the following:
[**Proposition 3.1**]{} [*Assume that $p\geq 3d$; then for any $1\leq n\leq d-1$, we have: $$\M_n\equiv \sum_{(\sigma,\theta_1,\dots,\theta_{m-1})\in
S_n^{m}}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{i\theta_1(i)}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{\theta_1(i)\theta_2(i)}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{\theta_{m-1}(i)\sigma(i)}~[\pi^{mY_n+1}].$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} Let $V$ be the valuation of $m_{u_i\theta_1(i)}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{\theta_1(i)\theta_2(i)}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{\theta_{m-1}(i)u_{\sigma(i)}}$; from Corollary 2.1 (note that since $d\geq 2$ and $p\geq 3d$ we have $p\geq d+3$), we get: $$V \geq \sum_{i=1}^n
\lceil\frac{pu_i-\theta_1(i)}{d}\rceil+\dots+\lceil\frac{p\theta_{m-1}(i)-u_{\sigma(i)}}{d}\rceil$$ Assume that $1\leq u_1<\dots<u_n=n+t_0$, and $1\leq \theta_i(1)<\dots<\theta_i(n)=n+t_i$, $1\leq i\leq m-1$; then we have from lemma 2.3 $$\begin{array}{rcl}
V& \geq & Y_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-1\right)t_0-t_1+\dots+y_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-1\right)t_{m-1}-t_0\\
& \geq & mY_n+\left(\left[\frac{p}{d}\right]-2\right)(t_0+\dots+t_{m-1}).\\
\end{array}$$ Assume that one of the $t_i$ is nonzero; from the hypothesis on $p$, we have $V\geq mY_n+1$, and this term doesn’t appear in the congruence. Thus the only terms remaining are those with $\{u_1,\dots,u_n\}$, $\theta_i(\{1,\dots,n\})$ all equal to $\{1,\dots,n\}$, and this is the desired result.
We are now ready to show the main result of this section; we use the notations of section 2:
[**Proposition 3.2**]{} [*Assume that $p\geq 3d$; then for any $1\leq
n\leq d-1$, we have the congruence: $$\M_n\equiv
\frac{N_{\K_m/{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}}_p}(\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d))}{\left(\prod_{i\notin
B_n}\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil!\prod_{i\in
B_n}\left(\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1\right)!\right)^m}\pi^{mY_n}~[\pi^{mY_n+1}].$$*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} We rewrite the sum in proposition 3.1: set $\sigma_0=\theta_1$, $\sigma_1=\theta_2\circ\theta_1^{-1},\dots,\sigma_{m-1}=\sigma\circ
\theta_{m-1}^{-1}$; we get
$$\M_n \equiv \sum_{(\sigma_0,\dots,\sigma_{m-1})\in
S_n^m}\sgn(\sigma_0\circ\dots\circ\sigma_{m-1})\prod_{i=1}^n
m_{i\sigma_0(i)}^{\tau^{m-1}}m_{i\sigma_1(i)}^{\tau^{m-2}}\dots
m_{i\sigma_{m-1}(i)}~[\pi^{mY_n+1}]$$ $$\equiv \prod_{i=0}^{m-1} \sum_{\sigma_i\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma_i)\prod_{j=1}^n
m_{j\sigma_i(j)}^{\tau^{m-1-i}}\equiv \prod_{i=0}^{m-1} \left(\sum_{\sigma_i\in
S_n}\sgn(\sigma_i)\prod_{j=1}^n
m_{j\sigma_i(j)}\right)^{\tau^{m-1-i}}~[\pi^{mY_n+1}].$$
Finally we know from Proposition 2.2 that $$\begin{array}{rcl}
\left(\sum_{\sigma\in \Sigma_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{j=1}^n
m_{j\sigma(j)}\right)^{\tau^i} & \equiv &
\left(\sum_{\sigma\in \Sigma_n}\sgn(\sigma)\prod_{j=1}^n
m_{j\sigma(j)}\right)^{\tau^i} ~[\pi^{Y_n+1}]\\
& \equiv &
\frac{\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d)^{\tau^i}}{\prod_{i\notin
B_n}\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil!\prod_{i\in
B_n}\left(\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1\right)!}\pi^{Y_n}~[\pi^{Y_n+1}],
\end{array}$$ and the theorem is an immediate consequence of the congruences above.
Generic Newton polygons
=======================
In this section we use the results above to determine the generic Newton polygon $GNP(d,q)$ associated to polynomials of degree $d$ over $\F_q$. We determine the Zariski dense open subset $U$ in $\A^{d-1}$, the space of monic polynomials of degree $d$ without constant coefficient, such that for any $f\in U$ we have $NP_q(f,\F_q)=GNP(d,q)$, giving an explicit polynomial, the Hasse polynomial $G_{d,p}$ in $\F_p[X_1,\dots,X_d]$ such that $U=D(G_{d,p})$.
Hasse polynomials
-----------------
In this section, we study the polynomials which appear when expressing the principal parts of the minors $M_n$ in terms of the coefficients of the original polynomial.
[**Definition 4.1.**]{} [*Recall that for $g(X)=\sum_{i=1}^d a_iX^i$, we have set $$\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d):=\sum_{\sigma\in \Sigma_n} \sgn(\sigma)
\prod_{i=1}^n\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}.$$ We denote by $P_n\in \F_p[X_1,\dots,X_d]$ the reduction modulo $p$ of $\P_n$, and let $P_{d,p}:=\prod_{i=1}^{[\frac{d}{2}]} P_i$.*]{}
Our next task is to ensure that the polynomial $P_{d,p}$ is non zero; in order to prove this, we consider the monomials in $P_{d,p}$ of minimal degree and exhibit one that appear (with non zero coefficient) exactly once when $\sigma$ describes $\Sigma_n$.
[**Lemma 4.1**]{} [*For any $1\leq n\leq d-1$, we have $P_n\neq 0$ in $\F_p[X_1,\dots,X_d]$. Moreover this polynomial is homogeneous of degree $Y_n$.*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} The polynomial $(a_1,\dots,a_d)\mapsto
\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}$ contains a unique monomial of maximal degree in $X_d$, which is $X_d^{\left[\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\right]}X_{\overline{pi-\sigma(i)}}$, where $\overline{n}$ stands for the least nonnegative integer congruent to $n$ modulo $d$, and we set $X_0=1$. Moreover its coefficient is $1$ if $\overline{pi-\sigma(i)}=0$, and $\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil$ else: in any case it is non zero modulo $p$. Thus $\prod_{i=1}^n\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}$ contains a unique monomial of maximal degree in $X_d$ with nonzero coefficient, which is $X_d^{\sum_{i=1}^n\left[\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\right]}\prod_{i=1}^n
X_{\overline{pi-\sigma(i)}}$.
On the other hand, we have $\left[\frac{pi-j}{d}\right]=\left[\frac{pi}{d}\right]$ if $1\leq j\leq
j_i$, and $\left[\frac{pi-j}{d}\right]=\left[\frac{pi}{d}\right]-1$ if $j\geq j_i+1$. Thus the degree in $X_d$ of a monomial of $P_n$ is maximal for those $\sigma$ such that $\sigma(i)\leq j_i$. From Lemma 2.2, we see that the monomials in $P_n$ of maximal degree in $X_d$ come from the $\sigma$ such that for any $i\in B_n$, $\sigma(i)=j_i$ (note that such $\sigma$ exist since $i\mapsto j_i$ is injective on $B_n$). If $\Sigma_n^+\subset \Sigma_n$ is the set of these permutations, we get that the monomials in $P_n$ of maximal degree in $X_d$ are the $$X_d^{\sum_{i=1}^n\left[\frac{pi}{d}\right]}\prod_{i\notin B_n}
X_{\overline{pi-\sigma(i)}}=X_d^{\sum_{i=1}^n\left[\frac{pi}{d}\right]}\prod_{i\notin B_n}
X_{j_i-\sigma(i)},$$ with $\sigma\in \Sigma_n^+$, and that there is exactly $\#\Sigma_n^+$ such monomials in $P_n$ (remark that for $i\notin B_n$, $\sigma\in \Sigma_n^+$, we have $\overline{pi}=j_i>n$, and $\overline{pi-\sigma(i)}=j_i-\sigma(i)$).
We now construct $\sigma_0\in \Sigma_n^+$ such that the associated monomial cannot be obtained from any other $\sigma\in \Sigma_n^+$. For $i\in B_n$, we must have $\sigma_0(i)=j_i$ from the definition of $\Sigma_n^+$. Let $i_0 \in \{1,\dots,n\}\backslash B_n$ be such that $j_{i_0}$ is maximal, and set $\sigma_0(i_0)=\min\left\{\{1,\dots,n\}\backslash \{j_i,~i\in
B_n\}\right\}$. Then we continue the same process, with $i_1\neq i_0$, $i_1\notin B_n$ such that $j_{i_1}$ is maximal, and $\sigma_0(i_1)$ minimal among the remaining possible images. The permutation $\sigma_0$ is clearly well defined, and unique. Let $\sigma\in \Sigma_n^+$ be such that $\prod_{i\notin B_n} X_{j_i-\sigma(i)}=\prod_{i\notin B_n}
X_{j_i-\sigma_0(i)}$. Consequently here exists $i\notin B_n$ such that $j_i-\sigma(i)=j_{i_0}-\sigma_0(i_0)$; from the construction we must have $j_i=j_{i_0}$, thus $i=i_0$, and $\sigma(i_0)=\sigma_0(i_0)$. Following this process, we get $\sigma=\sigma_0$. Finally the monomial $X_d^{\sum_{i=1}^n\left[\frac{pi}{d}\right]}\prod_{i\notin B_n}
X_{j_i-\sigma_0(i)}$ appears just once in $P_n$, with coefficient $\prod_{i\notin B_n}\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma_0(i)}{d}\rceil$ and this gives the first assertion.
To prove the second assertion, remark that from the proof of Lemma 2.1, $(a_1,\dots,a_d)\mapsto
\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{pi-\sigma(i)}$ is homogeneous of degree $\lceil\frac{pi-\sigma(i)}{d}\rceil$; thus from the definition of $\Sigma_n$, we get the result.
[**Lemma 4.2**]{}
*i) We have $P_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-1},1)\neq 0$ in $\F_p[X_1,\dots,X_{d-1}]$. Moreover this polynomial has degree less or equal than $\frac{d-1}{2}\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]\left(\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]+1\right)$;*
ii\) we have $P_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-2},0,1)\neq 0$ in $\F_p[X_1,\dots,X_{d-1}]$. Moreover this polynomial has degree less or equal than $\frac{d-1}{4}\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]\left(\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]+1\right)$.
[*Proof.*]{} [*i)*]{} The non vanishing is obvious from Lemma 4.1, since dehomogeneizing a non zero homogeneous polynomial with respect to any of its variables yields a non zero polynomial.
We now show the assertion on the degree; consider the polynomial $(a_1,\dots,a_d)\mapsto
\left\{g^{\lceil\frac{k}{d}\rceil}\right\}_{k}$. From the proof of Lemma 2.1, its monomials are among the $X_1^{m_1}\dots X_d^{m_d}$ with $m_1+\dots+dm_d=k$, and $m_1+\dots+m_d=\lceil\frac{k}{d}\rceil$. Multiplying the second equality by $d$ and substracting the first we get $(d-1)m_1+\dots+m_{d-1}=d\lceil\frac{k}{d}\rceil-k\leq d-1$; consequently $m_1+\dots+m_{d-1}\leq d-1$, and the degree in $X_1,\dots,X_{d-1}$ of the above polynomial is at most $d-1$. From the definition of $\P_n$, its degree in the first $d-1$ variables is at most $n(d-1)$, and finally the degree of $P_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-1},1)$ is at most $\frac{d-1}{2}\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]\left(\left[\frac{d}{2}\right]+1\right)$.
[*ii)*]{} The non vanishing follows from the proof of Lemma 4.1. Remark that from the construction of $\sigma_0$, we must have, for $i\notin B_n$, $j_i-\sigma_0(i)\leq d-2$; thus the monomial constructed in the proof doesn’t contain $X_{d-1}$, and the result follows. In order to give a bound for the degree, we use the same technique that in the proof of [*i)*]{}, remarking that now we take $m_{d-1}=0$, and consequently $m_1+\dots+m_{d-1}\leq \frac{d-1}{2}$. This ends the proof.
[**Definition 4.2.**]{} We define the [*Hasse polynomial for polynomials of degree $d$*]{} $G_{d,p}$ in $\F_q[X_1,\dots,X_{d-1}]$ as $$G_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-1}):=P_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-1},1),$$ and the [*Hasse polynomial for normalized polynomials of degree $d$*]{}, $H_{d,p}$ in $\F_q[X_1,\dots,X_{d-2}]$ as $$H_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-2}):=P_{d,p}(X_1,\dots,X_{d-2},0,1),$$
The generic Newton polygon.
---------------------------
We use the results of the paragraph above to show that for any monic polynomial of degree $d$ over $\F_q$, its Newton polygon is above a generic Newton polygon, and that most polynomials have their Newton polygon attaining the generic Newton polygon.
We identify the set of normalized monic polynomials of degree $d$ such that $f(0)=0$ with affine $d-2$ space $\A^{d-2}$ by associating the point $(a_1,\dots,a_{d-2})$ to the polynomial $f(X)=X^d+a_{d-2}X^{d-2}+\dots+a_1X$.
[**Definition 4.3.**]{} Set $Y_0:=0$. We define the [*generic Newton polygon*]{} of exponential sums associated to polynomials of degree $d$ in $\F_q$, $GNP(d,\F_q)$, as the lowest convex hull of the points $$\left\{ (n,\frac{Y_n}{p-1})\right\}_{0\leq n \leq d-1}.$$
We are ready to prove the main result of this paper.
[**Theorem 4.1.**]{} [*Let $p\geq 3d$ be a prime, and $f\in \F_q[X]$ a normalized polynomial of degree $d$. Then we have $NP_q(f,\F_q)=GNP(d,q)$ if and only if the coefficients of $f$ belong to the Zariski dense open subset $U:=D(H_{p,d})$. Moreover for any polynomial of degree $d$ over $\F_q$, the associated Newton polygon is above the generic Newton polygon.*]{}
[*Proof.*]{} Recall from Proposition $1.1$ that for any polynomial of degree $d$ we have $$L(f,T)=\det(\I_{d-1}-T\Gamma^{\tau^{m-1}}\dots \Gamma)=\sum_{n=0}^{d-1} \M_nT^n.$$ Thus the Newton polygon $NP_q(f,\F_q)$ is the lower convex hull of the set of points $$\{ (n,v_q(\M_n)),~0\leq n\leq d-1\}.$$ On the other hand we have, from Proposition 3.2 $$\M_n\equiv
\frac{N_{\K_m/{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}}_p}(\P_n(a_1,\dots,a_d))}{\left(\prod_{i\notin
B_n}\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil!\prod_{i\in
B_n}\left(\lceil\frac{pi}{d}\rceil-1\right)!\right)^m}\pi^{mY_n}~[\pi^{mY_n+1}].$$ and we get $v_q(\M_n)=\frac{Y_n}{p-1}$ if and only if $P_n(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{d-2},0,1)\neq 0$ in $\F_q$. Moreover, the Newton polygon is symmetric : if it has a slope of length $l$ and slope $s$ it has a segment of the same length and slope $1-s$. Thus, in order to show that $NP_q(f,\F_q)$ coincides with $GNP(d,q)$, it is sufficient to show that the first $[\frac{d}{2}]$ vertices of $NP_q(f,\F_q)$ coincide with the ones of $GNP(d,q)$. From Definition 4.1, this is true exactly when $P_{d,p}(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{d-2},0,1)\neq 0$; this is the desired result. The last assertion is an easy consequence of the discussion above.
[**Remark 4.1.**]{} Let us show that we have $NP(f)=HP(d)$ for any $f$ of degree $d$ when $p\equiv 1~[d]$; in this case we get $\Sigma_n=\{Id\}$ for any $n$, $Y_n=(p-1)\frac{n(n+1)}{2}$ and $GNP(d,q)=HP(d)$; moreover $P_n(X_1,\dots,X_d)=cX_d^{Y_n}$ for some $c\in \F_p^\times$, and $H_{d,p}$ is a nonzero polynomial of degree $0$. In this case we get that $U_{d,p}$ is the whole $\A^{d-2}$, as stated above.
[99]{}
, Exponential sums and Newton polyhedra: cohomology and estimates, Ann. Math. [**130**]{} (1989), 367-406.
, Annulation et pureté des groupes de cohomologie rigide associés à des sommes exponentielles, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris [**328**]{} (1999), 681-686.
, On the zeta function of an hypersurface, Publ. Math. I.H.E.S. [**12**]{} (1962), 5-68.
, Fonctions $L$ associées aux $F$-isocristaux surconvergents I, Math. Ann. [**296**]{} (1993), 557-576.
, Groupes de Barsotti-Tate et cristaux de Dieudonné, Séminaire de mathématiques supérieures, Université de Montréal, Les presses de l’université de Montréal, 1974.
, Newton polygons of $L$-functions associated with exponential sums of polynomials of degree four over finite fields, Finite Fields and Applications [**7**]{} (2001), 205-237.
, Newton polygons for $L$-functions of exponential sums of polynomials of degree six over finite fields, Journal of Number Theory [**97**]{} (2002), 368-396.
, Slope filtration of $F$-crystals , Astérisque [**63**]{} (1979), 113-164.
, $p$-adic numbers, $p$-adic analysis and zeta functions , GTM [**58**]{}, Springer-Verlag 1984.
, Index of $p$-adic differential operators III. Application to twisted exponential sums. Astérisque [**119-120**]{} (1984), 191-266.
, First slope case of Wan’s conjecture, Finite Fields and Applications [**8**]{} (2002), 414-419.
, On the $p$-adic theory of exponential sums, Amer. J. Math. [**109**]{} (1986), 255-296.
, Variation of p-adic Newton polygons for L-functions of exponential sums, Asian J. Math. [**8**]{} (2004), 427-474.
, $p$-adic variation of $L$-functions of one variable exponential sums, I. American Journal of Mathematics [**125**]{} (2003), 669-690.
, Asymptotic variation of $L$-functions of one-variable exponential sums , J. Reine Angew. Math., [**572**]{} (2004), 219–233.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We have performed local tunneling spectroscopy on high quality Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_x$B$_2$ single crystals by means of Variable Temperature Scanning Tunneling Spectroscopy (STS) in magnetic field up to 3 Tesla. Single gap conductance spectra due to $c$-axis tunneling were extensively measured, probing different amplitudes of the three-dimensional $\Delta_\pi$ as a function of Al content. Temperature and magnetic field dependences of the conductance spectra were studied in S-I-N configuration: the effect of the doping resulted in a monotonous reduction of the locally measured $T_C$ down to 24K for x=0.2. On the other hand, we have found that the gap amplitude shows a maximum value $\Delta_\pi= 2.3$ meV for x=0.1, while the $\Delta_\pi / T_C$ ratio increases monotonously with doping. The locally measured upper critical field was found to be strongly related to the gap amplitude, showing the maximum value $H_{c2}\simeq3T$ for x=0.1 substituted samples. For this Al concentration the data revealed some spatial inhomogeneity in the distribution of $\Delta_\pi$ on nanometer scale.'
author:
- 'F. Giubileo'
- 'F. Bobba'
- 'A. Scarfato'
- 'A.M. Cucolo'
- 'A. Kohen'
- 'D. Roditchev'
- 'N. Zhigadlo'
- 'J. Karpinski'
title: 'Local Tunneling Study of Three-Dimensional Order Parameter in the $\pi$-band of Al-doped MgB$_2$ Single Crystals'
---
Five years after Nagamatsu et al. [@Nagamatsu] reported MgB$_2$ to be superconductor, the huge worldwide experimental and theoretical effort seems to have established the main features of superconductivity in this compound. Indeed, the strong electronic coupling to the high-frequency in-plane boron modes ($E_{2g}$ at the zone centre $\Gamma$) and the number of holes at the Fermi level in the $\sigma$ bands are able to explain a transition temperature $T_C$ as high as 39 K [@Chol; @An]. Moreover, it is now demonstrated [@Kortus; @Budko; @Liu; @Giubileo1; @GiubileoPRL; @Szabo; @Gonnelli1; @Iavarone1; @PhysC] that MgB$_2$ is a two-gap superconductor with two distinct energy gaps: a large gap $\Delta_\sigma$ originating from two-dimensional (2D) $\sigma$ bands and a small gap $\Delta_\pi$ originating from three-dimensional (3D) $\pi$ bands. The presence of two bands with distinct superconducting gaps leads to several unusual properties, like the temperature and field dependent anisotropy which dominate the magnetic and transport properties. Anisotropy is related to the intraband and interband electron scattering that can be modified by partial chemical substitutions. In particular, aluminium (replacing magnesium) [@sluski], and carbon (replacing boron) [@ribeiro] have successfully entered in the MgB$_2$ structure, doping the material with additional electrons: small variations of the interband scattering have been predicted for C substitutions, while it has been demonstrated that Al doping can realize a considerable out-of-plane distortions of the B atoms [@Erwin] causing a significant increase of the interband scattering with consequent increasing of $\Delta_\pi$ and decreasing of $\Delta_\sigma$ [@BH].
Experimentally, it has been observed that the superconducting transition temperature of both Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_x$B$_2$ and Mg(B$_{1-y}$C$_y$)$_2$ decreases with doping [@sluski; @bianconi] and in the case of Al (C), superconductivity disappears for $x>0.5$ ($y>0.3$) [@postorino; @renker]. Recently, measurements of the amplitude of the energy gaps have been performed by means of different techniques (specific heat, point contact, STM) on Al doped [@PuttiAff; @PuttiGon] as well as on neutron irradiated polycrystals [@Wang; @Putti06] and on disordered thin films [@Iavarone]. From these studies a quite general trend seems to relate the variation of both energy gaps with $T_C$, however a different behavior of $\Delta_\pi$ has been reported for Al-doped single-crystals, indicating large gap values for doping levels up to 10% and quite small values for higher doping levels [@Gonnelli; @Karpinski]. Results on C-doped samples also are controversial and the analysis of the whole set of data resulted in an extended debate [@Kortus2; @reply1; @reply2] still waiting for a definite answer. It is our opinion that in some cases, disagreement arises due to the non-local nature of used experimental techniques and to the high number of fitting parameters necessary to reproduce the experiments.
In this paper we report a systematic study performed by Scanning Tunneling Spectroscopy (STS) on high quality Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_{x}$B$_2$ single crystals, for different Al concentrations. Directional tunneling along $c$-axis allowed us to selectively probe the $\pi$ band energy gap, with high spatial and energy resolution. In particular, by measuring the temperature dependence of the tunneling spectra, the local $T_C$ was inferred, corresponding to the energy gap measured in the same location. The magnetic field dependence was also studied to evidence correlations of the locally measured upper critical field $H_{c2}$ with the gap amplitude. Moreover, the high spatial resolution of the STS technique allowed to evidence possible non-homogeneities of the superconducting properties on the sample surface with variation of $\Delta_\pi$ depending on the doping.
Single crystals of Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_x$B$_2$ were grown by high pressure method in a cubic-anvil press in the same way as the pure crystals [@13]. The STS experiments were carried out on crystals with nominal 0$\%$, 10$\%$ and 20$\%$ Al content by means of an UHV variable temperature STM. The tunneling junctions were achieved by approaching a mechanically etched Pt/Ir tip to the $c$-axis oriented surface of the crystals. As expected, the STS measurements revealed only a single gap structure in the dI/dV spectra at low temperatures because the probability for direct tunneling into the 3D-sheet of the Fermi surface results much higher than the probability for tunneling into the 2D-part of the Fermi surface which has no states with wavevector parallel to the $c$-axis.
![\[fig:epsart\] Left plots: Low temperature spectra measured in Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_x$B$_2$ for x = 0 (a), x=0.1 (b) and x=0.2 (c). Solid lines represent the theoretical fittings calculated by considering a single gap isotropic BCS density of states with a smearing $\Gamma$ parameter. Right plots: corresponding temperature dependence of the superconducting energy gap $\Delta_\pi$ as extracted from the theoretical fittings. Experimental data are compared to the theoretical BCS behavior (solid lines). ](figura1finale)
In Fig. 1a,b,c we show the dI/dV characteristics measured at $T =
6.5 K$ respectively on pure MgB$_2$, and on samples with 10% (x=0.1) and 20% (x=0.2) Al content. It can be observed that all the tunneling spectra are well reproduced by an isotropic BCS state density with a single gap value $\Delta_{\pi}$, corresponding to the 3D $\pi$-band, and a phenomenological smearing factor $\Gamma$, corresponding to finite lifetime of the quasiparticles, as introduced by Dynes [@Dynes]. These are the only two fitting parameters needed to model the experimental data while the temperature was directly measured. The experiments indicated that pure MgB$_2$ crystals were highly homogeneous with the sample surface characterized by a superconducting energy gap $\Delta_\pi = 2.00 \pm 0.05$ meV, i.e. with less than 3% spread in the values measured in different locations.
The behavior of the doped crystals appeared to be quite different. For the x=0.1 substituted crystals, the 3D $\Delta_\pi$ resulted to be non-homogeneous in its spatial distribution on nanometer scale, with values varying between 1.5 meV $< \Delta_\pi <$ 2.3 meV, as observed in Fig. 1b referring to different locations of the same sample. The spectrum signed (I) for which we found $\Delta_\pi$ = 2.3 meV, was the statistically most present in about 90% of the locations. However, in few cases, we have measured different gap amplitudes as observed in curve (II) with $\Delta_\pi$ = 2.0 meV and in curve (III) with $\Delta_\pi$ = 1.7 meV. The energy gap variations in the x=0.1 substituted samples, can be due to different local Al concentrations arising during the crystal growth process. Indeed, structural changes can occur in crystals when the Al content is increased beyond a critical value $x \simeq 0.1$. These changes include the segregation of a non-superconducting, Al-rich phase and the formation of superstructures along the $c$-axis [@Karpinski]. We notice that the most satisfactory agreement between theory and experiments was obtained for the spectra statistically more present characterized by the largest value of the energy gap, $\Delta_\pi = 2.3$meV, corresponding to a 15% increase of the superconducting energy gap compared to the case of pure MgB$_2$.
For the x=0.2 substituted crystals, statistic in several locations showed quite homogeneous superconducting properties on the sample surface. The measured spectra evidenced single gap features (Fig. 1c) with $\Delta_\pi$= 1.8 meV, with less than 6% spread in the measured values. We notice that this last estimation results much higher than what previously reported for similar doping levels [@Gonnelli].
For all samples, we have performed complete measurements of the temperature dependence of the tunneling spectra in the range between 5K and 40K. In Fig. 1d,e,f, the gap amplitude as inferred from the theoretical fittings is plotted as a function of the temperature. In the case of pure MgB$_2$ (Fig. 1d), a BCS dependence (solid line) of the data (scattered symbols) is found indicating a local $T_C$ = 39K. In the case of 10% Al-doping (Fig. 1e), gaps of different amplitudes all vanish at the same critical temperature T$_C \simeq$ 35 K indicating that variations of the 3D order parameter in the $\pi$-band occur on a scale less than the superconducting coherence length. For samples with higher doping level, x=0.2 (Fig. 1f), a local $T_C$=24K is found.
We also performed a complete analysis of the local response to external magnetic fields up to 3 T, with the tunneling current and the applied field parallel to the c-axis of the crystal. The samples were cooled in zero magnetic field. At low temperature, the field was slowly increased from zero up to 3 T and then reduced to zero again, to evidence any hysteretic behavior. Since the reported spectra were averaged over many vortices passing under the tip [@APL], the main effect of the magnetic field was, as expected, the progressive filling of states inside the energy gap.
In Fig. 2 we show a complete set of data recorded in magnetic field for x=0 (Fig. 3a,d,g), x=0.1 (Fig. 2b,e,h), and x=0.2 (Fig. 2c,f,i). In the first column we show the evolution of the normalized tunneling conductance spectra as measured at $T \simeq
6.5 $K. The field dynamics of the DOS at the Fermi level is reported in the second column where the evolution of the Zero-Bias Conductance (ZBC) is presented. We notice that for pure crystals (Fig. 2d), the ZBC rapidly rises for low fields and reaches a value of about 80% of the normal state ZBC around 0.4 T. As the field further increases, the filling of states becomes much slower, the two different dynamics being separated by an almost flat crossover region. Finally, the gap fills completely around 2.2 T. By lowering the field we observed a similar behavior, with the crossover region slightly shifted to higher fields. We speculate that the crossover region can be associated to the rotation of the vortex lattice in the pure MgB$_2$ [@Qubit], while the hysteretic behavior seems to indicate different vortex dynamics for increasing and decreasing fields, which may be due to geometrical barriers, vortex pinning, and/or lattice re-arrangements.
In the case of 10% Al doping (Fig. 2e), the data refer to locations with $\Delta_\pi = 2.3$ meV. The field dynamics of the DOS at the Fermi level again shows a rapid rising of the ZBC for low magnetic fields. However, for increasing fields, the filling of states tends to saturate and, at 2.5T, it is still possible to distinguish the presence of the superconducting energy gap in the measured spectra. Extrapolation of the data in this region leads to $H_{c2} \simeq$ 3 T, corresponding to a value 30% higher than that observed in the case of pure MgB$_2$. For x=0.2, the ZBC evolution in magnetic field indicates a reduced $H_{c2}\simeq 1.8$ T. We notice that, for both substitutions, the ZBC doesn’t show any hysteretic behavior. Finally, in Fig. 2c,f,i we show the magnetic field dependence of $\Delta_\pi$ for the three samples as inferred from the theoretical fittings. We observe a clear reduction of the gap amplitude for fields up to 0.5 T followed by a region between 0.5 T and 1.0 T, in which no significant variations occur, while pair-breaking continuously increases due to the applied magnetic field. This observation seems to suggest that around 0.5T the contribution to the superconductivity due to the phonon mediated electron-electron interactions in the $\pi$-band itself is not efficient anymore, while for higher fields the energy gap survives due to both the phonon exchange with $\sigma$-band [@Suhl] and/or to the quasiparticle interband scattering.
x $T_C$(K) $\Delta_\pi (meV)$ $H_{c2}$(T) 2$\Delta_\pi / K_BT_C$
----- ---------- -------------------- ------------- ------------------------
0 39 2.0 2.2 1.17
0.1 35 2.3 3.0 1.52
0.2 24 1.8 1.8 1.74
: \[tab:table2\]Summary of our STM results.
Finally, in Table I we summarize our results that in Fig. 3 are compared with the literature. The significant spread of the data reported by different groups is at the origin of the recent, hot debate [@Kortus2; @reply1; @reply2], nevertheless a quite general trend (full lines) for both the 3D energy gap $\Delta_\pi (0)$ and the $2\Delta_\pi (0) / K_B T_C$ ratio as a function of $T_C$ can be inferred regardless to the nature of the measured samples: doped/irradiated/disordered - single crystals/polycristals/thin films. The monotonous increase of the $2\Delta_\pi (0) / K_B T_C$ ratio and the maximum value of $\Delta_\pi (0)$ found for x=0.1 appear as a strong confirmation of the hypothesis due to A. Bussmann-Holder and A. Bianconi [@BH] with our data adding a clear relation between the locally measured values of $\Delta_\pi
(0)$ and $H_{c2}$.
In conclusion, we have performed a systematic study of the local temperature and magnetic field dependence of the 3D energy gap $\Delta_\pi$ in Mg$_{1-x}$Al$_{x}$B$_2$ single crystals by means of Scanning Tunneling Spectroscopy. By working with high quality single crystals we succeded to selectively measure the behavior of the only $\Delta_\pi$, and due to the high spatial resolution of the STS technique, we were able to relate the local values of $T_C$, $\Delta_\pi$ and $H_{c2}$. We have found a reduction of $T_C$ for increasing doping, corresponding to a monotonous rising of the BCS ratio but not of the absolute amplitude of the energy gap. In agreement with recent theoretical models, we have measured the largest gap value ($\Delta_\pi$ = 2.3 meV, 15% larger than in pure MgB$_2$) in samples with x=0.1, corresponding to a local H$_{c2}^{\parallel c} \simeq$ 3T (30% higher than in pure MgB$_2$).
We thank A. Bussmann-Holder and A. Bianconi for comments and useful discussions. J. Nagamatsu et al., *Nature (London)*, **410**, 63 (2001). H.J. Chol et al., *Nature (London)*, **418**, 758 (2002). J.M. An, W.E. Pickett, *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, **86**, 4366 (2001). J. Kortus et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **86**, 4656 (2001). S.L. Budko $\it{et\,al.}$, *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **86**, 1877 (2001) A.Y. Liu et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **87**, 087005 (2001). F. Giubileo et al., *Europhys. Lett.* **58**, 764 (2002). F. Giubileo et el., *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, **87**, 177008 (2001). P. Szabo et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **87**, 137005 (2001). R.S. Gonnelli et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **89**, 247004 (2002). M. Iavarone et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **89**, 187002 (2002). For a review, see: *Physica C: Superconductivity*, Volume 385, Issues 1-2(2003), edited by G. Crabtree, W. Kwok, S.L. Bud’ko and P.C. Canfield. J.S. Slusky et al., *Nature (London)*, **410**, 343 (2001). R. A. Ribeiro et al., *Physica C*, **384**, 227 (2003). S. C. Erwin, I. I. Mazin, *Phys. Rev. B*, **68**, 132505 (2003). A. Bussmann-Holder, A. Bianconi, *Phys. Rev. B*, **67**, 132509 (2003). A. Bianconi et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **65**, 174515 (2002). P. Postorino et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **65**, 020507 (2002). B. Renker et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett*, **88**, 067001 (2002). M. Putti et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **68**, 094514 (2003). M. Putti et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **71**, 144505 (2005). Y. Wang et al., *J. Phy. Condens. Matter*, **15**, 883 (2003). M. Putti et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett*, **96**, 077003 (2006). M. Iavarone et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **71**, 214502 (2005). D. Daghero et al., *Phys. Stat. Sol.*, **2**, 1656 (2005). J. Karpinski et al., *Phys. Rev. B*, **71**, 174506 (2005). J. Kortus et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **94**, 027002 (2005). P. Samuely et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **94**, 099701 (2005). J. Kortus et al. Reply, Phys. Rev. Lett. **94**, 099702 (2005). J. Karpinski et al., *Supercond. Sci. Technol.*, **16**, 221 (2003); J. Karpinski et al., *Physica C*, **385**, 42 (2003). R.C. Dynes et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.*, **41**, 1509 (1978). A. Kohen et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. **86**, 212503 (2005). R. Cubitt et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **91**, 047002 (2003). H. Suhl et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **3**, 552 (1959).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry $(\nu_{e},\thinspace\nu_{\mu},\thinspace\nu_{\tau})\rightarrow(\overline{\nu}_{e},\thinspace\overline{\nu}_{\tau},\thinspace\overline{\nu}_{\mu})$ and the TM1 mixing (a PMNS matrix with the first column fixed to the TBM form) are both well compatible with experiments. If both approaches are simultaneously assumed, all lepton mixing parameters except for $\theta_{13}$ are predicted. In particular, one expects maximal CP violation ($|\delta|=90^{\circ}$), maximal atmospheric mixing ($\theta_{23}=45^{\circ}$), a slightly less-than-TBM solar mixing angle ($\theta_{12}\approx34^{\circ}$), as well as values of $0$ or $\pi$ for the two Majorana phases. We study the renormalization stability of this highly predictive framework when neutrino mass is described by an effective Weinberg operator and by the type I seesaw mechanism, both in the Standard Model and with supersymmetry.'
author:
- 'Werner Rodejohann and Xun-Jie Xu'
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: 'Trimaximal $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry'
---
Introduction
============
The structure of neutrino mixing, the PontecorvoMakiNakagawaSakata (PMNS) matrix, is considered as an important clue for possible underlying symmetries of the three generations of fermions in the Standard Model (SM). Many discrete flavor symmetries have been proposed in trying to understand the observed mixing – see, e.g., the reviews [@Mohapatra:2006gs; @Altarelli:2010gt; @Ishimori:2010au; @King:2013eh; @Feruglio:2015jfa]. In particular, it had long been speculated that the neutrino mixing could be tribimaximal (TBM) [@Harrison:2002er; @Harrison:2002kp; @Xing:2002sw; @Harrison:2002et; @Harrison:2003aw], which could originate from non-Abelian discrete symmetries such as $A_{4}$ and $S_{4}$. However, the TBM mixing predicts zero $\theta_{13}$ which has been excluded by reactor neutrino experiments [@Abe:2011fz; @An:2012eh; @Ahn:2012nd].
It is well understood that $\theta_{13}=0$ in TBM is attributed to $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry [@Xing:2015fdg], which is defined as the invariance of the neutrino mass terms under the interchange of $\nu_{\mu}$ and $\nu_{\tau}$. Therefore in the light of non-zero $\theta_{13}$, breaking the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry has been considered and extensively studied in many references in the past. However, there is a variation of the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry which does not require any breaking and is still well compatible with experiments. It is called $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry [@Harrison:2002et; @Ma:2002ce; @Babu:2002dz; @Ma:2002ge; @Grimus:2003yn], which attaches the CP transformation to the interchange of $\nu_{\mu}$ and $\nu_{\tau}$, $$\nu_{e}\rightarrow\overline{\nu}_{e},\thinspace\nu_{\mu}\rightarrow\overline{\nu}_{\tau},\thinspace\nu_{\tau}\rightarrow\overline{\nu}_{\mu}.\label{eq:mt-38}$$ The $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry allows non-zero $\theta_{13}$ and predicts $\theta_{23}=45^{\circ}$ and $\delta=\pm90^{\circ}$. Consequently it has aroused a lot of interest recently [@Nishi:2013jqa; @Ma:2013mga; @Fraser:2014yha; @He:2015gba; @Ma:2015gka; @Li:2015jxa; @DiIura:2015kfa; @Mohapatra:2015gwa; @Zhou:2014sya; @Joshipura:2015dsa; @He:2015xha; @Zhao:2017yvw; @Nishi:2016wki; @Chen:2015siy; @Fukuyama:2017qxb]. To generate TBM mixing the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry determines the third column of this mixing matrix and there is another $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ symmetry that is responsible for the first or second column [@Lam:2008rs; @Lam:2008sh; @Lam:2011ag]. Those $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ symmetries are assumed to be “residual symmetries”, after the full flavor group is broken. They could be accidental or subgroups of the full flavor group. If the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry is replaced with $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry, then we get a variation of TBM with its first or second column fixed and at the same time we will have non-zero $\theta_{13}$, $\theta_{23}=45^{\circ}$ and $\delta=\pm90^{\circ}$. We study the consequences of this assumption in this paper. General deviations of the TBM mixing with some part being fixed have been discussed in many references [@Bjorken:2005rm; @Xing:2006ms; @He:2006qd; @Albright:2008rp; @Albright:2010ap; @Antusch:2011ic; @He:2011gb; @Varzielas:2012pa; @Luhn:2013vna; @Li:2013jya] and the case that the first/second column is fixed is usually referred to as TM1/TM2 mixing, respectively [@Albright:2008rp]. In the TBM mixing, $\theta_{12}=\sin^{-1}\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\approx35.3^{\circ}$ is a little higher than the global best-fit value $\theta_{12}^{{\rm exp}}=33.56_{-0.75}^{+0.77}$ [@Esteban:2016qun], while in TM1 or TM2 it deviates from $35.3^{\circ}$ with a lower or a higher value, respectively [@Albright:2008rp]: $$\theta_{12}^{{\rm TM1}}=\cos^{-1}\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{3}\cos\theta_{13}}\right)\approx34.2^{\circ},\ \ \theta_{12}^{{\rm TM2}}=\sin^{-1}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}\cos\theta_{13}}\right)\approx35.8^{\circ}.\label{eq:mt-39}$$ Since $\theta_{12}^{{\rm TM1}}$ is well compatible with $\theta_{12}^{{\rm exp}}$ while $\theta_{12}^{{\rm TM2}}$ is disfavored at about $3\sigma$, in this paper we will consider TM1 only.
When the TM1 symmetry[^1] and $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry are imposed on the neutrino mass terms simultaneously, all the PMNS parameters except for $\theta_{13}$ are predicted (in addition to the predictions mentioned above, the two Majorana phases are $0$ or $\pi$). In the near future, this framework can be tested not only by a precision measurement of $\theta_{12}$ and $\theta_{23}$, but also by the confirmation of a maximal Dirac CP phase $|\delta|=\pi/2$, for which hints have recently appeared in T2K [@Abe:2013hdq; @Abe:2017uxa]. Besides, its predictions on Majorana phases could be verified in neutrinoless double beta decay ($0\nu\beta\beta$) experiments [@Rodejohann:2011mu].
Note that both the TM1 symmetry and $\mu-\tau$ reflection symmetry may be residual symmetries of a larger flavor symmetry broken at a high energy scale. Since $\mu-\tau$ reflection symmetry is essentially a generalized CP symmetry, looking for a horizontal flavor symmetry that contains it as a subsymmetry is more interesting and also more complicated. This is an active subject of on-going research and some non-Abelian discrete groups in semidirect product form, such as $A_{4}\rtimes\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{CP}$, $S_{4}\rtimes\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{CP}$, $\Delta(6n^{2})\rtimes\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{CP}$ can be the origin of the mixing scheme that we study here [@Feruglio:2012cw; @Feruglio:2013hia; @Ding:2014ora; @Li:2016nap].
It is most likely that the predictions of TM1 and $\mu-\tau$ reflection symmetries are exact only at the scale where the horizontal flavor symmetry breaks into these residual symmetries. When going to lower energy scales these predictions will unavoidably receive corrections from renormalization group (RG) running [@Ohlsson:2013xva]. Therefore in this paper, we will also study the RG corrections on the predictions from the joined TM1 and $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry. We consider the case in which neutrino mass is described by the effective Weinberg operator, as well as by the most popular realization of this operator, the type I seesaw [@Minkowski:1977sc; @yanagida1979proceedings; @glashow1979future; @mohapatra1980neutrino]. Both the SM and the (Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model) MSSM are assumed.\
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \[sec:basic\], we introduce the TM1 symmetry and the $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry, and study the phenomenology if both are simultaneously present. Then we study the RG running effects on the PMNS parameters in the cases we mentioned above, presented in Sec. \[sec:RG\]. Finally we summarize our result and conclude in Sec. \[sec:Conclusion\].
Trimaximal $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry\[sec:basic\]
========================================================
The TM1 mixing and its symmetry as well as model-building aspects have been studied in many references (see e.g. [@Albright:2008rp; @Varzielas:2012pa; @Luhn:2013vna; @Li:2013jya; @Rodejohann:2012cf; @Shimizu:2014ria; @Ballett:2016yod]). In the following we denote the TM1 symmetry as $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{{\rm TM1}}$. The $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry was originally proposed in Refs. [@Harrison:2002et; @Ma:2002ce; @Babu:2002dz; @Ma:2002ge; @Grimus:2003yn] and later extensively studied in, e.g., [@Nishi:2013jqa; @Ma:2013mga; @Fraser:2014yha; @He:2015gba; @Ma:2015gka; @DiIura:2015kfa; @Mohapatra:2015gwa; @Zhou:2014sya; @Joshipura:2015dsa; @He:2015xha; @Zhao:2017yvw; @Nishi:2016wki; @Chen:2015siy; @Fukuyama:2017qxb]. It can be regarded as a generalized CP symmetry [@Neufeld:1987wa; @Grimus:1995zi] so we use $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\rm CP}$ to denote it[^2]. Although both symmetries as well as their phenomenology have been extensive studied in the literature, their combination which provides a very effective description of the neutrino mixing data with only one free parameter, has attracted much less attention. Therefore in this section, we will discuss the theoretical and phenomenological aspects of this combination.
The explicit transformations of $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{{\rm TM1}}$ and $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\rm CP}$ in the flavor basis are given as $${\rm \mathbb{Z}_{2}^{TM1}:\ }\nu\rightarrow R^{{\rm TM1}}\nu,\label{eq:mt}$$ $${\rm \mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\rm CP}:\ }\nu\rightarrow R^{\mu\tau}\overline{\nu},\label{eq:mt-2}$$ where $\nu\equiv(\nu_{e},\thinspace\nu_{\mu},\thinspace\nu_{\tau})^{T}$ and the two matrices $R^{{\rm TM1}}$ and $R^{\mu\tau}$ are $$R^{{\rm TM1}}\equiv-\frac{1}{3}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 2 & 2\\
2 & -2 & 1\\
2 & 1 & -2
\end{array}\right),\label{eq:mt-1}$$ $$R^{\mu\tau}\equiv\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1\\
0 & 1 & 0
\end{array}\right).\label{eq:mt-3}$$ The matrix $R^{{\rm TM1}}$ has been derived in, e.g., Ref. [@Lam:2008sh] while the form of $R^{\mu\tau}$ is obvious according to the meaning of interchanging the $\mu$ and $\tau$ flavor. Since the $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry is essentially a generalized CP symmetry, it is necessary to check the consistency condition of flavor symmetry and CP symmetry [@Holthausen:2012dk]: $$R^{{\rm TM1}}R^{\mu\tau}=R^{\mu\tau}(R^{{\rm TM1}})^{*}.\label{eq:mt-4}$$
The neutrino mass terms $${\cal L}\supset-\nu_{\alpha}M_{\alpha\beta}^{\nu}\nu_{\beta}+{\rm h.c.,}\label{eq:mt-5}$$ should be invariant under the transformations in Eqs. (\[eq:mt\]) and (\[eq:mt-2\]). Therefore, the mass matrix $M^{\nu}$ should satisfy $$(R^{{\rm TM1}})^{T}M^{\nu}R^{{\rm TM1}}=M^{\nu},\label{eq:mt-6}$$ $$(R^{\mu\tau})^{T}M^{\nu}R^{\mu\tau}=(M^{\nu})^{*}.\label{eq:mt-7}$$ The above two equations can be broken down into equations in terms of the entries of $M^{\nu}$, so one can obtain explicit constraints on those: $$\begin{aligned}
M_{11}^{\nu},\thinspace M_{23}^{\nu} & = & {\rm real},\label{eq:mt-8}\\
M_{12}^{\nu} & = & (M_{13}^{\nu})^{*},\label{eq:mt-9}\\
M_{22}^{\nu} & = & (M_{33}^{\nu})^{*},\label{eq:mt-10}\\
{\rm Im}(M_{22}^{\nu}) & = & 2{\rm Im}(M_{23}^{\nu}),\label{eq:mt-11}\\
M_{11}^{\nu} & = & \sum_{i}{\rm Re}(M_{i2}^{\nu}).\label{eq:mt-12}\end{aligned}$$ The above equations are equivalent to Eqs. (\[eq:mt-6\]) and (\[eq:mt-7\]), which means they are sufficient and necessary conditions for Eq. (\[eq:mt-5\]) being invariant under the transformations. With the above constraints, $M^{\nu}$ can be parametrized by four real parameters $r$, $x_{1,2}$ and $y$: $$M^{\nu}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
r+x_{1}+x_{2} & x_{1} & x_{1}\\
x_{1} & x_{2} & r\\
x_{1} & r & x_{2}
\end{array}\right)+iy\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
0 & 1 & -1\\
1 & -2 & 0\\
-1 & 0 & 2
\end{array}\right).\label{eq:mt-13}$$ As one can check, Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]) is the most general mass matrix that satisfied Eqs. (\[eq:mt-6\]) and (\[eq:mt-7\]). The mass matrix contains only four real parameters; those are the three neutrinos masses and one degree of freedom for the PMNS matrix. As we will show later, this degree of freedom is just $\theta_{13}$. Therefore, the mass matrix with the form in Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]) is highly predictive. It predicts all the parameters except for $\theta_{13}$ in the PMNS matrix, including two mixing angles $(\theta_{12},\thinspace\theta_{23})$, one Dirac phase $\delta$ and two Majorana phases $(\alpha_{21},\thinspace\alpha_{31})$.
The mass matrix is diagonalized by $$(U^{\nu})^{T}M^{\nu}U^{\nu}={\rm diag}(m'_{1},\thinspace m'_{2},\thinspace m'_{3}).\label{eq:mt-14}$$ For $M^{\nu}$ in Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]), due to the residual symmetries, $U^{\nu}$ can be analytically solved: $$U^{\nu}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
2 & \sqrt{2}c & \sqrt{2}s\\
1 & -\sqrt{2}c-i\sqrt{3}s & i\sqrt{3}c-\sqrt{2}s\\
1 & -\sqrt{2}c+i\sqrt{3}s & -i\sqrt{3}c-\sqrt{2}s
\end{array}\right),\label{eq:mt-15}$$ where $(s,\thinspace c)=(\sin\theta,\thinspace\cos\theta)$ are given by $$s=\sqrt{\frac{\Delta+x_{1}-2x_{2}}{2\Delta}},\ c={\rm sign}(y)\sqrt{1-\frac{x_{1}-2x_{2}+\Delta}{2\Delta}},\label{eq:mt-16}$$ and $$(m'_{1},\thinspace m'_{2},\thinspace m'_{3})=\left(r+2x_{1}+x_{2},\thinspace r+\frac{\Delta}{2}-\frac{x_{1}}{2},\thinspace r-\frac{\Delta}{2}-\frac{x_{1}}{2}\right),\label{eq:mt-17}$$ $$\Delta\equiv\sqrt{24y^{2}+\left(x_{1}-2x_{2}\right){}^{2}}.\label{eq:mt-18}$$ Here ${\rm sign}(y)$ implies that we have taken $c=\sqrt{1-s^{2}}$ for positive $y$ and $c=-\sqrt{1-s^{2}}$ for negative $y$. Note that $(m'_{1},\thinspace m'_{2},\thinspace m'_{3})$ computed from Eq. (\[eq:mt-17\]) are not necessarily positive (but always real), so they may be different from the neutrino masses by some minus signs.
Comparing the above result to the standard parametrization of the PMNS matrix $$U_{{\rm PMNS}}=U\thinspace{\rm diag}(1,\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{21}/2},\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{31}/2}),\label{eq:mt-19}$$ $$U=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
c_{12}c_{13} & c_{13}s_{12} & e^{-i\delta}s_{13}\\
-c_{23}s_{12}-e^{i\delta}c_{12}s_{13}s_{23} & c_{12}c_{23}-e^{i\delta}s_{12}s_{13}s_{23} & c_{13}s_{23}\\
-e^{i\delta}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}+s_{12}s_{23} & -e^{i\delta}c_{23}s_{12}s_{13}-c_{12}s_{23} & c_{13}c_{23}
\end{array}\right),\label{eq:mt-20}$$ we can extract the predictions on all the PMNS parameters. It turns out that the predictions differ for positive and negative $y$. Next we will discuss both cases:
- Positive $y$ ($y>0$)If $y>0$, then $c=\sqrt{1-s^{2}}$ is positive. We extract some phases from $U^{\nu}$ so that $${\rm diag}(1,\thinspace-e^{i\beta},\thinspace e^{-i\beta})U^{\nu}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} & \frac{\sqrt{1-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{3}} & \frac{is}{\sqrt{3}}\\
\frac{2i\sqrt{3}s-3\sqrt{2-2s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{6+is\sqrt{6-6s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{\sqrt{3-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{6}}\\
\frac{2i\sqrt{3}s+3\sqrt{2-2s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{-6+is\sqrt{6-6s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{\sqrt{3-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{6}}
\end{array}\right){\rm diag}(1,\thinspace1,\thinspace-i),\label{eq:mt-21}$$ has the same phase convention as the standard parametrization, which requires $$\beta=\arg(\sqrt{3}c-i\sqrt{2}s).\label{eq:mt-22}$$ Comparing Eq. (\[eq:mt-21\]) to Eqs. (\[eq:mt-20\]) and (\[eq:mt-19\]), we get $$\theta_{23}=45^{\circ},\thinspace\delta=-90^{\circ},\thinspace c_{12}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{1}{c_{13}}.\label{eq:mt-23}$$ If $m'_{1,2,3}\geq0$, then the Majorana phases should be $(1,\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{21}/2},\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{31}/2})=(1,\thinspace1,\thinspace-i)$. However, $m'_{1,2,3}$ could be negative, which can be converted to positive by further adding some phases to the right-hand side of Eq. (\[eq:mt-21\]). Therefore the actual Majorana phases depend on the signs of $m'_{1,2,3}$: $$(1,\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{21}/2},\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{31}/2})=\left(1,\thinspace\sqrt{{\rm sign}(m'_{2}/m'_{1})},\thinspace-i\sqrt{{\rm sign}(m'_{3}/m'_{1})}\right).\label{eq:mt-24}$$
- Negative $y$ ($y<0$)If $y<0$, then $c=-\sqrt{1-s^{2}}$ is negative so we need to remove the minus sign of the 12-entry of (\[eq:mt-15\]). Therefore Eqs. (\[eq:mt-21\]) and (\[eq:mt-22\]) are modified to $${\rm diag}(1,\thinspace-e^{i\beta},\thinspace e^{-i\beta})U^{\nu}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} & \frac{\sqrt{1-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{3}} & -\frac{is}{\sqrt{3}}\\
\frac{-2i\sqrt{3}s-3\sqrt{2-2s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{6-is\sqrt{6-6s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{\sqrt{3-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{6}}\\
\frac{-2i\sqrt{3}s+3\sqrt{2-2s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{-6-is\sqrt{6-6s^{2}}}{6\sqrt{3-s^{2}}} & \frac{\sqrt{3-s^{2}}}{\sqrt{6}}
\end{array}\right){\rm diag}(1,\thinspace-1,\thinspace i),\label{eq:mt-25}$$ where now $$\beta=\arg(-\sqrt{3}c+i\sqrt{2}s).\label{eq:mt-26}$$ In this case, comparing with the standard parametrization of the PMNS matrix we have $$\theta_{23}=45^{\circ},\thinspace\delta=90^{\circ},\thinspace c_{12}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{1}{c_{13}},\label{eq:mt-27}$$ and the Majorana phases are $$(1,\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{21}/2},\thinspace e^{i\alpha_{31}/2})=\left(1,\thinspace\sqrt{{\rm sign}(m'_{2}/m'_{1})},\thinspace i\sqrt{{\rm sign}(m'_{3}/m'_{1})}\right).$$
As a summary, we have $$\theta_{23}=45^{\circ},\ \theta_{12}=\cos^{-1}(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{1}{c_{13}})\approx34.2^{\circ},\thinspace\label{eq:mt-28}$$ if the experimental value $\theta_{13}\approx9^{\circ}$ is taken as an input, and $$\delta=\pm90^{\circ},\ \alpha_{21}=\frac{\pi}{2}\pm\frac{\pi}{2},\ \alpha_{31}=\frac{\pi}{2}\pm\frac{\pi}{2},\label{eq:mt-29}$$ where the positive/negative signs depending on the signs of $y$ and $(m'_{1},\thinspace m'_{2},\thinspace m'_{3})$ computed from Eq. (\[eq:mt-17\]). Here the Majorana phases are predicted to be either $0$ or $\pi$. There have been many studies [@Rodejohann:2000ne; @Ge:2016tfx; @Bilenky:2001rz; @Pascoli:2002qm; @Minakata:2014jba; @Simkovic:2012hq; @Joniec:2004mx; @Rodejohann:2002ng; @Benato:2015via] on the option to measure the Majorana phases with upcoming neutrinoless double beta decay ($0\nu\beta\beta$) experiments. It was demonstrated in particular that expected nuclear and experimental uncertainties allow in principle to measure the phases, or at least contrain them non-trivially. The actual physical observable for $0\nu\beta\beta$ is the effective mass $|M_{ee}|$, which has significant dependence on the Majorana phases. For the inverted mass ordering, $|M_{ee}|$ is always nonzero, which necessarily leads to $0\nu\beta\beta$ at some level. For the normal mass ordering, it is well known that $|M_{ee}|$ can be zero for very small neutrino mass; however, $|M_{ee}|=0$ does not mean that $0\nu\beta\beta$ experiments tell us nothing about the Majorana phases. As it has been noticed in Refs. [@Ge:2016tfx; @Xing:2003jf], this case still gives some constraints on the Majorana phases. In the scenario of this work, the relation between $|M_{ee}|$ and the Majorana phases is more explicit because all the neutrino parameters except for the lightest neutrino mass $m_{L}$ have been determined by symmetries or by experiments, enabling us to compute $|M_{ee}|$ explicitly, as shown in Fig. \[fig:mee\]. Note that in this scenario, $|M_{ee}|<10^{-3}$ eV is possible only if $\alpha_{21}=\pi$. So if the future experiments push the upper bound of $|M_{ee}|$ down to $10^{-3}$ eV and still do not observe $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay, then we can draw the conclusion that $\alpha_{21}=\pi$.
![\[fig:mee\]Prediction on the effective mass $|M_{ee}|$, according to Eqs. (\[eq:mt-28\]) and (\[eq:mt-29\]). In the notation $N_{\pm\pm}$ ($I_{\pm\pm}$), $N/I$ standards for normal/inverted mass ordering respectively and the subscripts are the signs of two Majorana phases $e^{i\alpha_{21}}$ and $e^{i\alpha_{31}}$ ($\alpha_{21}$, $\alpha_{31}$ are always 0 or $\pi$ in this model). The light green region is the bound from the global fit, taken from [@Olive:2016xmw].](meeplot){width="10cm"}
We can confront the predictions of the mixing scheme with current data [@Esteban:2016qun]. First we study the predictions of TM1 mixing, namely the first column of the PMNS matrix being $(\sqrt \frac 23$, $\sqrt \frac 16, \sqrt \frac 16)^T$. The $\chi^2$-function is defined as $$\chi^2 = \sum \frac{(x_i - x_i^0)^2}{\sigma_i^2},$$ where $x_i^0$ represents the data of the $i$-th experimental observable, $\sigma_i$ the corresponding $1\sigma$ absolute error, and $x_i$ the prediction of the model. For the normal ordering, TM1 has a $\chi^2$-minimum of $1.14 \, (=0.063+0.000+1.058+0.0223)$ at the values $\theta_{13} = 8.5^\circ$ and $\theta_{23} = 41.6^\circ$. The numbers in brackets denote the contributions of $\theta_{13}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{12}$ and $\delta$ to the total value. In case of an inverted ordering, the $\chi^2$-minimum is $1.20 \, (=0.006+0.000+1.056+0.143)$ at the values $\theta_{13} = 8.5^\circ$ and $\theta_{23} = 50.0^\circ$. Note that TM1 has two free parameters. Combining TM1 with $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry, which in total has only one free parameter, gives for the normal ordering a $\chi^2$-minimum of $3.88 \, (=0.063+2.730+1.058+0.0308)$ at the value $\theta_{13} = 8.5^\circ$. In the inverted ordering, the $\chi^2$-minimum is $5.76 \, (=0.006+4.672+1.056+0.0234)$ at the value $\theta_{13} = 8.5^\circ$.
RG corrections\[sec:RG\]
========================
The residual symmetries we discussed in the previous section may appear at a very high energy scale, which we refer to as the flavor symmetry scale. Due to radiative corrections, the predictions at the flavor symmetry scale may be modified at the low energy scale, at which they are confronted with experimental measurements. If there is no new physics between the two scales, the corrections can be computed without many unknown parameters involved. However, it is also possible that some new physics appear in the middle so that the RG corrections would depend on more unknown parameters. For example, in the type I seesaw mechanism, the masses of right-handed neutrinos could be below the flavor symmetry scale; in this case the RG corrections would also depend on the masses of right-handed neutrinos.
RG running based on the Weinberg operator \[sec:RG-Weinb\]
----------------------------------------------------------
To avoid the dependence on too many parameters, we will first focus on the case that all other new physics scales are above the flavor symmetry scale. In this case, the calculation will be based on the RGE of the SM extended by the Weinberg operator, $${\cal L}\supset\frac{1}{4}\kappa_{\alpha\beta}(\widetilde{H}^{\dagger}L_{\alpha})(\widetilde{H}^{\dagger}L_{\beta})+{\rm h.c.},\label{eq:mt-30}$$ where $L$ is the lepton doublet and $H$ the Higgs doublet. After electroweak symmetry breaking $\langle \tilde{H}\rangle=(v/\sqrt{2},0)^{T}$, the neutrino mass matrix is given by $$M_{\alpha\beta}^{\nu}=-\frac{v^{2}}{4}\kappa_{\alpha\beta}.\label{eq:mt-31}$$ Constrained by the residual symmetries, $M^{\nu}$ depends on four parameters $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$ in Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]). Those parameters are actually highly constrained by neutrino oscillation measurements on the two mass-squared differences $$\delta m^{2}\equiv m_{2}^{2}-m_{1}^{2},\ \Delta m^{2}\equiv m_{3}^{2}-\frac{m_{1}^{2}+m_{2}^{2}}{2},\label{eq:mt-32}$$ and $\sin\theta_{13}$. In this section we will fix them at the best-fit values [@Esteban:2016qun; @Capozzi:2016rtj] as the result of our calculation varies very little within experimental uncertainties. If the lightest neutrino mass $m_{L}$ is also known, then $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$ can be determined by $(\theta_{13},\thinspace\delta m^{2},\thinspace\Delta m^{2},\thinspace m_{L})$. In Sec. \[sec:basic\] we have demonstrated how to compute $(\theta_{13},\thinspace\delta m^{2},\thinspace\Delta m^{2},\thinspace m_{L})$ for given values of $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$. Determining $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$ from experimental values of $(\theta_{13},\thinspace\delta
m^{2},\thinspace\Delta m^{2},\thinspace m_{L})$ is then of course also possible.
However there are some positive/negative signs one needs to choose in determining $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$. The first one is the sign of $\Delta m^{2}$, known as the neutrino mass ordering. Both the normal (NO, $\Delta m^{2}>0$) and the inverted ordering (IO, $\Delta m^{2}<0$ ) should be taken into consideration. The next one is the sign of the Dirac phase $\delta$. The $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry only predicts $|\delta|=90^{\circ}$ but both $+90^{\circ}$ and $-90^{\circ}$ are possible. Besides, as summarized in Eq. (\[eq:mt-29\]), the two Majorana phases take values of $\frac{\pi}{2}\pm\frac{\pi}{2}$, where we have to choose between the positive/negative signs.
![\[fig:running\]RG running of the mixing angles (left panel) and the Dirac/Majorana phases (right panel) in the SM for the normal hierarchy and $m_{L}=0.05$ eV.](thetaplot "fig:"){width="7.5cm"}![\[fig:running\]RG running of the mixing angles (left panel) and the Dirac/Majorana phases (right panel) in the SM for the normal hierarchy and $m_{L}=0.05$ eV.](alphaplot "fig:"){width="7.5cm"}
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](12plot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](13plot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](alpha21plot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](23plot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](deltaplot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8cases\]RG corrections for all the 8 cases, $N$/$I$ for normal/inverted hierarchy and “$+/-$” for $e^{i\alpha}=+1/-1$ where $\alpha$ stands for the two Majorana phases. The result depends on the lightest neutrino mass, which is set at $(1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV for points colored from green to red.](alpha31plot.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}
Therefore, there are four positive/negative signs (and thus $16$ physically inequivalent cases) relevant in determining $(r,\thinspace x_{1},\thinspace x_{2},\thinspace y)$. However, as it can be seen from the mass matrix, for $\delta=+90^{\circ}$ and $-90^{\circ}$, the mass matrix in one case is simply the complex conjugate of the other, so we only need to study one of the two cases. Actually, the result of RG running of both cases shows that the radiative corrections on both cases are the same except that for $\delta$ it differs by a minus sign. This reduces the 16 cases to 8 cases in our analysis. In addition, the case of positive $\delta=+90^{\circ}$ is disfavored by current global fits. For simplicity, we refer to the 8 cases as $N_{\pm\pm}$ and $I_{\pm\pm}$ where $N$/$I$ stands for the normal/inverted ordering and the two $\pm$ stand for the signs of $e^{i\alpha_{21}}$ and $e^{i\alpha_{31}}$, respectively.
We solve the RGEs using the code REAP [@Antusch:2005gp] and compute the RG corrections. The results are presented in Fig. \[fig:running\] for $N_{++}$ and Fig. \[fig:8cases\] for all the 8 cases. We set the flavor symmetry scale at $\Lambda=10^{14}$ GeV. Actually as shown in Fig. \[fig:running\] the RG corrections depend linearly on $\log\Lambda$, so if $\Lambda$ is changed to another value $\Lambda'$, the RG corrections can be evaluated correspondingly by simply multiplying a factor of $\log\Lambda'/\log\Lambda$. Another parameter that may have significant effect is the lightest neutrino mass $m_{L}$. In Fig. \[fig:8cases\] we show the RG corrections for different values of $m_{L}$ by green, yellow, orange and red points, corresponding to $m_{L} = (1,\thinspace20,\thinspace40,\thinspace60)$ meV respectively[^3]. We assume here that strong limits on the neutrino mass scale from cosmology are valid [@Archidiacono:2016lnv] and simply note that the effect of running roughly scales with $m_L$ for values larger than 60 meV.
As shown in Fig. \[fig:8cases\], typically the corrections to $\theta_{12}$, $\theta_{13}$, $\theta_{23}$, $\delta$, $\alpha_{21}$, $\alpha_{31}$ are about $0.1$, $0.001$, $0.005$, $0.1$, $0.05$, $0.1$ degrees respectively, except for some cases where due to some cancellations the RG corrections are suppressed. To understand the cancellation, we take $\theta_{12}$ as example, for which the analytic expression reads [@Antusch:2003kp] $$\frac{d\theta_{12}}{d\ln\mu}=-\frac{y_{\tau}^{2}}{32\pi^{2}}\sin2\theta_{12}s_{23}^{2}\frac{|m_{1}+m_{2}e^{i\alpha_{21}}|^{2}}{\delta m^{2}}+{\cal O}(\theta_{13}).\label{eq:mt-40}$$ Here $y_\tau$ is the tau-lepton Yukawa coupling. The plot for $\theta_{12}$ in Fig. \[fig:8cases\] shows that the corrections in the four cases $N_{-\pm}$ and $I_{-\pm}$ are suppressed, which can be understood from Eq. (\[eq:mt-40\]): the correction is proportional to $|m_{1}+m_{2}e^{i\alpha_{21}}|^{2}$, which can be small if $e^{i\alpha_{21}} = -1$ and $m_1 \approx m_2$. The latter always happens in the inverted ordering and in the normal ordering when the smallest mass $m_1$ approaches $\sqrt{\delta m^{2}}$. Except for some cases with cancellations, the RG corrections generally increases when $m_{L}$ increases. This behavior is very common regarding small perturbations to the mass matrix, which has been studied in Ref. [@Rodejohann:2015nva] from a more general point of view. The reason is because for larger $m_{L}$, the mass spectrum is closer to the quasi-degenerate situation, where the PMNS mixing becomes unstable when the mass matrix suffers perturbations. Besides, among the three mixing angles, $\theta_{12}$ generally receives the largest correction (except for cancellations); this is because the gap between $m_{1}$ and $m_{2}$ is much smaller than that of $m_{1}$ and $m_{3}$ or $m_{2}$ and $m_{3}$.
Since all the corrections are at the order of or even lower than $0.1^{\circ}$, we can draw the usual conclusion that in the context of the SM with the Weinberg operator only, the RG corrections are negligible when compared with current and near future experimental measurements. As well known, if we replace the SM with the MSSM, then according to Ref. [@Antusch:2003kp] the RG corrections to the neutrino mixing would be amplified by a factor of $\tan^{2}\beta$. To illustrate this effect, we compute the RG corrections again in the context of the MSSM with $\tan \beta=20$, and the result is shown in Fig. \[fig:8casesMSSM\]. As one can see, the RG corrections in the MSSM with large $\tan\beta$ are significantly enhanced to measurable values compared to Fig. \[fig:8cases\].
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](12plotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](13plotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](alpha21plotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](23plotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](deltaplotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}\
![\[fig:8casesMSSM\]Same as Fig. \[fig:8cases\] except that the SM is replaced with the MSSM for $\tan \beta = 20$.](alpha31plotMSSM.pdf "fig:"){height="4cm"}
RG running based on type I seesaw \[sec:RG-running-typeI\]
----------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we consider new physics that appears below the flavor symmetry scale. The Weinberg operator itself is UV incomplete and is usually believed to be a low-energy effective operator. Here we consider the type I seesaw realization of this operator only. Heavy right-handed neutrinos $N_{i}$ ($i=1,\thinspace2,\ldots$) are integrated out to generate the Weinberg operator. We consider the scenario that the right-handed neutrino masses (or the seesaw scale) are lower than the flavor symmetry scale. So at the flavor symmetry scale, we should consider the symmetry of the following Lagrangian instead of the Weinberg operator, $${\cal L}\supset-y_{ij}N_{i}\widetilde{H}^{\dagger}L_{j}-\frac{1}{2}N_{i}M_{ij}N_{j}+\rm{h.c}.\label{eq:mt-36}$$
Next we need to specify the transformation rules of $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{{\rm TM1}}$ and $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\rm CP}$ for the right-handed neutrinos. This depends on how we assign the right-handed neutrinos to the representations of the flavor symmetry, which is rather model-dependent. For simplicity, we assume that the number of right-handed neutrinos is three and that they have the same transformation rule as the left-handed neutrinos. As a result, both the Dirac mass matrix $m_{D}$ and the heavy Majorana matrix $M$ will be in the form of Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]). As one can check explicitly, if both $m_{D}$ and $M$ are in the form of Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]), then the light-neutrino mass matrix $$M^{\nu}=-m_{D}^{T}\,M^{-1}\,m_{D}\label{eq:mt-37}$$ is also of the form in Eq. (\[eq:mt-13\]). As we have discussed, each matrix of the form (\[eq:mt-13\]) contains four real parameters thus in the Lagrangian (\[eq:mt-36\]) we have 8 free parameters. The tree-level predictions in Eqs. (\[eq:mt-28\]) and (\[eq:mt-29\]) are independent of the values of these parameters. However, the RG corrections inevitably depend on these parameters. As we have argued, when some new physics such as the right-handed neutrinos appears below the flavor symmetry scale, the RG corrections would usually depend on many unknown parameters, which makes it difficult to evaluate the RG corrections exactly. To understand generally how large the RG corrections would be, we adopt random scattering in the allowed parameter space rather than focus on some specific parameter settings.
![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot12 "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot23 "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot13 "fig:"){width="5cm"}
![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplotd "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplota21 "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution\]The distributions of RG correction in the SM extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplota31 "fig:"){width="5cm"}
We randomly generate 1000 samples with right-handed neutrino masses $M_{1}$, $M_{2}$, $M_{3}$ distributed from $10^{6}$ GeV to $10^{13}$ GeV and the lightest neutrino mass $m_{L}$ from 1 meV to 60 meV. Rectangular distributions are used for $\log M_{1,2,3}$ and $m_{L}$. The positive/negative signs of $\Delta m^{2}$ and Dirac/Majorana phases are also chosen randomly. The Yukawa couplings can be computed once $(M_{1},\thinspace M_{2},\thinspace M_{3})$ and $(m_{1},\thinspace m_{2},\thinspace m_{3})$ have been set. We again use the code REAP [@Antusch:2005gp], which automatically integrates out the heavy right-handed neutrinos when the energy scale goes below their masses.
The results are presented in Fig. \[fig:distribution\], where we can see most RG corrections are distributed in small ranges, e.g. $\Delta\theta_{12}$, $\Delta\theta_{23}$ and $\Delta\theta_{13}$ are most likely less than $0.05^{\circ}$, $0.01^{\circ}$ and $0.005^{\circ}$ respectively. So generally, the deviations are similar to the results in Fig. \[fig:8cases\] where right-handed neutrinos are not introduced. However, large corrections are also possible. We do not find any significant cut-off of the deviations when the number of samples are increased, though the distributions above remain almost the same. This implies the RG corrections could be very large, but would require fine-tuning in the parameter space. For example, when the number of samples is increased to $10^{4}$, we find only two samples with $|\Delta\theta_{23}|>3{}^{\circ}$. Therefore, we can draw the conclusion that generally the RG corrections in the type I seesaw scenario are of similar magnitude as with the Weinberg operator only.
![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot12-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot23-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplot13-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}
![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplotd-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplota21-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}![\[fig:distribution-mssm\]The distributions of RG correction in the MSSM with $\tan \beta = 20$ extended by the type I seesaw. ](distplota31-MSSM "fig:"){width="5cm"}
Again, the RG corrections can be significantly amplified within supersymmetric scenarios. We compute the RG corrections in the MSSM extended by the type I seesaw with $\tan\beta=20$. The result is shown in Fig. \[fig:distribution-mssm\] where we can see that compared to Fig. \[fig:distribution\], the RG corrections in the MSSM with large $\tan\beta$ are significantly enhanced by up to two orders of magnitude to measurable values.
Conclusion\[sec:Conclusion\]
============================
Combining $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection and TM1 symmetry leads to a very predictive framework. We have shown in Sec. \[sec:basic\] that it not only can accommodate non-zero $\theta_{13}$ but also predicts all other PMNS parameters, including all CP phases ($\delta = \pm \pi/2$ and the Majorana phases are $0$ or $\pi$).
With these symmetries, the neutrino mass matrix can be constrained to the form (\[eq:mt-13\]) containing only four real parameters. Given the experimental values of $\theta_{13}$, $\delta m^{2}$ and $\Delta m^{2}$ as input, the mass matrix can be exactly reconstructed for a fixed value of the smallest mass $m_{L}$ and several choices of positive/negative signs. Therefore, for the SM extended by the Weinberg operator, the RG corrections can be exactly evaluated as the only free parameter is $m_{L}$.
We have computed the RG corrections to the scenario, which are in agreement with known results, namely that in the SM they are typically small, but can be enhanced to measurable values within supersymmetric scenarios and within explicit multi-scale scenarios such as the type I seesaw mechanism.
In summary, the mixing scheme we propose here is very well compatible with data and addresses the closeness of $\delta$ with $-\pi/2$, of $\theta_{23}$ with $\pi/4$ and that $\sin^2 \theta_{12}$ is slightly less than $1/3$. If future data confirms those special values of the mixing parameters, the proposed scheme seems an attractive approach to the description of lepton mixing. On the other hand, some deviations could occur in the future, which could either be explained by RG corrections if the deviations are small, or exclude this mixing scheme if they are large. One particularly noteworthy example is the deviation of $\theta_{23}$ from $45^{\circ}$, which was recently hinted by the NOVA measurement [@Adamson:2017qqn] $\theta_{23}=39.5^{\circ}{}_{-1.3}^{+1.7}$ or $52.2^{\circ}{}_{-1.8}^{+1.3}$ . Such a large deviation $(\gtrsim5^{\circ})$ if confirmed by future data, would exclude this mixing scheme embedded in the simple scenarios considered in this paper.
We thank Stefan Bruenner and Ludwig Rauch for helpful discussions. WR is supported by the DFG with grant RO 2516/6-1 in the Heisenberg program.
[^1]: For simplicity, we will refer to the symmetry responsible for the TM1 mixing as the TM1 symmetry in this paper.
[^2]: We prefer the symbol $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\rm CP}$ to $\mathbb{Z}_{2}^{\mu\tau}$ for the $\mu$-$\tau$ reflection symmetry because the latter is widely used for the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry without CP transformation.
[^3]: We do not take $m_{L}=0$ here because for $m_{L}=0$, the RG corrections are almost the same as $m_{L}=1$ meV except for the Majorana phases which are not well defined when $m_{L}=0$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'The photon echo quantum memory is based on a controlled rephasing of the atomic coherence excited by signal light field in the inhomogeneously broadened resonant line. Here, we propose a novel active mechanism of the atomic rephasing which provides a perfect retrieval of the stored light field in the photon echo quantum memory for arbitrary initial inhomogeneous broadening of the resonant line. It is shown that the rephasing mechanism can exploit all resonant atoms which maximally increases an optical depth of the resonant transition that is one of the critical parameters for realization of highly efficient quantum memory. We also demonstrate that the rephasing mechanism can be used for various realizations of the photon echo quantum memory that opens a wide road for its practical realization.'
author:
- 'Sergey A. Moiseev'
title: Photon echo quantum memory with complete use of natural inhomogeneous broadening
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Quantum memory (QM) is one of the key quantum devices for practical realization of various basic protocols in quantum communication [@Briegel998; @Kimble2008] and quantum computation [@Nielsen2000; @Kok2007]. In the last decade, a considerable progress has been achieved in the optical QMs based on the atoms in cavities [@Cirac1997], non-resonant Raman transitions [@Kuzmich2000; @Julsgaard2004], electromagnetically induced transparency [@Fleischhauer2000; @Eisaman2005; @Chaneliere2005; @Novikova2007; @Choi2008; @Appel2008; @Honda2008], and photon-echo QM techniques [@Moiseev2001; @Moiseev2003; @Nilsson2005; @Kraus2006; @Alexander2006; @Riedmatten2008].
The photon echo approach offers promising possibilities for storage of arbitrary multi-mode light fields [@Moiseev2007; @Gisin2007; @Simon2007; @Nunn2008] as demonstrated recently in a storage of 64 [@Usmani2010] and 1090 [@Bonarota2010] temporal modes. Record quantum efficiencies of $69\%$ [@Hedges2010] and $87\%$ [@Hosseini2010] have been also demonstrated for the QM of the traveling light fields in solid state and gaseous media. Moreover even higher quantum efficiency $>90\%$ is predicted for storage of 100 temporal modes in the optimal QED cavity for moderate atomic parameters [@Moiseev2010a]. However there are serious experimental problems in realization of the photon echo QMs with practically vital properties which are discussed in the reviews [@Lvovsky2009; @Tittel2008; @Hammerer2010; @Simon2010]. Especially it is worth noting that recently developed variants of the photon echo QM use quite complicated experimental methods (see below) for realization of very delicate spectral manipulations of the inhomogeneously broadened (IB) lines which restricts the quantum efficiency of the QMs, storage time or spectral width of the signal light field. In this paper we propose a novel simple *active mechanism of rephasing* (AMR-protocol) of the atomic coherence that offers new experimental possibilities for practical realization of the photon echo QM.
In the beginning we briefly outline the experimental methods providing a temporal and spectral manipulations of the atomic coherence excited in the photon echo QM media. Then we propose a basic scheme of the AMR-protocol by using Raman type of the photon echo QM (Raman echo QM) proposed recently in [@Moiseev2008; @Hetet2008b], further developed in [@Nunn2008; @Gouet2009] and experimentally demonstrated in [@Hosseini2009; @Hosseini2010]. Finally we describe how AMR-procedure can be used for original photon echo QM and discuss two perfect realizations of the photon echo QMs where AMR-protocol is protected from the negative influence of extra quantum noise. In conclusion we summarize the advantages of AMR-protocol and outline some of its interesting applications.
Atomic rephasing in the photon echo quantum memories {#sec:Rephasing procedures}
====================================================
In accordance with the basic idea [@Moiseev2001], the photon echo QM exploits complete absorption of the signal light pulse on the resonant IB transition providing thereby a direct pure mapping of the quantum information carried by the signal field on the excited coherence of the multi atomic ensemble. In a free space scheme, the complete absorption of the input light pulse occurs at large optical depth for each isochromatic atomic group of the IB line which is one of the critical requirement for realization of the effective photon echo QM. Subsequent efficient retrieval of the stored light field is realized in the echo signal irradiated in the backward direction in comparison with the direction of the input signal field propagation. Such scenario of the echo field generation is realized in accordance with most desirable reversible dynamics of the light field retrieval. The retrieval is launched by inversion of the frequency detunings for each $j$-th atom $\Delta_j (t>t')=-\Delta_j (t<t')$ of the IB resonant atomic transition at some moment of time $t'$ (the procedure is called the controlled reversibility of IB (CRIB)) and provided by phasematching condition for the echo field emission.
Concrete realizations of CRIB procedure can be fulfilled by various ways, for example it occurs automatically in the atomic gases due to opposite Doppler frequency shifts of the echo field irradiated in the backward direction to the input signal field propagation [@Moiseev2001]. However this scheme does not provide a long-lived QM, so it is more interesting for some quantum manipulations of the stored light field. CRIB procedure can be realized in some crystals by active inversion of local magnetic fields [@Moiseev2003] caused by the dipole interaction with nearest nuclei or electron spins. Very promising CRIB procedure uses the external electric or magnetic fields for control of the solid state photon echo QM media provided by preliminary spectral tailoring of the original IB resonant line into narrowed single pike. Here, the CRIB procedure is fulfilled by changing a polarity of the external electric (magnetic) field gradient effecting the inversion of linear Stark (Zeeman) shifts of the atomic transition [@Kraus2006; @Alexander2006; @Tittel2008]. However, preliminary tailoring of original IB line is accompanied by large reduction of the active atoms which considerably reduces an effective optical depth on the atomic transition.
Reduction of the optical depth can be minimized by using so called atomic frequency comb (AFC) structure of the IB transition [@Riedmatten2008], that offers promising possibilities for broad band photon echo QM [@Usmani2010; @Bonarota2010] demonstrated recently also for the entangled states of light [@Clausen2010; @Saglamyurek2010]. However, even for the ideal AFC, the optimal effective optical depth will be more than $10$-times smaller in comparison with the original optical depth of IB resonant line. Besides, some new specific experimental problems must be resolved in AFC protocol. In particular, the retrieval time can not be shorter of some given value determined by the AFC structure that excludes a temporal flexibility in the readout of the stored information. Perfect tailoring of the AFC structure within the IB line by using the laser hole burning technique is also a serious experimental problem in the presence of additional atomic sublevels situated closely to the active levels used in the QM.
The basic equations {#sec:The scheme}
===================
Basic scheme of the light-atoms interaction for AMR-protocol is presented in Fig.\[Figure1\], Fig. \[Figure2\] and Fig.\[Figure3\]. At time t=0 the input signal light field $\hat{A}_{1}(t,z)$ with duration $\delta t<<T_2$ ($T_2$ is a decoherent time of the Raman transition), carrier frequency $\omega_1$ and spectral width $\delta\omega$ enters along the $+z$ direction in the medium with three-level atoms prepared in the long-lived level $\ket{1}=\prod_{j=1}^{N} \ket{1}_{j}$. The control (writing) field with Rabi frequency $\Omega_1 $ is switched on before the entrance of the input pulse and propagates along the wave vector $\vec{K}_{1}$ at small angle to $z$ axis with carrier frequency $\omega_1^c$. The signal and writing fields are in Raman resonance $\omega_{1}-\omega_{1}^c\approx\omega_{21}$ with sufficiently large spectral detuning $\Delta_{1}=\omega_{31}-\omega_{1}$ from the optical transition $1\leftrightarrow 3$ so that $\Delta_{1}\gg\delta\omega, \Delta_{in}^{(31)}$ (where $\Delta_{in}^{(31)}$ is a IB for the transition $1\leftrightarrow 3$). We assume a very weak intensity of the signal field (in particular it can be a single photon field ) so the excited population of atomic levels $2$ and $3$ can be ignored. To be concrete, below we analyze a rare-earth type of three-level scheme in the inorganic crystals where large IB $\sim 10^{8}-10^{10}$ $s^{-1}$ can be easily realized for optical transition $1 \leftrightarrow 3$ while a spectral width of the transition $1 \leftrightarrow 2$ reaches few kilo-Hertz [@Tittel2008; @Simon2010]. So the spectral broadening of the transition $1\leftrightarrow 2$ is neglegable in a microsecond timescale. In this case, we get the following linearized system of Haisenberg equations for the weak signal (echo) fields $\hat{A}_{12} (\tau,z)$ and for long-lived atomic coherence $\hat{R}_{12}^j$ between level $1$ and $2$:
![Energies of the atomic levels and Raman transition $1\leftrightarrow 2$ due to interaction with the probe field $A_1$ and writing field $\Omega_1$ (two left arrows) and with echo field $A_2$ and reading field $\Omega_2$ (two right arrows). Black small arrows show the wave vectors of the fields. $|\Omega_1|^2/\Delta_1$ is Stark shift of Raman transition.[]{data-label="Figure1"}](Figure1){width="40.00000%" height="30.00000%"}
![The rephasing pulse $\Omega_R$ is switched on adiabatically on the transition $1\leftrightarrow3$ that causes a Stark shift (dependent on $\Delta_{13}^j$ with an opposite sign in comparison with the Stark shifts induced by the control fields $\Omega_1$ and $\Omega_2$) leading to rephasing of the excited Raman coherence $\hat{R}_{12}^j$. []{data-label="Figure2"}](Figure2){width="40.00000%" height="30.00000%"}
![Basic AMR-protocol. Temporal sequence of the interaction with weak signal ($A_1$) and echo ($A_2$) fields (filled blue shapes); writing ($\Omega_1$) and reading ($\Omega_2$) control fields are applied together with the weak light fields; $\Omega_R$ is a rephasing control laser pulse.[]{data-label="Figure3"}](Figure3){width="50.00000%" height="25.00000%"}
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main A_po1}
- (-1)^{\nu}
\textstyle{\partial \over {\partial z}} \hat {A}_{\nu} (\tau_{\nu},z) =
\nonumber \\
i\textstyle{\beta _{\nu} \over {2 }}\Big (
\chi \hat {A}_{\nu} (\tau_{\nu},z)
+ \frac{\Omega _{\nu} (t)}{g_{\nu} }
\langle\textstyle{{\hat {R}_{12}^{j} }\over {\Delta _{\nu}+\Delta_{31}^j}}\rangle
\Big ),\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main R_12}
\textstyle{\partial \over {\partial \tau_{\nu}}}\hat {R}_{12}^j = &
i\textstyle{{\Omega _{\nu}^\ast (\tau_{\nu}) g_{\nu} \hat {A}_{\nu} (\tau_{\nu},z_j )}\over{\Delta _{\nu}+\Delta_{31}^j }}
-i \delta \omega_ {\nu}(\Delta_{31}^j) \hat {R}_{12}^j,\end{aligned}$$
where we have used the moving system of coordinates: $t<t^{\prime}$, (${\nu}=1$), $\tau_{1}=t-z/{v_1}$, $z=z$, and for retrieval: $t>t^{\prime}$, (${\nu}=2$), $\tau_{2}=t+Z/{v_2}$, $z=z$, $\delta \omega_ {\nu}(\Delta_{31}^j)=\delta_{\nu}+\textstyle{{|\Omega_{\nu}(t)|^2 } f_{\nu}(\Delta_{31}^j)}$, $\delta_{\nu}=\Delta_{21}-\textstyle{{|\Omega_{\nu}(\tau_{\nu})|^2 }\over{\Delta _{\nu}}}$, $f_{\nu}(\Delta_{31}^j)=\textstyle{{1 }\over{\Delta _{\nu}}}-
\textstyle{{1 }\over{\Delta _{\nu}+\Delta_{31}^j }}$, $\nu=1 (2)$ corresponds to the signal (echo) field. For the signal and echo fields we have $\hat{E}_{\nu}(\tau_{\nu},z)=\hat{A}_{\nu}(\tau_{\nu},z)\exp \{-i\omega _{\nu}
(t+(-1)^{\nu}n_{\nu} z/c)\}$, $n_\nu$ is the refractive index for the signal and echo fields; for the control fields with Rabi frequency $\tilde{\Omega} _{\nu} (t,\vec{r}) =
\Omega _{\nu} (\tau_{\nu} )\exp \{ - i\omega _{\nu}^c t+i\vec {K}_\nu \vec {r}\}$, $v_{\nu} = {\partial \omega }/{\partial k}|_{\omega =
\omega _{\nu} }$ are group velocities for the signal (echo) in the absence of interaction with atoms, and $\beta_{\nu} =2\pi (n_o S)\vert
g_{\nu}\vert ^2/{v_{\nu}}$ with atomic density $n_{o}$, photon-atom coupling constants $g_{\nu}$, and cross section of the signal (echo) fields $S$; and for the atomic coherences $\hat {P}_{12}^j (t) =
\hat {R}_{12,\nu}^j (t)\exp \{ i\varphi _{\nu} (\vec{r},z)- i(\omega
_{\nu}-\omega_{\nu}^c)(t+(-1)^{\nu}n_{\nu} z/c) \}$, $\Delta_{21}=\omega_{21}-\omega_{1}+\omega_{1}^s$, $\varphi _{\nu} (\vec{r},z) = -((-1)^{\nu}n_{\nu}\omega _{\nu}^c z / c + \vec
{K}_{\nu} \vec {r})$, $\vec {K}_{\nu}$ is the wave vector of the control fields, $\langle...\rangle$ means an ensemble averaging over spectral detunings $\Delta_{31}^j$ of IB on the transition $1\leftrightarrow 3$ for atoms with spatial coordinates $z_j \approx z $: $\langle...\rangle =\int
{d\Delta _{31,\nu}^j}$ ${G(\Delta _{31,\nu}^j )...}$, $\chi=\langle\textstyle{{ 1 }\over { \Delta _{\nu}+\Delta_{31}^{j} }}\rangle$.
In the equations (1),(2), we have used slowly varied optical coherence $\hat R_{13}(t)$ which follows adiabatically to temporal evolution of the signal (echo) field and atomic coherence $\hat R_{12}^j (t )$ as $\hat R_{13}^j (t) \cong \frac{g_{\nu} \hat {A}_{\nu} (t,z_j )+ \Omega
_{\nu}(t) \hat R_{12}^j (t )}{\Delta _{1} + \Delta _{31}^j }$ and $\hat {R}_{11}^j (t )\approx 1, \hat {R}_{22}^j (t )=\hat {R}_{33}^j (t )=0$.
Storage {#sec:Storage}
=======
Similarly to the main idea of photon echo QM [@Moiseev2001], we assume that IB broadening on the Raman transition outreaches the light field width and the resonant transition has large enough optical depth. By taking into account these spectral conditions, we launch the signal field into the medium at $\tau=0$. The probe pulse will be completely absorbed almost during the time duration of the light pulse $\tau \cong \delta t$. After the absorption we slowly switch off the control field $\Omega_{\nu}(t > \delta t)\rightarrow 0$, so only the atomic coherence on the transition $1 \leftrightarrow 2$ will be created in the atomic system. By taking into account linear equations (1),(2) below we will analyze only the behavior of the observable values of the light field ${A}_{\nu} (\tau_{\nu},z)$ and atomic coherence $ R_{12}^j (\tau_{\nu} )$ that is sufficient for understanding of the main properties of the analyzed QM. By assuming that the control field amplitude $\Omega _{\nu=1} (\tau_{\nu} )$ is constant during the interaction with probe field ${A}_{1} (\tau_{\nu},z)$, we find ${A}_{1} (\tau_{1}>\delta t,z)\cong 0$ for the optically dense media and the excited atomic coherence ${R}_{12}^j (T_{a}>\delta t)= i\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over{\Delta _{1}+\Delta_{31}^j}}
\exp\{-i \delta \omega_ {1} (\Delta_{32}^j) (T_{a}-z/{v_1}) \} \tilde {A}_{1} [\delta \omega_ {1}(\Delta_{31}^j),z]$ where
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq444}
\tilde{A}_{1} (\omega , z )=
\exp\{ \textstyle{\beta _{1} \over {2 }}[ i \chi - B_{1} (\omega) ] z \} \tilde{A}_{1} (\omega , 0),\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq444}
B_{1} (\omega)=
-\textstyle{{1 }\over {g_{1}}} \int {du}
\tilde G_1 (u)/[\gamma+i(\Delta_{21}-u-\omega)],\end{aligned}$$
where $\tilde{A}_{1} (\omega , z )=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp\{ -i\omega \tau \}{A}_{1} (\tau , z ) {d\tau}$, $\tilde G_1 (u)=G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {u}}-\Delta_1)$, $\gamma$ is a negligibly small decay constant of the atomic coherence.
By using Eqs. (3), (4), we find the absorption coefficient $ \beta _{1} Re[ B_{1} (\omega)]=\textstyle{{\pi \beta _{1} }\over {g_{1}}}
G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{21}-\omega}}-\Delta_1)$ on the frequency detuning $\omega$. The maximum absorption coefficient will be on the frequencies $\omega$ close to $\omega_o=\Delta_{21}-\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{1}}}$ where the function $G(0)$ has a maximum. It is also clear that $ Im[ B_{1} (\omega_o)]\cong 0$ for small value $|\omega-\omega_o|\ll \Delta_{in}^{31}$, respectively. The value ${|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{1}}$ is a Stark shift of the IB Raman transition $1 \leftrightarrow 2$ induced by the control field $\Omega_{1}$.
After absorption the probe field (at time $\tau_1=T_a$) we switch of the control field during $T_a<t<T_s$ for long-lived storage of the light field so ${R}_{12}^j (T_s)=
\exp\{-i \int_{T_a}^{T_s} \delta \omega_ {1} (\Delta_{31}^j, \tau_{1}) {d\tau_1} \} {R}_{12}^j (T_a)$. We note that switching of the control field $\Omega_1$ freezes further dephasing of the atomic coherence. Below we propose a AMR procedure for rephasing of the excited coherence $R_{12}$ by launching of one additional nonresonant control laser pulse.
AMR-protocol for control of atomic coherence {#sec:AMR-procedure}
============================================
The principle spectral scheme of the rephasing process is depicted in the Fig. \[Figure2\]. We launch a nonresonant control light pulse $\Omega_R (\tau)$ coupling only the atomic levels $1$ and $3$. Carrier frequency of the rephasing pulse coincides with carrier frequency of the signal field. It is well-known that the selective interaction of the control field with the transition $1\rightarrow3$ can be experimentally realized by exploiting the properties of allowed and forbidden atomic transitions or frequency vicinity between the carrier frequency and the atomic transition (see also below). Here, the evolution of atomic coherence $R_{12}^j$ is determined by the following equation.
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main R_12}
\textstyle{\partial \over {\partial \tau_{\nu}}}{R}_{12}^j = &
-i \delta \omega_ {R}(\Delta_{31}^j,\tau) {R}_{12}^j,\end{aligned}$$
where the frequency detuning
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main delta_R}
\delta \omega_ {R}(\Delta_{31}^j,\tau)=\delta_{R} (\tau)-\textstyle{{|\Omega_{R}(\tau)|^2 } f_{1}(\Delta_{31}^j)},\end{aligned}$$
where $\delta_{R}(\tau)=\Delta_{21}+\textstyle{{|\Omega_{R}(\tau)|^2 }\over{\Delta _{1}}}$. We note that the frequency shift $\delta \omega_ {R}(\Delta_{31}^j,\tau)$ gets an opposite frequency dependence on the atomic detuning $\Delta_{31}^j$ in comparison with the frequency shift in Eq. (2). This is a result that the rephasing nonresonant field couples the atomic states $1 \leftrightarrow 3$ but not the states $2 \leftrightarrow 3$. Here, we have also assumed a slowly (adiabatically) varying amplitude of the control field $\Omega_{R}(\tau)$ that excludes any real atomic transition $1\leftrightarrow3$. However, below we also discuss an additional method which have to be applied for complete elimination of negative influence caused by the spontaneous induced transition $1\rightarrow 2$ during the rephasing procedure.
We apply the rephasing field $\Omega_{R}(\tau)$ only for finite temporal duration $T_R$. The switching of the rephasing pulse results to the following atomic coherence
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main R_12}
{R}_{12}^j (T_s+T_R)=
\exp\{-i \int\limits_{T_s}^{T_s+T_R} \delta \omega_ {R} (\Delta_{31}^j, \tau) {d\tau} \} {R}_{12}^j (T_s)
\nonumber \\
=i\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over{\Delta _{1}+\Delta_{31}^j}}
\exp\{-i \theta +i f_{1} (\Delta_{31}^j)P(S,R) \}
\tilde {A}_{1} [\delta \omega_ {1}(\Delta_{31}^j),z],\end{aligned}$$
where $\theta=\int_{-\infty}^{T_s} \delta_ 1 {d\tau} +\int_{T_s}^{T_s+T_R} \delta_R {d\tau}$ is a constant phase shift, the factor $P(S,R)=\int_{T_s}^{T_s+T_R} |\Omega_{R} (\tau)|^2 {d\tau}
- \int_{-\infty}^{T_s} |\Omega_{1} (\tau_1)|^2 {d\tau_1}$ determines conditions of the atomic rephasing. For some fixed temporal duration $T_R'$, the factor $P(S,R)=0$ that means a complete recovering of the atomic coherence ${R}_{12}$. Below we use larger temporal duration $T_R>T_R'$ where the rephased coherence is realized again but with opposite atomic phase shifts for each isochromatic group. For simplicity we use equaled magnitudes of the control fields $\Omega_1 = \Omega_R$ with adiabatic switching of the rephasing pulse at time $t=T_s+T_R$ ($\Omega_{R} (\tau >T_s+T_R)=0$). By assuming a large enough temporal duration $T_R$ (for example $T_R=2 T_s$ or larger) we have prepared the atomic system ($R_{12}$) for readout of the stored signal light field.
Echo signal irradiation {#sec:Echo irradiation}
=======================
Here we launch the readout control pulse $\Omega_{2} (\tau_2)$ at $\tau_2>T_s+T_R$ in the almost opposite direction in comparison with the first writing control pulse in order to provide phasematching condition and propagation of the echo field in the backward direction to the signal light pulse (see also the details in [@Moiseev2008]). In this case we prepare the initial atomic state on the second ground level and exploit larger wave vectors of the writing and reading control laser fields that leads us the following initial atomic coherence ${R}_{12,in}^j (T_s+T_R) ={R}_{12}^j (T_s+T_R)\exp\{i \delta k(\Delta_{31}^j) z\}$, where the appropriate value of $\delta k$ provides the phasemismatch condition (see below) due to using an difference of energies between level 1 and 2. In order to satisfy a temporally reversible behavior we exploit the same amplitude of the reading control field $\Omega_{2} =\Omega_{1}$ during the echo signal emission and the same frequency detuning $\Delta_2=\Delta_1$.
Evolution of the light field dynamics is determined by the equations (1) and (2) with index $\nu=2$. Initially, the launched reading pulse will only recover the macroscopic atomic coherence ${R}_{12}$ during temporal interval $T_s-T_a$ so the complete rephasing of the atomic coherence will occur later at $t\cong T_R+T_s=3 T_s$. By taking into account the initial state in Eq. (7), we find the following equation for the Fourier component of the echo field $\tilde {A}_{2} (\omega,z)$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{main A_echo}
- \textstyle{\partial \over {\partial z}} \tilde {A}_{2} (\omega,z) =
\textstyle{\beta _{\nu} \over {2 }} \Big ( i \chi
-B_1 (\omega) \Big )\tilde {A}_{2} (\omega,z)
\nonumber \\
-\exp\{i(\omega T_R -\theta)\}
\}\frac{\pi\beta}{g_1}\int \frac{{d\Delta} e ^{i\delta k (\Delta) z }G(\Delta) |\Omega_1|^2}{(\Delta_1+\Delta)^2}
\nonumber \\
\exp\{+i P (S,R) f_1(\Delta)+\textstyle{\beta _{\nu} \over {2 }}\Big ( i \chi-B_1[\delta\omega_1(\Delta)] \Big )z \}
\nonumber \\
\delta(\omega-\delta\omega_1(\Delta))
\tilde {A}_{1} (\delta\omega_1(\Delta),0),\end{aligned}$$
where $\theta$ is some constant phase shift.
By integrating (8) over the delta-function $\delta(\omega-\delta\omega_1(\Delta))$ with substitution $u=\textstyle{{|\Omega_1|^2} \over {\Delta+\Delta_1}}$, we find the following solution
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{A_echo}
\tilde {A}_{2} (\omega,z=0)=
-\exp\{-i\theta+i \omega ( T_R +T_s)\}
\nonumber \\
\textstyle{{\pi }\over {g_{1}}}
\frac{G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{21}-\omega}}-\Delta_1)}
{\Big( B_1 (\omega)-i[\chi+\delta k(\omega)/\beta _{1}] \Big)}
\tilde {A}_{1} (\omega,0),\end{aligned}$$
where we have taken into account $T_s=P (S,R)/|\Omega_1|^2$ and large optical depth of the Raman transition $Re[ B_1 (\omega)] \beta L >>1$.
The function $G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{21}-\omega}}-\Delta_1)$ reaches a maximum while $Im [B_1(\omega)]\cong (\omega-\omega') B_1(\omega ')_{\omega'} ' $ close to the frequency detuning $\omega '=\Delta_{21}-|\Omega_1|^2/{\Delta_1}$ (center of the input pulse spectrum). Therefore as it is seen in Eq.(9), we can satisfy the phase matching condition by using of the relation $\delta k(\omega) \cong -\beta_1 \chi+ \delta\kappa '_{\omega '} (\omega-\omega ')$. So the denominator in Eq.(9) can be simplified for narrow spectral width of the input light field as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\label{denominator}
{\Big( B_1 (\omega)-i[\chi+\delta k(\omega)/\beta _{1}] \Big)}\cong
\nonumber \\
\textstyle{{\pi }\over {g_{1}}} G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{21}-\omega}}-\Delta_1)
+i (\omega-\omega ') [B_1(\omega ')_{\omega'} '- \delta\kappa '_{\omega '}]\cong
\nonumber \\
\textstyle{{\pi }\over {g_{1}}}G(\textstyle{{|\Omega_{1}|^2 }\over {\Delta_{21}-\omega}}-\Delta_1)
\exp\{i (\omega-\omega ') \delta \tau\},\end{aligned}$$ where $\delta \tau\cong \textstyle{{g_{1} }\over {\pi}}
(B_1(\omega ')_{\omega'} '- \delta\kappa '_{\omega '}/\beta _{1})/{G(0)}$. Finally after the Fourier transformation we find the echo field
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{A_echo_t}
{A}_{2} (\tau,z=0)=
\nonumber \\
-\exp\{i (\omega '\delta \tau-\theta)\}
{A}_{1} (\tau-T_R-T_s+\delta\tau,z=0).\end{aligned}$$
As seen in Eq.(10), the echo field completely reproduces the input signal field similar to AFC protocol while we remind that usual scenario of the photon echo QM [@Moiseev2001] leads to the temporally reversed shape to the signal field. The original temporal shape of the echo field in AMR-protocol is caused by the same temporal behavior of the atomic coherence on each spectral component of the IB line. Here, we have to note that absence of the temporal reversibility in light-atoms dynamics can lead to unreversible behavior due to spectral dispersion in echo field emission (see denominator in Eq.(9)). However the weak dispersion leads only to an additional time delay $-\delta\tau$ and phase shift $\omega '\delta \tau$ which is possible for narrow enough spectral width of the signal field.
The described scheme of QM needs additional analysis and some improvement since the rephasing laser pulse induces spontaneous Raman transitions $|1>\rightarrow |2>$ so a direct use of the schemes depicted in Figs.1-3 leads to extra quantum noises in the irradiated echo field. Below we describe the procedure providing complete elimination of any drawbacks caused by the spontaneous transitions.
Let us consider four level realization of the described QM protocol depicted in Fig.\[Figure4\] where an additional (buffer) level 4 could be some hyperfine sublevel similar to other ground levels 1 and 2.
![Atomic transitions in four level systems where first two arrows indicate the input $A_1$ and writing $\Omega_2$ fields, then $\pi$- pulse transfer the atoms from level 2 to the level 4; laser pulse $\Omega_R$ rephases the atomic coherence $R_{14}$ and leads to spontaneous transitions of atoms on level 2 (dotted waved arrow directed to level 2); the additional atomic population $\delta\rho$ of level $2$ is transferred to the level $4$ by second $\pi$ pulse; last two arrows indicate the reading $\Omega_2$ and echo $A_2$ fields.[]{data-label="Figure4"}](Figure4){width="40.00000%" height="40.00000%"}
Here, we assume that the transition $|1>\leftrightarrow |4>$ is forbidden for the Raman transitions realized during the storage and echo field retrieval. Before rephasing of the excited atomic coherence $R_{12}$ by the laser pulse $\Omega_R$, we transfer the coherence $R_{12}$ to the long-lived coherence $R_{14}$ by resonant $\pi$-pulse on the transition $|2>\leftrightarrow |4>$. Then we apply the laser pulse $\Omega_R$ which rephases now the coherence $R_{14}$ that follows the equations similar to Eqs.(5),(6). Rephasing of coherence $R_{14}$ is accompanied by some additional population $\delta\rho_2$ of level $2$ due to the spontaneous Raman transitions caused by the rephasing pulse $\Omega_R$ (see Fig.\[Figure4\]). After that we can apply second $\pi$-pulse on the transition $|2>\leftrightarrow |4>$ for transfer of the rephased coherence $R_{14}$ to the coherence $R_{12}$ and remove the atomic population $\delta\rho_2$ to the level $4$. Thereby the coherence $R_{12}$ is prepared for retrieval of the stored information in the echo field $A_2$ without any quantum noise since all the atoms excited by the spontaneous Raman transitions will stay on the level 4.
Finally we note that the described procedure of AMR can be applied for original scheme of the photon echo QM [@Moiseev2001; @Moiseev2003] where the input signal pulse is absorbed on the optical transition $|1>\leftrightarrow |3>$. In this case we have to use large enough spectral detuning $\Delta_1 \gg |\Delta_{13}^j|$ for the rephasing pulse so that the frequency detunings during the rephasing stage will be given by ${\Omega_R^2}/(\Delta_1 +\Delta_{13}^j)\cong {\Omega_R^2}/{\Delta_1}-\Delta_{13}^j|\Omega_R/{\Delta_1}|^2$. Here, we get the same spectral shape of IB as it takes place for the absorption of the signal light field. Moreover by taking into account that factor $f_R=|\Omega_R/{\Delta_1}|^2$ can be close to unity, we can rephase the excited atomic coherence $R_{13}$ (after transfer to the long lived coherence $R_{12}$) within the same temporal scale and eliminate thereby the negative drawbacks caused by the spontaneous transitions on the level $2$ as it is described in previous section.
Conclusion {#sec:Conclusion}
==========
We have described a novel simple scheme of the photon echo QM where the rephasing of the atomic coherence (AMR procedure) is realized by using of additional nonresonant interaction with control laser field. We have also demonstrated that the proposed atomic rephasing can be realized without negative influence of the quantum noises by using an additional buffer level $4$ for the atoms excited by the spontaneous Raman transitions during the rephasing stage. We have shown that AMR procedure can be used for Raman echo QM and for usual photon echo QM. In the last case we use larger spectral detuning $|\Delta_{31}^j|<<\Delta_{1}$ where the Raman transition will get a spectral IB shape which is differed only by the factor $f_R=|\Omega_R|^2/\Delta_1|^2$ from the original shape of IB line. Therefore the time of echo field irradiation will be scaled only by the factor $f_R$.
The proposed AMR procedure provides a possibility of photon echo QMs for atomic systems with arbitrary inhomogeneous broadenings that offers now new practical perspectives for realization of the efficient optical quantum memories and repeaters. We believe that the proposed scheme of photon echo QMs will be interesting for quantum manipulations of the light fields, in particular for the purposes of quantum compression [@Hosseini2009; @Moiseev2010] and frequency conversion [@Moiseev2008]. We also anticipate considerable advantages of AMR procedure for the Raman echo QM on surface plasmon polariton fields which is very promising for nanoscale storage of the light fields [@Moiseev2010b].
Acknowledgement {#sec:Ack}
===============
Financial support by the Russian Fund for Basic Research grant \# 10-02-01348-a and government contract of RosNauka 02.740.11.01.03 is gratefully acknowledged.
References
==========
H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J.I. Cirac, P. Zoller, **81**, 5932 (1998). H.J. Kimble, Nature **453**, 1023 (2008). M.A. Nielsen and I.L. Chuang 2000, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge Univ. Press). P. Kok, W.J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T.C. Ralph, J.P.Dowling, G.J. Milburn, **79**, 135 (2007). J.I. Cirac, *et al.*, **78**, 3221 (1997). A. Kuzmich, and E.S. Polzik, **85**, 5639 (2000). B. Julsgaard, *et. al.*, Nature **432**, 482 (2004). M. Fleischhauer, and M.D. Lukin, **84**, 5094 (2000). M.D. Eisaman, *et. al.*, Nature **438**, 837 (2005). T. Chaneliere, *et. al.*, Nature **438**, 833 (2005). K.S. Choi, *et. al.*, Nature **452**, 67 (2008). I. Novikova, *et. al.*, , 243602 (2007). J. Appel, *et. al.*, , 093602 (2008). K. Honda, *et. al.*, **100**, 093601 (2008). S.A. Moiseev, and S. Kröll, **87**, 173601 (2001); S.A. Moiseev, and B.S.Ham, Phys.Rev.A. **70**, 063809, (2004). S.A. Moiseev, V.F. Tarasov, and B.S. Ham, J.Opt.B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 5, S497 (2003). M. Nilsson, and S. Kröll, Opt. Commun. **247**, 393 (2005). B. Kraus, *et. al.*, **73**, 020302 (2006). A.L. Alexander *et al.*, **96**, 043602 (2006); G. Hétet, *et. al.*, , 023601 (2008). H. De Riedmatten, *et al.*, Nature **456**, 773 (2008); M. Afzelius *et. al.*, **79**, 052329 (2009). S.A. Moiseev, J. of Phys. B: Atom., Mol. and Opt. Phys. **40**, 3877 (2007). N. Gisin, S.A. Moiseev, and C. Simon, **76**, 014302 (2007). C. Simon, *et. al.*, **98**, 190503 (2007). J. Nunn, et.al., **101**, 260502 (2008). I. Usmani, M. Afzelius, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Nat. Commun, **1**, 1 (2010). M. Bonarota, J.-L. Le Gouet, T. Chaneliere, arXiv: 1009.2317v1 \[quant-ph\]. M.P. Hedges, *et. al.*, Nature, **465**, 1052 (2010). M. Hosseini, B.M. Sparkes, P.K. Lam and B.C. Buchler, arXiv: 1009.0567v1 \[quant-ph\]. S.A. Moiseev, S.N. Andrianov, and F.F. Gubaidullin. **82**, 022311 (2010). A.I. Lvovsky, B.C. Sanders, W. Tittel, Nature Photon. **3**, 706 (2009). W. Tittel, M.Afzelius, T. Chaneliere, R.L.Cone, S.Kroll, S.A.Moiseev, and M.Sellars, Laser & Phot. Rev, **4**, 244 (2010). K. Hammerer, A.S. Sörensen and E.S. Polzik, **82**, 1041 (2010). C. Simon, *et. al.*, Eur. Phys. J. D **58**, 1 (2010). C. Clausen, *et. al.*, arXiv:1009.0489v2 \[quant-ph\]. E. Saglamyurek,*et. al.*, arXiv:1004.4691 \[quant-ph\]. S.A. Moiseev, and W. Tittel, arXiv:0812.1730v2 \[quant-ph\]. G. Hétet, *et. al.*, Opt. Lett. **33**, 2323 (2008). J.L. Le Gouët, and P.R. Berman, **80**, 012320 (2009). M. Hosseini, et al., Nature **461**, 241 (2009). S.A. Moiseev, W. Tittel, **82**, 012309 (2010). S.A. Moiseev, and E.S. Moiseev, Proceedings of the NATO Workshop: “Quantum Cryptography and Computing” (R. Horodecki, S.Ya. Kilin, J. Kowalik (eds.), IOS Press, 2010, p.212).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We present the general rules for double-Reggeon production of objects with different spins and parities. The existing experimental information on resonance production in these central exclusive diffractive processes is discussed. The absorptive corrections are calculated and found to depend strongly on the quantum numbers of the produced states. The central exclusive diffractive production of $0^+$ and $0^-$ Higgs bosons is studied as an illustrative topical example of the use of the general rules. The signal for diffractive $0^+$ and $0^-$ Higgs production at the LHC is evaluated using, as an example, the minimal supersymmetric model, with large $\tan\beta$.'
---
plus 2mm minus 2mm 23.0cm 17.0cm -1.0in -42pt
IPPP/03/35\
DCPT/03/70\
29 September 2003\
[**Central exclusive diffractive production as a\
spin–parity analyser: from hadrons to Higgs**]{}
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">A.B. Kaidalov$^{a,b}$, V.A. Khoze$^{a,c}$, A.D. Martin$^a$ and M.G. Ryskin$^{a,c}$</span>\
$^a$ Department of Physics and Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology,\
University of Durham, DH1 3LE, UK\
$^b$ Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, 117259, Russia\
$^c$ Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina, St. Petersburg, 188300, Russia\
Introduction
============
It is always a challenge to measure the quantum numbers of new states, particularly their spin and parity. We may measure the specific characteristics of given decay channels or angular correlations of the accompanying particles in the production process, especially the correlations between the outgoing protons in the central exclusive production process, $pp\to p + h + p$, shown in Fig. \[fig:1\](a).
![(a) The central production of a state $h$ by double-Reggeon exchange. (b) The double-Pomeron exchange contribution to $pp\to p + h + p$, which dominates at high energies, where the $+$ signs are used to indicate the presence of Pomeron-induced rapidity gaps.\[fig:1\]](fig1.eps){height="5cm"}
The advantage of the latter approach is that it offers the possibility, not only to separate different states by accurately measuring the missing mass, but also to distinguish between scalar and pseudoscalar new heavy objects, which is difficult from studying their decay products. In this paper we begin by studying the general implications of applying Reggeon techniques to describe such exclusive processes. At very high energies, and in the central region ($x_F\simeq0$), the double-Pomeron process, Fig 1(b), should give the dominant contribution.
The theory of double-Reggeon (and multi-Reggeon) exchanges was developed long ago [@a1]. However the revival of interest in these processes is related to the new effects observed in the central production of resonances by the WA102 experiment [@a2] in the reaction $pp\to pX^0p$, and to the proposal to look for the Higgs boson and other new particles in double-Pomeron-exchange processes, see, for example, [@BL]–[@INC]. Indeed it will be one of the main challenges of the LHC to identify the nature (including the spin–parity) of newly-discovered heavy objects. It appears to be very hard to find a spin–parity analyser using conventional approaches.
Models for double-Pomeron-exchange production of hadrons with different quantum numbers have been developed in recent years [@a4]–[@a8]. However in some papers [@a5; @a5a] the formulas of Reggeon theory were not fully consistent, while some results of the others follow simply from general rules of the Reggeon approach. In Section \[sec:2\] we first consider these rules and compare them with experimental observations [@a2], and with the results of the phenomenological analysis performed in Ref. [@a7]. Also the dynamics for the Pomeron–Pomeron–particle vertices is discussed.
In Section \[sec:3\] we illustrate how the general behaviour is distorted by the dynamics of the process, using $h(0^\pm)$ exclusive diffractive production as an example. Apart from subsection 3.1, where we discuss the uncertainties in the predicted cross sections, this section neglects the absorptive or unitary corrections. However at high energies these corrections are important (see, for example, Refs. [@Bj]–[@a17]). They correspond to the diagrams of Fig. \[fig:2\], and can be calculated using the Reggeon diagram technique [@a10].
![Unitarity or rescattering corrections to the exclusive diffractive process $pp\to p + h + p$. \[fig:2\]](fig2.eps){height="5cm"}
It will be shown in Section \[sec:4\] that the inclusion of these diagrams leads not only to a decrease of the cross sections of the double-Pomeron processes, but also to significant modifications of the angular correlations between the outgoing (forward) protons. Moreover, the magnitude of these absorptive corrections depends on the quantum numbers of the produced state $h$.
In Section \[sec:4\] we illustrate the results using the important topical example of the double-Pomeron production of heavy bosons. In particular we compare the production of a Standard Model Higgs boson with spin-parity $J^P=0^+$, with that for a $0^-$ Higgs[^1] which appears in various extensions of the Standard Model, in particular in a supersymmetric extension. In Section \[sec:5\], we consider the consequences of this approach to investigations of the Higgs sector at the LHC. For illustration we evaluate the exclusive cross sections using the minimal supersymmetric model[^2] (MSSM) with large $\tan\beta$; a domain in which, for $m(0^-)\lesim 200~\GeV$, the conventional searches at the LHC will face difficulties to discriminate between the different Higgs states and to determine their masses. This is especially true in the so-called “intense coupling limit”, $m_h\sim m_A\sim m_H\sim {\cal
O}(100~\GeV)$ [@EB]. As a specific example we calculate the event rates for the exclusive central production of mass $115~\GeV$ $0^\pm$ bosons at the LHC.
Exclusive diffractive production: general rules {#sec:2}
===============================================
Here we study the general rules for the amplitudes of the exclusive diffractive process 1+2 3+h+4, \[eq:adder\] shown in Fig. \[fig:1\], where $1,\dots,4$ are hadrons, and where the centrally produced particle $h$ has spin and parity $J^P$. We show that the production process has characteristic features, that depend on the value of $J^P$, which follow from general principles.
To begin, we assume that all the particles are spinless. Then, at high energies and small momentum transfer,
[l @ l]{} s\_1 = (p\_3+p\_h)\^2 s\_0, & s\_2 = (p\_4 + p\_h)\^2 s\_0\
t\_1-p\_[3]{}\^2 s\_0, & t\_2 -p\_[4]{}\^2 s\_0, \[eq:bear\]
the amplitude can be written in the form [@a1] T\_[12]{}\^[3h4]{}(s\_1,s\_2,p\_[3]{}, p\_[4]{}) = \_[i,k]{} g\_[13]{}(t\_1)g\_[24]{}(t\_2)()\^[\_i(t\_1)]{}()\^[\_k(t\_2)]{} (\_i(t\_1))(\_k(t\_2)) g\_[ik]{}\^h(t\_1,t\_2,), \[eq:cat\] where $s_0 = 1~\GeV^2$, $\phi$ is the angle between the transverse momenta $\vec p_{3\perp}$ and $\vec p_{4\perp}$ of the outgoing protons and (\_i(t)) = -() \[eq:dog\] is the signature factor for Regge pole $i$ with trajectory $\alpha_i(t)$ and signature $\sigma_i = \pm1$. The vertex factors $g_{13}(t_1)$ and $g_{24}(t_2)$ describe the $13-\alpha_i$ and $24-\alpha_k$ couplings respectively, while $g_{ik}^h$ describes the transition $\alpha_i\alpha_k\to h$. Note that $g_{ik}^h$ depends, in general, on all the scalars that can be formed from the vectors which enter the vertex. Moreover, in the case of Reggeons, the longitudinal and transverse components of their momenta act as two different vectors [@a10]. In our case, where the mass of the boson $h$ is fixed, it is enough to keep the transverse momenta $\vec p_{3\perp}$ and $\vec p_{4\perp}$, and the unit vector $\vec n_0$ in the direction of the colliding hadrons. Unlike $g_{13}$ and $g_{24}$, the function $g_{ik}^h$ may be complex. In the Regge domain [(\[eq:bear\])]{}, s\_1s\_2 = s(m\_h\^2 + p\_[h]{}\^2), \[eq:elephant\] where $s = (p_1 + p_2)^2$.
When spin is included, the process is described by helicity amplitudes, each of which has a double-Regge behaviour as in [(\[eq:cat\])]{} [@a11]. T\_[\_1\_2]{}\^[\_3\_h\_4]{}(s\_1,s\_2,t\_1,t\_2,) = \_[i,k]{}g\_[\_1\_3]{}(t\_1)g\_[\_2\_4]{}(t\_2) ()\^[\_i(t\_1)]{}()\^[\_k(t\_2)]{} (\_i(t\_1))(\_k(t\_2))g\_[ik]{}\^[\_h]{}(t\_1,t\_2,) \[eq:fox\] The relations between the vertex couplings for different helicities, due to conservation of parity and other quantum numbers, are the same as for $2\to2$ reaction [@a12]. For example, g\_[\_1\_3]{}(t) = (-1)\^[\_1-\_3]{}\_1 g\_[-\_1-\_3]{}(t), \[eq:giraffe\] with \_1 = \_1\_3(-1)\^[S\_1-S\_3]{}P\_i\_i, \[eq:hedgehog\] where $S_1$ ($S_3$) and $\eta_1$ ($\eta_3$) are the spin and parity of the particle 1 (3) respectively, and $P_i,\sigma_i$ are the parity and signature of the Reggeon $i$. The vertices behave as [@a12; @a13], g\_[\_1\_3]{}(t) \~(-t)\^[| \_1 - \_3|/2]{}, t0. \[eq:iguana\] Note that relation [(\[eq:giraffe\])]{} depends only on the product $P_i\sigma_i$ and thus the model-independent spin structure of the vertices $g_{\lambda_1\lambda_3}(g_{\lambda_2\lambda_4})$ is the same for all Reggeons with the same product $P_i\sigma_i$.
Below we will be interested mainly in the spin structure of the central vertex $g_{ik}^{\lambda_h}(t_1,t_2,\phi)$. It can be written in the form [@a11] g\_[ik]{}\^[\_h]{} = \_[m\_2 = -]{}\^e\^[im\_2]{} \_[m\_1m\_2]{}\^[\_h]{},m\_1 + m\_2 = \_h, \[eq:jackal\] where $m_2$ has the meaning of the projection of the angular momentum $j_k$ of Reggeon $k$ (analytically continued from all angular momenta $j_k$ in the $t_1,t_2$-channels). Now invariance under parity leads to the relation [@a11] \_[m\_1m\_2]{}\^[\_h]{} = (-1)\^[\_h]{}\_3 \_[-m\_1-m\_2]{}\^[-\_h]{}, \[eq:koala\] where \_3 = \_h(-1)\^[S\_h]{}P\_i\_iP\_k\_k. \[eq:lion\] Thus the spin structure of the central vertex depends only on the product of the naturalities (that is the parities and signatures) of particle $h$ and the exchanged Reggeons[^3]. The behaviour of $\gamma_{m_1m_2}^{\lambda_h}$ for small $t_1,t_2$ is given by the formula [@a11] \_[m\_1m\_2]{}\^[\_h]{} \~(-t\_1)\^[|m\_1|/2]{} (-t\_2)\^[|m\_2|/2]{}, m\_1+m\_2 = \_h. \[eq:mouse\] Note that all values of $m_2$ ($m_1$) enter [(\[eq:jackal\])]{}, but, due to [(\[eq:mouse\])]{}, for small $t_1,t_2$ it is enough to consider the lowest values of $m_2$ ($m_1$) consistent with [(\[eq:koala\])]{}.
It is often convenient to write the spin structure of the amplitudes in terms of the characteristic 3-vectors of the problem. Such a representation is closely related to the helicity amplitudes discussed above [@a13], but the formulas become more transparent. In this case the central vertex $g_{ik}^h$ is written as a scalar (or pseudoscalar) function (depending on the product $\eta_h(-1)^{S_h}\sigma_iP_i\sigma_kP_k$) of the vectors $\vec
p_{3\perp},\vec p_{4\perp}$ and the spin vectors (tensors) of particle $h$.
Let us consider particular examples for the spin-parity $J^P$ of $h$, in each case taking$\sigma_iP_i\sigma_kP_k = +1 $ as for double-Pomeron exchange.
- $J^P(h) = 0^+$
For a scalar particle $h$, the vertex coupling is simply g\_[ik]{}\^h = f\_[0\^+]{}(p\_[3]{}\^2, p\_[4]{}\^2, p\_[3]{}p\_[4]{}), \[eq:nightingale\] where $f_{0^+}$ is a function of the scalar variables which can be formed from the transverse momenta $\vec
p_{3\perp}$ and $£\vec p_{4\perp}$ of the outgoing protons. When $\vec p_{3\perp}$ or $\vec p_{4\perp}\to 0$, this function in general tends to some constant $f(0,0,0)$. In order to obtain further information on the structure of this function, extra dynamical input is needed (see Section \[sec:3\]).
- $J^P(h) = 0^-$
For the central production of a pseudoscalar particle, the vertex factor takes the form g\_[ik]{}\^h = f\_[0\^-]{}(p\_[3]{}\^2, p\_[4]{}\^2, p\_[3]{}p\_[4]{}) \_[ikl]{} (p\_[3]{})\_i(p\_[4]{})\_k (n\_0)\_l, \[eq:ocelot\] where $\vec n_0$ is the unit vector in the direction of the colliding hadrons (in the c.m.s.). In this case, according to [(\[eq:koala\])]{}, all amplitudes with $m_1,m_2=0$ are zero, and so $|m_1| = |m_2| = 1$ are the leading terms. According to [(\[eq:mouse\])]{} this corresponds to helicity amplitudes which are proportional to $(-t_1)^{\frac{1}{2}}(-t_2)^{\frac{1}{2}}$ for small $t$. Thus the cross section behaves as $\sim|t_1||t_2|$. Also the angular distribution contains a factor $\sin^2\phi$, which is evident from either [(\[eq:ocelot\])]{} or [(\[eq:jackal\])]{} and [(\[eq:koala\])]{}. Again the function $f_{0^-}$ is not predicted from general principles.
Note that the characteristic $\sin^2\phi$ dependence of the angular distribution, and the $t$-behaviour at small $t$, which are observed by the WA102 Collaboration for $\eta$, and $\eta'$ production [@a2], are direct consequences of the general properties of the double-Regge-exchange amplitudes. This behaviour is valid not only for double-Pomeron exchange, but also for $P\!f, f\!f, \rho\rho, A_2A_2, \omega\omega,\dots$ exchanges. Under the interchange of the Reggeons, $i\leftrightarrow k$, (n\_0)\_l -(n\_0)\_l \[eq:panda\] and hence if the Reggeons are the same, $i=k$, the function $f_{0^-}$ should be symmetric under the interchange $3\leftrightarrow 4$.
- $J^P(h) = 1^+$
For the production of an axial vector state, both $\lambda_h = 0$ and $\lambda_h = \pm1$ components are present, and the vertex factor can be written as g\_[ik]{}\^h = f\_[1\^+]{}\^0 \_[ikl]{} (p\_[3]{})\_i(p\_[4]{})\_k e\_l + ( f\_[1\^+]{}\^1(p\_[3]{})\_i + f\_[1\^+]{}\^1(p\_[4]{})\_i) \_[ikl]{}(n\_0)\_ke\_l, \[eq:quail\] where the $f^i$ are functions of the scalar variables $p_{3\perp}^2, p_{4\perp}^2$ and $\vec p_{3\perp} \cdot \vec
p_{4\perp}$, and where $\vec e$ is the polarization vector of the $1^+$ meson. If both of the exchanged Reggeons are the same ($i=k$), then the function $g_{ik}^h$ is symmetric under the interchange $3\leftrightarrow 4$. As a consequence, for small $\vec p_{i\perp}$, f\_[1\^+]{}\^0 \~(p\_[3]{}\^2 - p\_[4]{}\^2), f\_[1\^+]{}\^1 = -f\_[1\^+]{}\^1. \[eq:rat\]
The form of the vertex factors $g_{ik}^h$ for the central production of states $h$ of higher spin can readily be constructed using equations [(\[eq:jackal\])]{}–[(\[eq:lion\])]{}.
It is interesting to note that the structure of the vertex factors given in [(\[eq:nightingale\])]{}–[(\[eq:rat\])]{} coincides, for small $\vec p_{i\perp}$, with that found using a non-conserved vector current model [@a7], which gives a good description of the experimental data of the WA102 Collaboration [@a2]. However, from the discussion above, it is clear that these results simply follow from the general rules of Reggeon theory. They are not connected with a particular vector current model of the Pomeron, but rather follow from the fact that the product of the parity and signature of the Pomeron is $+1$. Moreover the Pomeron has positive signature and corresponds to the analytic continuation from angular momenta $J^P = 2^+,4^+,\dots$ in the $t$-channel. The same results would be obtained if a tensor current model were used.
On the other hand, the detailed structure of the amplitudes $f_m^k(p_{3\perp}^2, p_{4\perp}^2, \vec
p_{3\perp}\!\cdot\!\vec p_{4\perp})$ (with $m=0^+,0^-,1^+,2^+,\dots$) depends on dynamics and cannot be predicted from the general principles of Regge theory. For example, if the heavy state $h$ is strongly coupled to gluons and is produced perturbatively via the diagram shown in Fig. \[fig:3\](a), then in the forward direction ($p_{3\perp}, p_{4\perp}\ll Q_\perp$) the vertex factor $f_{0^+}$ does not depend on $p_3$ or $p_4$. Moreover, as was shown in [@Liverpool; @KMRmm; @INC], there exists a $J_z=0$, parity-even, selection rule, for production by gluon–gluon fusion where each of these active gluons comes from colour-singlet digluon $t$-channel exchange, see Fig. \[fig:3\]. As a consequence the production of the negative-parity $h(0^-)$ state is strongly suppressed in comparison with the production of the $h(0^+)$ state. Similarly it follows that the central diffractive exclusive production of $2^{++}$ states is also suppressed in some topical cases; for example, $2^{++}$ states formed from heavy quark pairs (in the non-relativistic model) [@KMRmm; @TEN] or $2^{++}$ ‘gravitons’ in models with extra dimensions in which their coupling to gluons has a point-like nature (with no derivatives) so they are not produced via the $J_z=0$ two-gluon state [@INC]. Also these processes can provide a unique opportunity to determine the quantum numbers of pair-produced new strongly-interacting objects [@INC]. For example, comparatively light gluinos and squarks can be distinguished by the respective $\beta^3$ and $\beta$ threshold behaviour, where $\beta$ is the particle velocity.
Example: dynamics of $h(0^\pm)$ Higgs production {#sec:3}
================================================
So far we have discussed the structure of the production amplitudes for pp p + h + p, \[eq:rat1\] where $h$ has a given $J^P$, which follow from general principles. To go further we need to consider the dynamics of the process. We study $h(0^\pm)$ Higgs production as a topical example. The general rules imply that the central vertices behave as
[l l l]{} g\_[ik]{}\^[h(0\^+)]{} & \~& [constant]{}\
g\_[ik]{}\^[h(0\^-)]{} & \~& (p\_[3]{} p\_[4]{})n\_0 \~|t\_1|\^|t\_2|\^\[eq:rat2\]
at small $t$.
Amplitudes for $h(0^{\pm})$ production
--------------------------------------
To see how the dynamics modify this behaviour we have first to describe how the cross sections for the exclusive production of $h(0^\pm)$ Higgs bosons are calculated. We use the formalism of Ref. [@KMR; @KMRmm; @INC]. The amplitudes are described by the diagram shown in Fig. \[fig:3\](a), where the hard subprocesses $gg\to h(0^\pm)$ are initiated by gluon–gluon fusion and where the second $t$-channel gluon is needed to screen the colour flow across the rapidity gap intervals.
![(a) The QCD diagram for double-diffractive exclusive production of a Higgs boson $h$, $pp\to p + h + p$, where the gluons of the hard subprocess $gg\to h$ are colour screened by the second $t$-channel gluon. (b) The rescattering or absorptive corrections to $pp\to p + h + p$, where the shaded region represents the multi-Pomeron exchanges of Fig. \[fig:2\].\[fig:3\]](fig3.eps){height="5cm"}
The Born amplitudes are of the form T\_h = N f\_g(x\_1, x\_1’, Q\_3\^2, \^2; t\_1)f\_g(x\_2,x\_2’,Q\_4\^2,\^2; t\_2) \[eq:rat3\] The overall normalization constant $N$ can be written in terms of the $h\to gg$ decay width [@INC], and the $gg\to h$ vertex factors are
[l l l]{} V\_[h(0\^+)]{} & = & (Q\_- p\_[3]{}) (Q\_+ p\_[4]{})\
V\_[h(0\^-)]{} & = & ( (Q\_- p\_[3]{}) (Q\_+ p\_[4]{}))n\_0. \[eq:rat4\]
The $f_g$’s are the skewed unintegrated gluon densities of the proton at the hard scale $\mu$, taken to be $m_h/2$, with
[l l l]{} Q\_3 & = & {Q\_,|(Q\_- p\_[3]{})|},\
Q\_4 & = & {Q\_,|(Q\_+ p\_[4]{})|}. \[eq:rat5\]
Below, we assume factorization of the unintegrated distributions, f\_g(x,x’,Q\^2,\^2;t) = f\_g(x,x’,Q\^2,\^2)F\_N(t), \[eq:rat5a\] where we parameterize the form factor of the proton vertex by the form $F_N(t) = \exp(bt)$ with $b=2~\GeV^{-2}$. To single log accuracy, we have [@MR01] f\_g(x,x’,Q\_i\^2,\^2) = R\_g ( xg(x,Q\_i\^2)), \[eq:rat6\] where $T$ is the usual Sudakov form factor which ensures that the gluon remains untouched in the evolution up to the hard scale $\mu$, so that the rapidity gaps survive. The square root arises because the bremsstrahlung survival probability $T$ is only relevant to the hard gluon. $R_g$ is the ratio of the skewed $x'\ll x$ integrated distribution to the conventional diagonal density $g(x,Q^2)$. For $x\ll 1$ it is completely determined [@SGMR]. The apparent infrared divergence of [(\[eq:rat3\])]{} is nullified[^4] for $h(0^+)$ production by the Sudakov factors embodied in the gluon densities $f_g$. However the amplitude for $h(0^-)$ production is much more sensitive to the infrared contribution. Indeed let us consider the case of small $p_{i\perp}$ of the outgoing protons. Then, from [(\[eq:rat4\])]{}, we see that $V_{h(0^+)} \sim Q_\perp^2$, whereas $V_{h(0^-)} \sim p_{3\perp}p_{4\perp}$ (since the linear contribution in $Q_\perp$ vanishes after the angular integration). Thus the $d^2Q_\perp/Q_\perp^4$ integration for $h(0^+)$ is replaced by $p_{3\perp}p_{4\perp} d^2Q_\perp/Q_\perp^6$ for $h(0^-)$, and now the Sudakov suppression is not enough to prevent a significant contribution from the $Q_\perp^2\lesim1~\GeV^2$ domain.
Uncertainties
-------------
To estimate the uncertainty in the predictions for the $h^\pm(0)$ exclusive diffractive cross sections we first quantify the above uncertainty arising from the infrared region, where the gluon distribution is not well known. Fig. 4 shows the $\phi$ dependence of $h(0^-)$ and $h(0^+)$ production at the LHC, for $m_h=120$ GeV and $\mu=m_h/2$, using different treatments of the infrared region.
The continuous and dashed curves are calculated using MRST99 [@MRST99] and CTEQ6M [@CTEQ] partons respectively with the very low $Q$ gluon frozen at its value at $Q_{3,4}=1.3$ GeV. Then we integrate down in $Q_\perp$ until $Q_{3,4}$ are close to $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$, where the contribution vanishes due to the presence of the $T$-factor. This will slightly overestimate the cross sections as the gluon density decreases with decreasing $Q^2$ for $x\sim0.01$. A lower extreme is to remove the contribution below $Q_{3,4}=1.3$ GeV entirely. The result for MRST99 partons is shown by the dotted curve in Fig. 4. Even with this extreme choice, the $0^+$ cross section is not changed greatly; it is depleted by about 20%. On the other hand, as anticipated, we see for $0^-$ production, the infrared region is much more important and the cut reduces the cross section by a factor of 5.
Another uncertainty is the choice of factorization scale $\mu$. Note that in comparison with previous calculations [@INC], which were done in the limit of proton transverse momenta, $p_{3,4\perp}\ll Q_\perp$, now we include the explicit $p_\perp$-dependence in the $Q_\perp$-loop integral of (\[eq:rat3\]). Moreover, we resum the ‘soft’ gluon logarithms, $\ln\,1/(1-z)$, in the $T$-factor.[^5] So now the $T$-factor includes both the single soft logarithms and the single collinear logarithms. The only uncertainty is the non-logarithmic NLO contribution. This may be modelled by changing the factorization scale, $\mu$, which fixes the maximal $q_\perp$ of the gluon in the NLO loop correction. As the default we have used $\mu=m_h/2$; that is the largest $q_\perp$ allowed in the process with total energy $m_h$. Choosing a lower scale $\mu=m_h/4$ would enlarge the cross sections by about 30%.
Next there is some uncertainty in the gluon distribution itself. To illustrate this, we compare predictions obtained using CTEQ6M [@CTEQ], MRST99 [@MRST99] and MRST02 [@MRST02] partons. For $0^+$ production at the LHC, with $m_h=120$ GeV and $\mu=m_h/2$, we find that the effective gluon–gluon luminosity, before screening, is $$\left.\frac{d{\cal L}}{dyd\ln M^2}\right|_{y=0} = (2.2,\ 1.7,\ 1.45)\times10^{-2}$$ respectively. This spread of values arises because the CTEQ gluon is 7% higher, and the MRST02 gluon 4% lower, than the default MRST99 gluon, in the relevant kinematic region. The sensitivity to the gluon arises because the central exclusive diffractive cross section is proportional to the 4th power of the gluon. For $0^-$ production, the corresponding numbers are $(4.2,\ 2.7,\ 1.7)\times10^{-5}$. Up to now, we have discussed the effective gluon–gluon luminosity. However, NNLO corrections may occur in the $gg\to h$ fusion vertex. These give an extra uncertainty of $\pm20\%$. Note that we have already accounted for the NLO corrections for this vertex [@INC].
Finally, we need to consider the uncertainty in the evaluation of the soft rescattering correction factor $S^2$, which is the probability that the rapidity gaps survive the soft $pp$ interaction. The computation of $S^2$ is discussed in some detail in Section 4. Here it suffices to say, from the analysis [@KMRsoft] of all soft $pp$ data, that a conservative error on the values of $S^2$ is $\pm50\%$.
Combining together all these sources of error we find that the prediction for the $0^+$ cross section is uncertain to a factor of almost 2.5, that is up to almost 2.5, and down almost to $1/2.5$, times the default value.[^6] On the other hand, $0^-$ production is uncertain by this factor just from the first (infrared) source of error, with the remaining errors contributing almost another factor of 2.5. Although the rate of $h(0^-)$ production is very sensitive to the infrared contribution, and could indicate the presence of a significant non-perturbative contribution, we find that the form of the $\phi$ dependence is not. We discuss this point in Section \[sec:5\].
Note that the non-local structure of the amplitude leads to an extra angular dependence coming from the correlations between $\vec Q_\perp$ and the $\vec p_{i\perp}$ in the integral in [(\[eq:rat3\])]{}. In fact, expanding the gluon propagators gives corrections of the type Q\_p\_[3]{} / Q\_\^2,Q\_p\_[4]{} / Q\_\^2, \[eq:rat7\] which lead to an additional contribution of the form $-\vec p_{3\perp}\cdot \vec p_{4\perp}/Q_\perp^2$. This reflects the dependence of the vertex factors $f_{0^\pm}$ on $\vec p_{3\perp}\cdot \vec p_{4\perp}$, see [(\[eq:nightingale\])]{} and [(\[eq:ocelot\])]{}. However, it is evident from Fig. \[fig:4\] that this contribution does not give a large effect. What is more important is the suppression of $h(0^-)$ production in comparison to that for $h(0^+)$. The $h(0^-)$ amplitude is proportional to $\vec p_{3\perp}\times \vec p_{4\perp}$, where the dimensions must be compensated by some scale. In perturbative QCD this is the scale $Q_\perp^2$ arising from the gluon loop in Fig. \[fig:3\](a). Therefore the $h(0^-)$ cross section is reduced by a factor $\langle\, p_{3\perp}^2
p_{4\perp}^2 / 2Q_\perp^4\,\rangle$, that is by a factor of the order of 500 for typical $p_{i\perp}^2 \sim 1/2b
\sim 0.25~\GeV^2$ if $Q_\perp^2 \sim 4~\GeV^2$.
Absorptive corrections {#sec:4}
======================
In this section we consider how exclusive double-diffractive production is influenced by the absorptive (shadowing) effects, which arise from the multi-Pomeron diagrams of Fig. \[fig:2\]. To determine the suppression due to these absorptive corrections, it is convenient to work in impact parameter, $b$, space.
Absorptive effects for $h(0^+)$ production
------------------------------------------
The amplitude for the central production of an $h(0^+)$ state, via the double-Pomeron-exchange process $pp\to p +
h + p$, has the form T\^h(s,b\_1,b\_2,b) = ([-\_P(s,b\^2)]{}) T\_[PP]{}\^h(s\_1,s\_2,b\_1,b\_2), \[eq:snake\] where $\Omega_P$ is the contribution of Pomeron exchange to elastic $pp$ scattering in impact parameter space \_P(s,b\^2) = (-b\^2/4B), \[eq:tiger\] where $\sigma_{pp}^P$ is the Pomeron contribution to the total cross section of the $pp$ interaction, and B = B\_0 + \_P’(s/s\_0) \[eq:unicorn\] is the slope of the elastic $pp$ amplitude. The amplitude $T_{PP}^h$ is the Fourier transform, to impact-parameter space, of the amplitude $T_{12}^{3h4}(s_1,s_2,\vec p_{3\perp},\vec p_{4\perp})$ of [(\[eq:adder\])]{} with $i=k=P$. That is T\_[PP]{}\^h(s\_1,s\_2,b\_1,b\_2) = ()\^2d\^2p\_[3]{}d\^2p\_[4]{} e\^[ip\_[3]{}b\_1]{} e\^[-ip\_[4]{}b\_2]{} T\_[PP]{}\^h(s\_1,s\_2,p\_[3]{},p\_[4]{}), \[eq:vole\] where $\vec b = \vec b_1 + \vec b_2$ is the Fourier conjugate to $\vec q = \vec p_{3\perp} - \vec p_{4\perp}$. For simplicity, we give the formula for a single-channel eikonal, where only intermediate proton states are considered, between the Pomeron exchanges in Fig. \[fig:2\]. The extension to the multichannel case is straightforward. In the calculations presented here we used the two-channel eikonal model of Ref. [@KMRsoft].
Note that if $\alpha_P(0)-1 \equiv \Delta>0$, then $\Omega_P(s,b^2)$ increases with energy and leads to a substantial suppression of cross section at very high energies. Calculations, using the model of Ref. [@KMRsoft], show that at Tevatron energies the Born cross section, corresponding to the diagram of Fig. \[fig:1\](b), is suppressed by the multi-Pomeron exchanges of Fig. \[fig:2\] by a factor of roughly 0.05. At the LHC the suppression factor[^7] $\langle S^2\rangle$ is 0.026.
Since the amount of suppression depends on the impact parameter $\vec b$, it leads to a characteristic dependence of the factor $S^2$ on the angle $\phi$ between the outgoing protons [@a17]. This is related to the fact that $\vec b$ is the Fourier conjugate to the vector $\vec q = \vec p_{3\perp} - \vec p_{4\perp}$. If the outgoing protons are tagged, then the characteristic peripheral form of the amplitude $T^h$ in $\vec b$-space can be studied experimentally in double-Pomeron-exchange processes by measuring the dependence of the cross section on $\vec q$.
We emphasize that the suppression $S^2$, due to absorptive or rescattering corrections, depends not only on the particular process, but also on the kinematical cuts which select events in a given $p_{i\perp},\phi$ domain. Therefore the suppression $S^2$ has to be calculated for each particular kinematical configuration.
Comparison of exclusive diffractive $h(0^\pm)$ Higgs production {#sec:4a}
---------------------------------------------------------------
So far we have discussed absorptive corrections for $h(0^+)$ production. Here we compare these corrections with those for $h(0^-)$ production. For $h(0^-)$ production we predict a different $\vec q$ behaviour. This originates from [(\[eq:ocelot\])]{}; the Born double-Pomeron-exchange amplitude for process [(\[eq:adder\])]{} now contains the kinematical factor $(\vec p_{3\perp}\times \vec p_{4\perp})\cdot \vec n_0$ and this, in turn, implies that the Fourier transform contains the factor $(\vec b_1 \times \vec b_2)\cdot \vec n_0$. Thus the corresponding amplitude $T_{PP}^{h(0^-)}(s_1,s_2,\vec b_1,\vec b_2)$ tends to zero as $\vec b_1$ or $\vec b_2\to0$. As a result, the suppression arising from rescattering is less effective, and the factor $S^2$ is larger than for $h(0^+)$ production. Also the $\phi$ distribution is distorted due to absorption.
The effect of the absorptive corrections on the angular correlations $\phi$ between the outgoing protons was discussed in detail in Ref. [@a17] for $h(0^+)$ production[^8]. There it was shown that the absorptive corrections are largest in the back-to-back configuration where $\vec p_{3\perp}$ is directed against $\vec p_{4\perp}$, since in this case both $t_1 \simeq -(\vec k_\perp + \vec p_{3\perp})^2$ and $t_2\simeq -(\vec
k_\perp - \vec p_{4\perp})^2$ can be minimized simultaneously by the same momentum $\vec k_\perp$ transferred in the elastic rescattering, see Fig. \[fig:3\](b). Thus for $\phi = 180^\circ$ the momentum is transferred mainly through the rescattering amplitude. The suppression factor $S^2$ was plotted versus $\phi$ for different choices of $p_{3\perp}$ and $p_{4\perp}$ in Ref. [@a17]. It was shown that the diffractive dip (which arises from the maximum cancellation between the bare amplitude and rescattering contribution) moves to smaller $\phi$ as the values of $p_{i\perp}$ are increased.
Here we calculate $S^2$ as a function of $\phi$ for $h(0^-)$, as well as $h(0^+)$, exclusive diffractive production. We integrate over the $p_{i\perp}$ of the outgoing protons assuming an $\exp(-b(p_{3\perp}^2 +
p_{4\perp}^2))$ behaviour of the Pomeron-proton vertices $g_{13}$ and $g_{24}$, with $b=2~\GeV^{-2}$. We use the two-channel eikonal model of Ref. [@KMRsoft]. For the central vertex we take $(\vec p_{3\perp} \times \vec
p_{4\perp})\cdot \vec n_0$ for $h(0^-)$ production and a constant for $h(0^+)$ production. The results for the suppression factor $S^2$ are shown in Fig. \[fig:5\] for $h(0^\pm)$ production of mass 120 GeV at the LHC energy, $\sqrt s = 14$ TeV.
As the azimuthal angle between $\vec p_{3\perp}$ and $\vec p_{4\perp}$ increases, the first diffractive dip, followed by the second maximum, are evident in the $S^2$ curves obtained by integrating over all $p_{i\perp}$. The dotted curves show the effect of restricting the outgoing protons to the domain $p_{i\perp}<0.35~\GeV$. As expected, the diffractive dip is pushed to larger angles and is barely reached even for the back-to-back configuration, $\phi=180^\circ$. As we see from Fig. \[fig:5\] that the survival factor $S^2$ is about 3–4 times larger for $h(0^-)$ as compared to $h(0^+)$ production. This is a reflection of the more peripheral nature of $h(0^-)$ production. For the same reason the suppression $S^2$ obtained when integrating over the small $p_{i\perp}$ domain, $p_{i\perp}<0.35~\GeV$, is less than when integrating over all $p_{i\perp}$, since it is more weighted to the larger values of the impact parameter $b$.
Finally in Fig. \[fig:6\] we show the predictions for the effective luminosity with the absorptive effects included. The original $\sin^2\phi$ and constant behaviours of $h(0^-)$ and $h(0^+)$, respectively, are distorted first by the $\vec p_{3\perp}\cdot \vec p_{4\perp}/Q^2$ type corrections from the integration over the gluon loop in Fig. \[fig:4\], and then by the absorptive effects given by the suppression factors $S^2$ shown in Fig. \[fig:5\].
Consequences for signals in the Higgs sector {#sec:5}
============================================
We have studied the central [*exclusive*]{} diffractive production of bosons via the process $pp\to p + h + p$, and emphasized that correlations between the outgoing proton momenta reflect the spin-parity of $h$. As a topical example to illustrate these properties we compared $h(0^+)$ and $A(0^-)\equiv h(0^-)$ Higgs production. In particular, Fig. \[fig:6\] shows that the dependence on the angle $\phi$ between the outgoing proton transverse momenta, $\vec p_{3\perp}$ and $\vec p_{4\perp}$, is different for the natural ($0^+$) and unnatural ($0^-$) parity states of $h$. The comparison with Fig. \[fig:4\] shows that absorptive effects have significantly distorted the $\phi$ distributions and, in fact, have increased the difference between the $0^+$ and $0^-$ distributions. Thus this distribution provides a unique possibility to distinguish between $0^+$ and $0^-$ bosons, which, in the case of [*inclusive*]{} production[^9], is extremely difficult.
We have seen that the amplitude for the production of unnatural parity ($P=(-1)^{J+1}$) states contains a factor $(\vec p_{3\perp}\times\vec p_{4\perp})\cdot\vec n_0$. Thus the cross section vanishes as $p_{3\perp}$ or $p_{4\perp}\to0$ and vanishes as $\sin^2\phi$ as $\phi\to0$ or $\pi$. These properties may be used to suppress the cross section for natural parity ($P=(-1)^J$) production in comparison to that of unnatural parity states. In particular, selecting events with $p_{3\perp},p_{4\perp}>0.4~\GeV$ and $20^\circ < \phi < 120^\circ$ suppresses the $0^+$ yield by about a factor of 10, while only decreasing the $0^-$ cross section by a factor of 2.3. The relative $0^-$ enhancement may be important as the cross section for the central exclusive production of an $A(0^-)$ boson is quite small, and moreover, in many supersymmetric scenarios, the $h(0^+)$ (and/or $H(0^+)$) and $A(0^-)$ bosons are close in mass.
As a specific example we consider Higgs production in the minimal supersymmetric model (MSSM) with large $\tan\beta$ and $m_A \sim 110$–130 GeV. In this domain the branching ratios of Higgs-like bosons to vector bosons and photon pairs[^10], and the couplings to top quarks, are much suppressed [@EB], and it becomes problematic to perform a complete coverage of the Higgs boson sector using the conventional inclusive processes. In particular the problem of resolving the signals for different states becomes quite challenging[^11]. On the contrary the cross section, $\sigma_{\rm CEP}$, for central exclusive diffractive production in the MSSM is enhanced in comparison with that of the SM. The MSSM (for $\tan\beta = 30$) and SM cross sections, $\sigma_{\rm CEP}$, at the LHC energy, are shown in Fig. \[fig:7\].
They have been evaluated using the effective $gg$ luminosities obtained in Section \[sec:3\] with the absorptive corrections calculated in Section \[sec:4a\], see Fig. \[fig:6\]. The normalization factor in [(\[eq:rat3\])]{} is N\^2 = K, \[eq:wombat\] where the NLO $K$ factor $\simeq 1.5$ [@INC] and the number of colours $N_c = 3$. The widths and properties of the Higgs scalar ($h,H$) and pseudoscalar ($A$) bosons are calculated using the HDECAY code, version 3.0 [@HDEC], with all other parameters taken from Table 2 of [@HDEC]; also we take ${\rm IMODEL} = 4$, which means the radiative corrections are included according to Ref. [@HHW].
From Fig. \[fig:7\] we see that the $0^+$ Higgs bosons should be accessible at the LHC, via the central exclusive signal, over a wide mass range up to about 250 GeV in this scenario. The enhancement of the MSSM signals is clearly apparent, except near $m_h\simeq 127~\GeV$. For example, for the production of a Higgs boson of mass 115 GeV for $\tan\beta = 30$ (or 50) we have (h)\_[CEP]{}\^[h(0\^+)]{} \~ 20 (70) [fb]{}, \[eq:xrayfish\] about 10 (40) times larger than $\sigma_{\rm CEP}$ in the SM.
For the same parameters, for $A(0^-)$ production we obtain (A)\_[CEP]{}\^[A(0\^-)]{} \~ 0.2 (0.5) [fb]{}. \[eq:yak\] However we have emphasized the infrared sensitivity of the [*rate*]{} of $A(0^-)$ production. It is possible that a non-perturbative contribution, coming from low values of $Q_\perp$ in [(\[eq:rat3\])]{}, may enhance the cross section by a factor of 3 or more. Nevertheless it would be extremely hard to observe the $A(0^-)$ boson under the $h(0^+)$ signal, when the masses are close. A typical mass difference is $m_A-m_h \simeq 2.9$ (1.4) GeV for $\tan\beta =
30$ (50), if $m_A = 115~\GeV$. The situation for the observation of the $A(0^-)$ boson is even worse due to the comparatively large expected widths of the Higgs bosons. For instance, if $m_A\sim 90\!\!-\!\!130~\GeV$ and $\tan\beta = 30$, then the widths of the Higgs bosons become of order 2 GeV [@CH]. On the other hand, proton taggers, with a very accurate missing mass resolution of $\Delta M \simeq 1~\GeV$, offer the attractive possibility, not only to separate the $h$ and $H$ bosons, but also to provide a direct measurement of the widths of the $h$ (for $m_h\lesim 120~\GeV$) and the $H$ bosons (if $m_H\gtrsim 130~\GeV$). Also we note that by comparing the cross sections of [(\[eq:xrayfish\])]{} and [(\[eq:yak\])]{}, we see that if a new heavy object were observed in inelastic events, but not in exclusive central production, it would indicate that it had unnatural parity.
Although the rate of $A(0^-)$ Higgs production is sensitive to contributions from the infrared region, we do not expect a significant change in the qualitative behaviour of the $0^-$ production amplitude. The reasons are as follows. First, the vanishing of the amplitude as $p_{i\perp}\to 0$ and/or $\phi\to 0,\pi$ follows from the general form [(\[eq:ocelot\])]{} of the vertex in Regge theory. Second, as a rule the extra $\phi$ dependence caused by the $\vec p_{3\perp}\cdot\vec p_{4\perp}$ term is weak, see Fig. 4 for example. Third, in the very extreme case where we use GRV94 partons [@GRV94] (which enable us to take a very low infrared cut-off $Q_0^2 = 0.4~\GeV^2$, but which are known to overestimate significantly the low $x$ gluon), the $0^-$ Higgs cross section is enhanced, relative to that obtained using MRST99 partons with $Q_0=1.3~\GeV$, by about a factor of 4, but the $\phi$ and $p_{i\perp}$ dependences are essentially unaltered.
Returning to $h(0^+)$ production, we see, for the example of [(\[eq:xrayfish\])]{}, that already for an LHC luminosity ${\cal L} = 30~{\rm fb}^{-1}$, about 600 (2000) bosons are produced. If the experimental cuts and efficiencies quoted in Ref. [@DKMOR] are imposed, then the signal is depleted by about a factor of 6. This leaves about 100 (400) observable events, with an unaltered background of about 3 events [@DKMOR] in a $\Delta M = 1~\GeV$ missing mass bin; which gives an incredible significance for a Higgs signal!
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank Abdelhak Djouadi, Howie Haber, Leif Lonnblad, Risto Orava, Albert de Roeck and Georg Weiglein for valuable discussions. ABK and MGR would like to thank the IPPP at the University of Durham for hospitality. This work was supported by the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council, by grants INTAS 00-00366, RFBR 01-02-17383 and 01-02-17095, and by the Federal Program of the Russian Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology 40.052.1.1.1112 and SS-1124.2003.2.
[xxxxxxx]{}
K.A. Ter-Martirosyan, Nucl. Phys. [**68**]{} (1964) 591.
WA102 Collaboration: D. Barberis et al., Phys. lett. [**B440**]{} (1998) 225; ibid. [**B432**]{} (1998) 436; ibid. [**B427**]{} (1998) 398; ibid. [**B397**]{} (1997) 339; A. Kirk et al., [arXiv:hep-ph/9810221]{}.
A. Bialas and P.V. Landshoff, Phys. Lett. [**B256**]{} (1991) 540.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Phys. Lett. [**B401**]{} (1997) 330.
M.G. Albrow and A. Rostovtsev, [arXiv:hep-ph/0009336]{} and references therein.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C14**]{} (2000) 525.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C23**]{} (2002) 311.
F.E. Close and A. Kirk, Phys. Lett. [**B397**]{} (1997) 333.
J.R. Ellis and D. Kharzeev, [arXiv:hep-ph/9811222]{};\
N.I. Kochelev, [arXiv:hep-ph/9902203]{}.
N.I. Kochelev, T. Morii, B.L. Reznik and A.V. Vinnikov, Eur. Pys. J. [**A8**]{} (2000) 405;\
N.I. Kochelev, T. Morii and A.V. Vinnikov, Phys. Lett. [**457**]{} (1999) 202.
F.E. Close and G. Schuler, Phys. Lett. [**B458**]{} (1999) 127;\
F.E. Close, A. Kirk and G. Schuler, Phys. Lett. [**B477**]{} (2000) 13.
E. Shuryak and I. Zahed, [arXiv:hep-ph/0302231]{}.
J.D. Bjorken, Int. J. Mod. Phys. [**A7**]{} (1992) 4189, Phys. Rev. [**D47**]{} (1993) 101.
E. Gotsman, E. Levin and U. Maor, Phys. Rev. [**D60**]{} (1999) 094011 and references therein.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C18**]{} (2000) 167.
A.B. Kaidalov, V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C21**]{} (2001) 521.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C24**]{} (2002) 581.
V.N. Gribov, Sov. Phys. JETP [**26**]{} (1968) 414.
M. Carena and H. Haber, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. [**50**]{} (2003) 63.
E. Boos, A. Djouadi, M. Mühlleitner and A. Vologdin, Phys. Rev. [**D66**]{} (2002) 055004.
K.G. Boreskov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. [**8**]{} (1969) 464 \[Yad. Fiz. [**8**]{} (1968) 796\].
A.B. Kaidalov and B.M. Karnakov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. [**3**]{} (1966) 814 \[Yad. Fiz. [**3**]{} (1966) 1119\].
A.B. Kaidalov and B.M. Karnakov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. [**11**]{} (1970) 121 \[Yad. Fiz. [**11**]{} (1970) 216\].
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, [hep-ph/0006005]{}, in [*Proc. of 8th Int. Workshop on Deep Inelastic Scattering and QCD (DIS2000)*]{}, Liverpool, eds. J. Gracey and T. Greenshaw (World Scientific, 2001), p.592.
V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C19**]{} (2001) 477, erratum [**C20**]{} (2001) 599.
Feng Yuan, Phys. Lett. [**B510**]{} (2001) 155.
A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Phys. Rev. [**D64**]{} (2001) 094017.
A.G. Shuvaev, K.J. Golec-Biernat, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Phys. Rev. [**D60**]{} (1999) 014015.
A.D. Martin, R.G. Roberts, W.J. Stirling and R.S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. [**C14**]{} (2000) 133.
CTEQ Collaboration: J. Pumplin et al., JHEP [**0207**]{} (2002) 012.
A.D. Martin, R.G. Roberts, W. J. Stirling and R.S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. [**C28**]{} (2003) 455.
T. Plehn, D. Rainwater and D. Zeppenfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**88**]{} (2002) 05181.
S.Y. Choi, D.J. Miller, M.M. Muhlleitner and P.M. Zerwas, Phys. Lett. [**B553**]{} (2003) 61.
A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. Com. [**108**]{} (1998) 56, [arXiv:hep-ph/9704448]{}.
S. Heinemeyer, W. Hollik and G. Weiglein, [arXiv:hep-ph/0002213]{}.
M. Glück, E. Reya and A. Vogt, Z. Phys. [**C67**]{} (1995) 433.
A. De Roeck, V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin, R. Orava and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. [**C25**]{} (2002) 391.
[^1]: For convenience of presentation we will denote this particle $h(0^-)$, rather than the conventional notation $A(0^-)$.
[^2]: For a recent review see, for example, Ref. [@CH].
[^3]: It can be shown that similar formulae are also valid for photon–photon fusion processes.
[^4]: In addition, at LHC energies, the effective anomalous dimension of the gluon gives an extra suppression of the contribution from the low $Q_\perp$ domain [@KMRH].
[^5]: To account for the interference and the precise form of the amplitude for soft gluon ($q_\perp \ll m_h$) large-angle emission, we explicitly calculate the one-loop virtual correction to the $gg\to h$ vertex, integrating over the whole angular range for $q_\perp \ll
m_h$. We adjust the upper limit of the $z$-integral so that $z<0.62m_h/(0.62m_h+q_\perp)$ in the expression for the $T$-factor (see eq. (10) of [@INC] with $k_t=q_\perp$), in order to reproduce the complete one-loop result.
[^6]: For example, we predict the cross section for the exclusive diffractive production of a Standard Model Higgs at the LHC, with $m_h = 120$ GeV, to be in the range 0.9–5.5 fb.
[^7]: It is interesting to note that the introduction of the $\vec
p_{i\perp}$ and angular correlations in (\[eq:rat3\]), (\[eq:rat4\]) raise $\langle S^2\rangle$ from 0.023 to 0.026.
[^8]: Note that there is a typographical error in eq. (25) of [@a17], where the last factor should be simply $S^2$ rather than its second derivative. However the results presented in [@a17] correspond to the correct definition of $F$.
[^9]: A proposal, similar in spirit to our approach, can be found in Ref. [@OZ]. The idea is to determine the CP-parity of a Higgs boson by measuring the azimuthal correlations of the tagging (quark) jets which accompany Higgs production via the vector-boson-fusion mechanism. Even if we disregard the possible degradation of the characteristic features of the distribution caused by parton showers and the inclusive environment of the jets, we note that the method is not applicable in some important regions where the couplings of the Higgs to vector bosons are strongly suppressed. Another method to determine the spin-parity of the Higgs, which similarly relies on the vector-boson coupling, was discussed in Ref. [@CMMZ].
[^10]: The branching ratios of $h,H,A\to\gamma\gamma$ are less than, or of the order of, $10^{-5}$–$10^{-4}$, which is much smaller than in the SM.
[^11]: The separation of $h$ and $H$ bosons may be especially difficult for [*inclusive*]{} signals, where the mass resolution is usually $\Delta m\gtrsim 10~\GeV$, except in the $\gamma\gamma$ and probably $\mu\mu$ modes. However, with forward proton taggers, the [*exclusive*]{} signal has the added bonus that a mass resolution of $\Delta m \sim 1~\GeV$ may be obtained [@DKMOR].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
author:
- |
[**Matteo Brunelli**]{}\
[IAMSR and Turku Centre for Computer Science]{}\
[Åbo Akademi University]{}, [Joukahainengatan 3-5A, FIN-20520 Åbo, Finland]{}\
[e–mail: `[email protected]`]{}\
[**Andrew Critch**]{}\
[Department of Mathematics]{}\
[University of California]{}, [Berkeley, CA 94720, United States]{}\
[e–mail: `[email protected]`]{}\
[**Michele Fedrizzi**]{}\
[Department of Computer and Management Sciences]{}\
[University of Trento]{}, [Via Inama 5, I-38122 Trento, Italy]{}\
[e–mail: `[email protected]`]{}
date: 'September, 2010'
title: '**A note on the proportionality between some consistency indices in the AHP**'
---
[**Abstract** ]{}
[: Analytic hierarchy process; consistency indices; pairwise comparison matrices; reciprocal relations.]{}
Introduction
============
Measuring the inconsistency of an $n \times n$ pairwise comparison matrix — that is, assigning a numerical value to “how much" the matrix $\mathbf{A}=(a_{ij})_{n \times n}$ deviates from one indicating consistent preferences — is an important issue in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), as well as in other alternative methods of decision-making.
The oldest and most commonly used measure is the consistency index, $CI$, introduced by Saaty [@saaty1977], $$%
CI=\frac{\lambda_{\max}-n}{n-1}, \label{CI}
%$$
where $\lambda_{\max}$ is the maximum eigenvalue of $\mathbf{A}$. After Saaty, several other authors proposed different consistency indices in order to find the most suitable way to estimate “how far" $\mathbf{A}$ is from the consistency condition
$$%
a_{ij}a_{jk}=a_{ik} ~ \forall i,j,k.
%
\label{consistenza moltiplicativa}$$
Note that Saaty’s definition (\[CI\]) is based on the fact that, for a positive reciprocal matrix, condition (\[consistenza moltiplicativa\]) holds if and only if $\lambda_{\max}=n$.
Appropriate consistency evaluation of elicited preferences is seen as important largely because the achievement of a satisfactory consistency level is viewed as a desirable property. The more consistent are the preferences of a decision maker, the more likely he/she is a reliable expert, has a deep insight into the problem, and acts with attention and care with respect to the problem he/she is facing. Conversely, if judgements are far from consistency, i.e. they are heavily contradictory, it is likely that they were given with poor competence and care. Several inconsistency indices have been already proposed in literature to estimate the degree of incoherence of judgements [@Barzilai1998; @CavalloD'Apuzzo2009; @CavalloD'Apuzzo2010; @DuszakKoczkodaj1994; @GoldenWang1989; @Koczkodaj1993; @RamikKorviny2010; @RamikPerzina2010; @SteinMizzi2007]
If two indices are proportional, it is important to know their proportionality for two reasons. From an empirical point of view, they should not be considered as contributing independent evidence for the consistency of a subject’s preferences. On the other hand, from a mathematical perspective, their equivalence may be taken to suggest that they represent an important quantity.
Pairwise comparison matrices and consistency indices
====================================================
Given a set of alternatives $X=\{ x_{1},\ldots,x_{n} \}~(n \geq 2)$, a pairwise comparison matrix $\mathbf{A}=(a_{ij})_{n \times n}$ is a matrix $\mathbf{A} \in [1/9,9]^{n \times n}$ with (i) $a_{ii}=1 \;
\forall i$ and (ii) $a_{ij}a_{ji}=1 \; \forall i,j$ where $a_{ij}$ is a multiplicative estimation of the degree of preference of $x_i$ over $x_j$ [@saaty1977]. The comparison scale ranging from 1 to 9 was employed by Saaty based on experimental evidence [@miller1956] that an individual cannot simultaneously compare more than $7\pm 2$ objects without being confused. A pairwise comparison matrix is considered [*consistent*]{} if and only if the following transitivity condition holds: $$\label{eq:transitivity}
a_{ik}=a_{ij}a_{jk}~ \forall i,j,k.$$ If $\mathbf{A}$ is consistent, then there exists a vector $\mathbf{w}=(w_{1},\ldots,w_{n})$ such that $$\label{eq:ratio}
a_{ij}=\frac{w_i}{w_j}~ \forall i,j.$$ In this case, the vector $\mathbf{w}$ can be obtained using the geometric mean method: $$\label{eq:mediageometrica}
w_{i}=\left( \prod_{j=1}^{n}a_{ij} \right)^{\frac{1}{n}}~ \forall i .$$
Some other types of matrices have been proposed in order to pairwise compare alternatives, and perhaps the second best known approach, after that of Saaty, is based on [*reciprocal relations*]{} [@tanino]. Reciprocal relations, which are sometimes also called fuzzy preference relations, can be represented by means of matrices $\mathbf{R}=(r_{ij})_{n \times n}$ with (i) $r_{ii}=0.5
\; \forall i$ and (ii) $r_{ij}+ r_{ji}=1 \; \forall i,j$ where $r_{ij}$ is an estimation of the degree of preference given to $x_i$ compared with $x_j$. Tanino calls a reciprocal relation matrix [*additively consistent*]{} if $$\label{transR}
%
r_{ij}-r_{ik}-r_{kj}+0.5 = 0 ~ \forall i,j,k.
%$$ Pairwise comparison matrices and reciprocal relations are theoretically interchangeable representations of preferences, relatable by means of a function $f:[1/9,9]\rightarrow
[0,1]$ defined in [@fedrizzi] as follows $$\label{eq:f}
r_{ij}=f(a_{ij})=\frac{1}{2}(1+\log_{9}a_{ij}),$$ and its inverse $$\label{eq:g}
a_{ij}=f^{-1}(r_{ij})=9^{2 (r_{ij}-0.5)} \, .$$ Under this transformation, given $\mathbf{A}=(a_{ij})$ and $\mathbf{R}=(r_{ij})$, if $r_{ij}=f(a_{ij})~\forall i,j$, then $\mathbf{A}=(a_{ij})$ and $\mathbf{R}=(r_{ij})$ can be considered to represent the same preference configuration.
Besides Saaty’s consistency index (\[CI\]), several other consistency indices have been proposed in the literature so far, and in this short paper we establish the proportionality between two pairs of them. Hence, let us first briefly recall the definitions of the four consistency indices at issue.
The Geometric Consistency Index {#sub:Geometric consistency index}
-------------------------------
The geometric consistency index [@GCI; @crawford85] is based on the deviations of the entries $a_{ij}$ of $\mathbf{A}$ from the consistent values $w_i / w_j$, where the weight vector $\mathbf{w}=(w_1,...,w_n)$ is given by (\[eq:mediageometrica\]). It has the following formulation: $$\label{eq:GCI}
GCI=\frac{2}{(n-1)(n-2)}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j>i}^{n} \, \ln^2{e_{ij}}$$ with $e_{ij}:=a_{ij} (w_j / w_i )$ being a local estimator of inconsistency and $\frac{2}{(n-1)(n-2)}$ a normalization factor.
The index of Lamata and Peláez {#sub:Index of determinants}
------------------------------
The index of Lamata and Peláez [@lamatapelaez; @pelaezlamata], denoted by $CI^{*}$, is based on the property that three alternatives $x_i,x_j,x_k$ are pairwise compared in a consistent way if and only if the determinant of the corresponding pairwise comparison matrix of order three
$$%
\mathbf{A}_{3 \times 3} = \left(%
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & a_{ij} & a_{ik} \\
\frac{1}{a_{ij}} & 1 & a_{jk} \\
\frac{1}{a_{ik}} & \frac{1}{a_{jk}} & 1 \\
\end{array}%
\right)
%
\label{matrice3X3}$$
is equal to zero,
$$\label{det} \det (\mathbf{A}_{3 \times
3})=\frac{a_{ik}}{a_{ij}a_{jk}}+\frac{a_{ij}a_{jk}}{a_{ik}}-2 = 0.$$
Based on this property, the authors define the consistency index $CI^{*}$ of an $n \times n$ pairwise comparison matrix $\mathbf{A}$ as the mean value of the determinants of all the $3 \times 3$ submatrices of $\mathbf{A}$.
The index $c_3$ {#sub:The index $c_3$}
---------------
Shiraishi et al. [@giapponesi1; @giapponesi2; @giapponesi3] proposed, as a consistency index of a pairwise comparison matrix, the coefficient $c_3$ of its characteristic polynomial. $$P_{\mathbf{A}}(\lambda)=\lambda^n +c_{1}\lambda^{n-1}+\cdots
+c_{n-1}\lambda+c_{n} \; .$$ They proved [@giapponesi1] that $c_3(\mathbf{A})\leq 0$ for every pairwise comparison matrix $\mathbf{A}$, with $c_3(\mathbf{A}) = 0$ if and only if $\mathbf{A}$ is consistent, which justifies its use as a consistency index.
The index $\rho$ {#sub:The index rho}
----------------
The index $\rho$ for reciprocal relations [@FedFedMarPer2002; @fedrizzigiove] is based on an index of local consistency associated with the triplet $(x_i,x_j,x_k)$, that is $$\label{eq:L} t_{ijk}^2=(r_{ij}-r_{ik}-r_{kj}+0.5)^2.$$ which clearly derives from (\[transR\]). Fedrizzi and Giove [@fedrizzigiove] defined a global consistency index as the mean value of the local consistency indices for all the possible triplets $(x_i,x_j,x_k)$, obtaining $$\label{eq:rho}
\rho=\sum_{i<j<k}^{n} (r_{ij}-r_{ik}-r_{kj}+0.5)^2
\bigg/ \binom{n}{3}.$$
Results
=======
In this section we prove that the index $c_3$ is proportional to $CI^{*}$, and the index $\rho$ is proportional to $GCI$.
\[proposizione1\] Given a positive reciprocal matrix $\mathbf{A}_{n \times n}$ with $n \geq 3$, the consistency indices $c_3$ and $CI^*$ satisfy the equality $$%
c_3 = - \binom{n}{3} CI^*.
%
\label{prima equivalenza}$$
Consistency index $CI^*$ is the mean value of the determinants of all the $3 \times 3$ submatrices (\[matrice3X3\]) of $\mathbf{A}$, and therefore,
$$CI^{*}=\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j>i}^n
\sum_{k>j}^n
\bigg(\frac{a_{ik}}{a_{ij}a_{jk}}+\frac{a_{ij}a_{jk}}{a_{ik}}-2\bigg)\bigg/
\binom{n}{3}.
%
\label{svil_det_3X3}$$
Furthermore, since $\mathbf{A}$ is positive and reciprocal, by expanding $P_{\mathbf{A}}(\lambda)$ (see [@giapponesi1]) one obtains $$%
c_3=\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j>i}^n
\sum_{k>j}^n\bigg(2-\frac{a_{ik}}{a_{ij}a_{jk}}-\frac{a_{ij}a_{jk}}{a_{ik}}
\bigg) .
%
\label{svilc3}$$ Then, equality (\[prima equivalenza\]) follows from (\[svil\_det\_3X3\]) and (\[svilc3\]).
If in this case the similarity between the two indices was quite clear, then the same cannot be said about the next two. For this reason, if the previous proof was straightforward, the next involves more computations.
\[proposizione2\] Given a reciprocal relation $\mathbf{R}=(r_{ij})_{n \times n}$ , the consistency indices $\rho$ and $GCI$ satisfy the equality $$%
\rho = \frac{3}{4\ln^2(9)}GCI
%
\label{seconda equivalenza}$$ for every $n \geq 3$
For later convenience, letting $q_{ij}=r_{ij}-0.5$ allows us to write $r_{ij}+r_{ji}=1$ property as $q_{ij}=-q_{ji}$. Then, (\[eq:g\]) becomes $a_{ij}=9^{2q_{ij}}$. Now, write $t_{ijk}=r_{ij}-r_{ik}-r_{kj}+0.5 = q_{ij}+q_{jk}+q_{ki}$ so that, from (\[eq:rho\]), the index $\rho$ can be reformulated (see [@fedrizzigiove]) as
$$\begin{aligned}
\rho &=& \sum_{ijk}^{n} (r_{ij}-r_{ik}-r_{kj}+0.5)^2
\bigg/ 6 \binom{n}{3} \\
&=& \sum_{ijk}t^2_{ijk} \bigg/ 6 \binom{n}{3} \; .\end{aligned}$$
Let us rewrite the Geometric Consistency Index (\[eq:GCI\]) for reciprocal relations by applying (\[eq:f\]). From (\[eq:mediageometrica\]), $$\log_{9} w_i = \frac{2}{n} \sum_k q_{ik}$$ and thus, from the definition of local inconsistency $e_{ij} :=
a_{ij}\frac{w_j}{w_i}$ in (\[eq:GCI\]), $$\begin{aligned}
n\log_{9}(e_{ij}) &=& 2nq_{ij}+2\sum_k (q_{jk}-q_{ik}) \\
&=& 2\sum_k (q_{ij}+q_{jk} + q_{ki}) \\
&=& 2 \sum_k t_{ijk}\end{aligned}$$ so the Geometric Consistency Index equals
$$\begin{aligned}
GCI &=& \frac{2}{(n-1)(n-2)}\sum_i\sum_{j>i}\ln^2e_{ij}\\
&=& \frac{1}{(n-1)(n-2)}\sum_{ij}\ln^2e_{ij}\\
&=& \frac{\ln^2(9)}{(n-1)(n-2)}\sum_{ij}\left(\frac{2}{n} \sum_k t_{ijk}\right)^2\\
&=& \frac{4\ln^2(9)}{n^2(n-1)(n-2)} \sum_{ij}\left(\sum_k
t_{ijk}\right)^{2}\end{aligned}$$
At this point, the proportionality claim $\rho \propto GCI$ is equivalent to $$\sum_{ijk}t^2_{ijk} \quad \propto \quad \sum_{ij}\left(\sum_k t_{ijk}\right)^2$$ (where the constant of proportionality could depend on $n$).
First, let us compute the LHS: $$\begin{aligned}
t_{ijk}^2 &= q_{ij}^2+q_{jk}^2+q_{ki}^2
+ 2(q_{ij}q_{jk}+q_{jk}q_{ki}+q_{ki}q_{ij})\end{aligned}$$ Let $S=\displaystyle\sum_{ij}q_{ij}^2$ and $C=\displaystyle\sum_{ijk}q_{ij}q_{jk}$. Summing the expansion of $t_{ijk}^2$ one term at a time, $$\sum_{ijk}q_{ij}^2=\sum_k\sum_{ij}q_{ij}^2=nS$$ and by symmetry, $$\sum_{ijk}q_{jk}^2=\sum_{ijk}q_{ki}^2=nS.$$ Similarly, $$\sum_{ijk}q_{ij}q_{jk}=\sum_{ijk}q_{jk}q_{ki}=\sum_{ijk}q_{ki}q_{ij}=C.$$ Hence, $$\text{LHS}=\sum_{ijk}t^2_{ijk}=nS+nS+nS+2(C+C+C)=3(nS+2C).$$
Next let us compute the RHS, first by rewriting:
$$\text{RHS} = \sum_{ij}\left(\sum_k t_{ijk}\right)^2 = \sum_{ij}\left(\sum_{kl} t_{ijk}t_{ijl}\right) = \sum_{ijkl}t_{ijk}t_{ijl}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
t_{ijk}t_{ijl} &=& (q_{ij}+q_{jk}+q_{ki})(q_{ij}+q_{jl}+q_{li})\\
\mbox{ \ } &=& q^2_{ij}+q_{ij}q_{jl}+q_{ij}q_{li}
+q_{jk}q_{ij}+q_{jk}q_{jl}+q_{jk}q_{li}
+q_{ki}q_{ij}+q_{ki}q_{jl}+q_{ki}q_{li} \\\end{aligned}$$
The 1st term sums to $$\sum_{ijkl}q_{ij}^2=\sum_{kl}\sum_{ij}q_{ij}^2=n^2S.$$ The 2nd term sums to $$\sum_{ijkl}q_{ij}q_{jl}=\sum_k\sum_{ijl}q_{ij}q_{jl}=nC.$$ Similarly, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th terms respectively sum to $$\sum_{ijkl}q_{li}q_{ij}
=\sum_{ijkl}q_{ij}q_{jk}
=\sum_{ijkl}q_{ki}q_{ij}=nC,$$ whereas the 5th and 9th terms each sum to $$\sum_{ijkl}-q_{kj}q_{jl} =
\sum_{ijkl}-q_{ki}q_{il} = -nC.$$ The 6th term sums to $$\sum_{ijkl}q_{jk}q_{li}=\left(\sum_{jk}q_{jk}\right)\left(\sum_{li}q_{li}\right)=(0)(0)=0,$$ and similarly the 8th term sums to $0$.
Hence, the total sum is $$\begin{aligned}
\text{RHS} &=& n^2S+nC+nC+nC-nC+0+nC+0-nC \\
&=& n^2S+2nC \\
&=& n(nS+2C)\end{aligned}$$ so we obtain the proportionality $$\frac{\text{LHS}}{\text{RHS}} = \frac{3(nS+2C)}{n(nS+2C)} = \frac{3}{n},$$ and recover $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\rho}{GCI} &=& \frac{\text{LHS}}{\text{RHS}}\cdot \frac{n^2(n-1)(n-2)}{4\ln^2(9)}\cdot \frac{1}{6 \binom{n}{3} } \\
&=& \frac{3n(n-1)(n-2)}{4\ln^2(9)}\cdot \frac{1}{n(n-1)(n-2)} \\
&=& \frac{3}{4\ln^2(9)}.\end{aligned}$$
Note that the constant of proportionality between $c_3$ and $CI^*$ depends on the number $n$ of alternatives, whereas the one between $\rho$ and $GCI$ does not. Propositions \[proposizione1\] and \[proposizione2\] can also be represented graphically. We randomly generated a large number of pairwise comparison matrices (or, equivalently, reciprocal relations) and associated each of them with a point on the cartesian plane having as coordinates the corresponding values of the two consistency indices involved in proposition \[proposizione1\]. As expected, all the points lie on a straight line. The same holds for proposition \[proposizione2\].
Conclusions
===========
When making use of the various indices observed and proven proportional in this paper, we believe it is important that the applied mathematician be aware of their equivalence. This avoids redundancy in the consideration of evidence for consistent preferences, and allows existing results proven for one index to apply directly to other indices which are proportional to it.
[999]{}
Aguaròn, J., Moreno-Jimènez, J.M., The geometric consistency index: Approximated threshold, European Journal of Operational Research, 147, 137–145 (2003)
Barzilai J., Consistency measures for pairwise comparison matrices, *J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal.*, 7, 123–132 (1998)
Cavallo B. and D’Apuzzo L., A General Unified Framework for Pairwise Comparison Matrices in Multicriterial Methods, *International Journal of Intelligent Systems*, 24, 377–398 (2009)
Cavallo B. and D’Apuzzo L., Characterizations of consistent pairwise comparison matrices over abelian linearly ordered groups, *International Journal of Intelligent Systems*, 25 1035–1059 (2010)
Crawford, G., Williams, C., A note on the analysis of subjective judgement matrices, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 25–40 (1985)
Duszak Z. and Koczkodaj W. W., Generalization of a new definition of consistency for pairwise comparisons. Information Processing Letters 52, 273–276 (1994)
Fedrizzi, M., On a consensus measure in a group MCDM problem, in Multiperson Decision Making Models using Fuzzy Sets and Possibility Theory (theory and Decision Library, series B: Mathematical and Statistical Methods, Vol. 18), J. Kacprzyk and M. Fedrizzi (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dortrecht, The Netherlands (1990)
Fedrizzi, M., Fedrizzi, M., Marques Pereira, R.A., On the issue of consistency in dynamical consensual aggregation. In Technologies for Constructing Intelligent Systems, Vol. 1, Bouchon Meunier B., Gutierrez Rios J., Magdalena L., Yager R. R. (ed.), Heidelberg: Physica, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 89, 129–137, Springer (2002)
Fedrizzi, M., Giove, S., Incomplete pairwise comparisons and consistency optimization, European Journal of Operational Research, 183, 303–313 (2007)
Golden B. L. and Wang Q., An alternate measure of consistency, in Golden B. L., Wasil E. A. and Harker P. T. (ed.), *The Analythic Hierarchy Process, Applications and studies*, Springer–Verlag, 68–81. Berlin–Heidelberg (1989)
Koczkodaj W. W., A new definition of consistency or pairwise comparisons. Mathematical & Computer Modelling 18, 79–84 (1993)
Lamata, M.T., Peláez, J.I., A method for improving the consistency of judgments, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 10, 677–686 (2002)
Miller, G. A., The magical number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information, The Psychological Review, 63, 81–97 (1956)
Peláez, J.I., Lamata, M.T., A new measure of inconsistency for positive reciprocal matrices, Computer and Mathematics with Applications, 46, 1839–1845 (2003)
Ramík J. and Korviny P., Inconsistency of pair-wise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements based on geometric mean, *Fuzzy Sets and Systems*, 161, 1604–1613 (2010)
Ramík J. and Perzina R., A method for solving fuzzy multicriteria decision problems with dependent criteria, *Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making*, 9, 123–141 (2010)
Saaty, T.L., A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234–281 (1977)
Shiraishi, S., Obata, T., Daigo, M., Properties of a positive reciprocal matrix and their application to AHP, Journal of the Operations Resesearch Society of Japan, 41, 404–414 (1998)
Shiraishi, S., Obata, T., Daigo, M., Nakajima, N., Assesment for an incomplete matrix and improvement of the inconsistent comparison: computational experiments, Proceedings of ISAHP 1999, Kobe, Japan (1999)
Shiraishi, S., Obata, T., On a maximization problem arising from a positive reciprocal matrix in the AHP, Bulletin of Informatics and Cybernetics, 34, 91–96 (2002)
Stein W. E. and Mizzi P. J., The harmonic consistency index for the analytic hierarchy process, *European Journal of Operational Research*, 177, 488–497 (2007)
Tanino, T., Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 12, 117–131 (1984)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We prove that if $G$ is a quasi-line graph with $\Delta(G)>\omega(G)$ and $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$. Together with our previous work, this implies that if $G$ is a claw-free graph with $\Delta(G)>\omega(G)$ and $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$.'
author:
- 'Daniel W. Cranston[^1]'
- 'Landon Rabern[^2]'
bibliography:
- 'GraphColoring.bib'
title: 'List-coloring claw-free graphs with $\Delta$-1 colors'
---
Introduction
============
Brooks’ Theorem shows that to color a graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)$ colors, the obvious necessary condition (no clique of size $\Delta(G)+1$) is also sufficient, when $\Delta(G)\ge 3$. Borodin and Kostochka [@BK77] conjectured something similar for $\Delta(G)-1$ colors.
\[BK-conj\] If $G$ is a graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 9$ and no clique of size $\Delta(G)$, then $\chi(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$.
This conjecture is a major open problem and has been the subject of much research. Reed [@Reed99] used probabilistic techniques to prove the conjecture when $\Delta(G)\ge 10^{14}$. For graphs with smaller maximum degree, the best result [@big-cliques] is that $\chi(G)\le\Delta(G)-1$ whenever $G$ has no clique of size $\Delta(G)-3$. We have also proved Conjecture \[BK-conj\] for claw-free graphs [@BK-claw-free].
Although the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture is far from resolved, it is natural to pose the analogous conjectures for list-coloring and online list-coloring, replacing $\chi(G)$ in Conjecture \[BK-conj\] with ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}(G)$. These conjectures first appeared in print in [@BK-claw-free] and [@BK-squares], respectively. In the case of Brooks’ Theorem, the analogues for ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}(G)$ both hold. In fact, the proof of the latter [@Brooks-AT] constructs an orientation of $E(G)$ from which the result follows by the Alon–Tarsi Theorem. The present paper applies this approach to the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture. More precisely, given a graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 9$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, we seek an orientation of $E(G)$ that implies that ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$. Our main result is the following.
\[MainThm\] Let $G$ be a quasi-line graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$. If $\omega(G) <
\Delta(G)$, then ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$. Further, Painter has a natural winning strategy, using a combination of the Alon–Tarsi Theorem and the kernel method.
Chudnovsky and Seymour [@CS-survey; @CS-claw-free4] proved a structure theorem for claw-free graphs. Although it is rather complicated, it implies the following structure theorem for quasi-line graphs, which is much simpler. (We define the undefined terms in Section \[defns\].)
\[QuasilineStructure\] Every connected quasi-line graph not containing a non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques is a circular interval graph or a composition of linear interval strips.
Theorem \[QuasilineStructure\] suggests a natural approach to prove Theorem \[MainThm\]. Let $G$ be a quasi-line graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. In Sections \[circular-interval-graphs\] and \[homogeneous-pairs\] we show that if $G$ is a minimal counterexample to our theorem, then $G$ cannot be a circular interval graph and $G$ cannot contain a non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques. In Section \[2joins\], we consider compositions of linear interval strips (which include line graphs, as a special case). We show that a minimal counterexample $G$ must be formed from a line graph $G'$ by deleting some (possibly empty) matching $M$. Further, we can choose $G'$ such that $\Delta(G')=\Delta(G)$ and $\omega(G')<\Delta(G)$. So we prove the desired result for all quasi-line graphs if we prove it for line graphs. Finally, in Section \[line-graphs\] we prove the theorem for line graphs. By combining this result with Theorem 5.6 from [@BK-claw-free], we get that every claw-free graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ satisfies ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)\le \Delta(G)-1$. In other words, for these graphs we prove the list-coloring version of the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture.
It is somewhat surprising that line graphs seem to be the most difficult case in the proof. In our reduction from general quasi-line graphs to line graphs, we only need $\Delta(G)\ge 9$. It is our proof of Theorem \[MainThm\] for line graphs that requires $\Delta(G)\ge 69$. As noted above, Theorem 5.6 in [@BK-claw-free] shows that if ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)\le\Delta(G)-1$ for all quasi-line graphs $G$ with $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ and $\Delta(G)\ge 9$, then the same bound holds for all such claw-free graphs. In unpublished work, we have extended this reduction to *online* list-coloring. Thus, ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le\Delta(G)-1$ for every such claw-free graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$. (And again, the hypothesis $\Delta(G)\ge 69$ is needed only for the case of line graphs.)
Definitions {#defns}
-----------
Most of our terminology and notation are standard. We write $N(v)$ for the neighborhood of a vertex $v$, and $N[v]=N(v)\cup\{v\}$. When $u$ and $v$ are adjacent, we write $u\adj v$; otherwise, $u\nonadj v$. We write $[t]$ for $\{1,\ldots,t\}$ (but we reserve, for example, $[13]$ for citations). The degree, $d(v)$, is the size of $N(v)$ and $d_H(v)$ is the size of $N(v)\cap V(H)$, for any subgraph $H$. A graph is *$k$-degenerate* if every subgraph $H$ contains a vertex $v$ with $d_H(v)\le k$. The complement of $G$ is denoted $\overline{G}$. The maximum degree and clique number of $G$ are denoted $\Delta(G)$ and $\omega(G)$, and we may write $\Delta$ and $\omega$ when the context is clear. The chromatic number of $G$ is $\chi(G)$. Similarly, the list chromatic and online list-chromatic numbers are ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}(G)$. The edge chromatic number of $G$ is $\chi'(G)$, and ${\chi_{\ell}}'(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}'(G)$ are defined analogously. A graph $G$ is *$L$-colorable* if $G$ has a proper coloring $\varphi$ such that $\varphi(v)\in L(v)$ for all $v\in V(G)$. A graph $G$ is *$f$-choosable* if $G$ is $L$-colorable whenever $|L(v)|\ge
f(v)$ for all $v$, and $f$-paintable is defined analogously. We write $d_1$ for the function $f(v)=d(v)-1$, and thus define *$d_1$-choosable* and *$d_1$-paintable*.
The subgraph of a graph $G$ induced by vertex set $S$ is $G[S]$. The *average degree*, $\ad(G)$, of a graph $G$ is $2|E(G)|/|V(G)|$. The *maximum average degree*, ${{\textrm{mad}}}(G)$, is the maximum of $\ad(H)$, taken over all subgraphs $H$ of $G$. A graph or subgraph is *complete* if it induces a clique; otherwise it is *incomplete*. A graph is *almost complete* if deleting some vertex yields a complete graph. The *join* of graphs $G$ and $H$, denoted ${G \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} H}$, is formed from their disjoint union by adding every edge with one endpoint in each of $G$ and $H$.
A *linear interval graph* is one in which the vertices can be placed on the real line so that for each vertex $v$ its neighborhood is precisely the vertices in some interval of the line containing $v$. A *circular interval graph* is defined analogously, except that now the vertices are placed on the unit circle. The *line graph* $G$ of some graph $H$ has $V(G)=E(H)$ and $uv\in E(G)$ whenever $u,v\in V(G)$ and they correspond to edges in $H$ sharing an endpoint. A graph $G$ is *quasi-line* if for each vertex $v\in V(G)$, the subgraph $G[N(v)]$ can be covered by two cliques. A graph if *claw-free* if it contains no induced copy of $K_{1,3}$. It is easy to check that the class of claw-free graphs properly contains the class of quasi-line graphs, which in turn properly contains the class of line graphs.
A *homogeneous pair of cliques* $(A_1, A_2)$ in a graph $G$ is a pair of disjoint nonempty cliques such that for each $i \in \{1,2\}$, every vertex in $G \setminus (A_1 \cup A_2)$ is either adjacent to all of $A_i$ or non-adjacent to all of $A_i$ and ${\left|A_1\right|} + {\left|A_2\right|} \geq 3$. The pair $(A_1, A_2)$ is *non-linear* if $G[A_1\cup A_2]$ contains an induced 4-cycle.
Chudnovsky and Seymour [@CS-survey] generalized the class of line graphs by introducing the notion of *compositions of strips* ([@king2009claw Chapter 5] gives a more detailed introduction). We use the modified definition from King and Reed [@king2008bounding]. A *strip* $(H, A_1, A_2)$ is a claw-free graph $H$ containing two cliques $A_1$ and $A_2$ such that for each $i \in
\{1,2\}$ and $v \in A_i$, the set $N_H(v)\setminus A_i$ is a clique. If $H$ is a linear interval graph with $A_1$ and $A_2$ on opposite ends, then $(H, A_1, A_2)$ is a $\emph{linear interval strip}$. Now let $H$ be a directed multigraph (possibly with loops) and suppose for each edge $e$ of $H$ we have a strip $(H_e, X_e, Y_e)$. For each $v \in V(H)$ define
$$C_v {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}{\left( \bigcup {\left\{ X_e \mid \text{$e$ is directed out of $v$} \right\}} \right)}
\cup {\left( \bigcup {\left\{ Y_e \mid \text{$e$ is directed into $v$} \right\}} \right)}.$$
The graph formed by taking the disjoint union of ${\left\{ H_e \mid e \in E(H) \right\}}$ and making $C_v$ a clique for each $v \in V(H)$ is the composition of the strips $(H_e, X_e, Y_e)$. Any graph formed in this way is a *composition of strips*. Notice that if each strip $(H_e, X_e, Y_e)$ in the composition has $V(H_e) = X_e = Y_e$, then the graph formed is just the line graph of the multigraph formed by replacing each $e \in E(H)$ with ${\left|H_e\right|}$ copies of $e$.
It is convenient to have notation and terminology for a strip together with how it attaches to the graph. An *interval $2$-join* in a graph $G$ is an induced subgraph $H$ such that (i) $H$ is a nonempty linear interval graph, (ii) the ends of $H$ are cliques $A_1$ and $A_2$, not necessarily disjoint, (iii) $G\setminus H$ contains cliques $B_1$, $B_2$ (not necessarily disjoint) such that $A_1$ is joined to $B_1$ and $A_2$ is joined to $B_2$, and (iv) no other edges exist between $H$ and $G-H$. Since $A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2$ are uniquely determined by $H$, we can refer to the interval $2$-join as either $H$ or, equivalently, as the quintuple $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$.
An interval $2$-join $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ is *trivial* if $V(H) = A_1
= A_2$ and *canonical* if $A_1 \cap A_2 =
\emptyset$. A canonical interval $2$-join $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ with leftmost vertex $v_1$ and rightmost vertex $v_t$ is *reducible* if $H$ is incomplete and $N_H(A_1)\setminus A_1 = N_H(v_1)\setminus A_1$ or $N_H(A_2)\setminus A_2 = N_H(v_t)\setminus A_2$. We call such a canonical interval $2$-join reducible because we can *reduce* it as follows. Suppose $H$ is incomplete and $N_H(A_1)\setminus A_1 = N_H(v_1)\setminus A_1$. Let $C
{\mathrel{\mathop:}=}N_H(v_1) \setminus A_1$, let $A_1' {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}C \setminus A_2$, and let $A_2' {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}A_2 \setminus C$. Since $H$ is incomplete, $v_t \in
A_2'$, so $H' {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}G[A_1' \cup A_2']$ is a nonempty linear interval graph that gives the reduced canonical interval $2$-join $(H', A_1', A_2', A_1
\cup {\left( C \cap A_2 \right)}, B_2 \cup {\left( C \cap A_2 \right)})$.
Note that reducing an interval 2-join yields an interval 2-join with a smaller strip. Note also that reducing a canonical interval 2-join again yields a canonical interval 2-join. The process of reducing a 2-join allows us to refine the composition representation, and to get a representation with more strips. In particular, in a representation with the maximum number of strips, every 2-join is irreducible.
Coloring from Graph Orientations
--------------------------------
In this section, we show how we can orient the edges of a graph $G$ to prove upper bounds on ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}(G)$. It is well-known that if a graph $G$ is $k$-degenerate, then $\chi(G)\le k+1$; and this upper bound holds also for ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)$ and ${\chi_{OL}}(G)$. If $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ is a vertex order such that each $v_i$ has at most $k$ neighbors with smaller index, then we use at most $k+1$ colors when we color greedily in order of increasing index. We can view this bound in terms of orientations as follows. Orient each edge $v_iv_j$ as $v_i\to v_j$ when $i>j$. Now $\chi(G)\le k+1$ whenever $G$ has an acyclic orientation $D$ with maximum outdegree $k$. Alon and Tarsi proved the following far-reaching generalization, where $D$ need not be acyclic.
\[AT-thm\] Let $f:V\to \nats$ be a list size assigment, and let $D$ be an orientation of $E(G)$ in which $|EE(D)|\ne|EO(D)|$, where $EE(D)$ and $EO(D)$ are the sets of spanning Eulerian subgraphs of $D$ with an even (resp. odd) number of edges. If $f(v) > d_D^+(v)$ for all $v\in V(G)$, then $G$ is $f$-choosable. (In fact, $f$-paintable.)
Now we consider the other standard technique for coloring graphs via orientations. A *kernel* of a digraph $D$ is an independent set $I$ such that each vertex not in $I$ has an out-neighbor in $I$. A digraph is *kernel-perfect* if every induced subgraph has a kernel. Most applications of kernels to list-coloring use the following lemma of Bondy, Boppana, and Siegel.
\[BBS-lemma\] Let $f:V\to \nats$ be a list size assigment, and let $D$ be a kernel-perfect orientation of $E(G)$. If $f(v) > d_D^+(v)$ for all $v\in V(G)$, then $G$ is $f$-choosable. (In fact, $f$-paintable.)
We can easily prove Lemma \[BBS-lemma\] by induction. Given such an orientation, on each round Painter chooses as his independent set a kernel of the subgraph induced by the vertices listed by Lister. This technique is called the Kernel Method. Both Theorem \[AT-thm\] and Lemma \[BBS-lemma\] were originally proved for list coloring, and then extended to online list-coloring by Schauz [@Schauz-Paint-Correct]. (The extension of Lemma \[BBS-lemma\] has the same proof as the original. However, the extension of Theorem \[AT-thm\] requires significant work.)
Our proofs in this paper rely heavily on both of these techniques, so the following definitions are useful. A graph $H$ is *$f$-AT* if it has an orientation $D$ with $f(v) > d_D^+(v)$ for all $v \in V(H)$ and with different numbers of even and odd spanning Eulerian subgraphs. Such a $D$ is an *Alon–Tarsi orientation* for $f$ and $H$. A graph $H$ is $f$-KP if some supergraph $H'$ of $H$ has a kernel-perfect orientation where $f(v) > d^+(v)$ for all $v \in V(H')$. Allowing this supergraph for KP gives us more power. For example, $K_4-e$ has no kernel-perfect orientation showing it is degree-choosable, but if we double the edge in two triangles, then there is such an orientation. We could allow a supergraph for AT as well, but this doesn’t give us any more power, as we will see in Lemma \[subgraphLemma\]. Since our focus in this paper is the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture, we have one more definition.
A connected graph $G$ is *BK-free* if it does not contain an induced subgraph $H$ that is $f_H$-AT or $f_H$-KP where $f_H(v) {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}d_H(v) - 1 +
\Delta(G) - d_G(v)$ for all $v \in V(H)$.
The motivation for this definition is that any minimal counterexample to Theorem \[MainThm\] must be BK-free. To see this for list-coloring is easy. Suppose $G$ is not BK-free; say it contains subgraph $H$ that is $f$-AT or $f$-KP. By minimality, color $G\setminus H$. Now, by definition, we can extend the coloring to $H$. The same idea works for online list coloring. On each round, Painter first plays optimally on $G\setminus H$, then plays optimally on $H$ (omitting from $H$ any vertices with neighbors in $G$ that Painter chose on that round). So in particular, if $G$ is BK-free, then $\delta(G) \ge \Delta(G) - 1$. Thus, a vertex $v$ is *high* if $d(v)=\Delta(G)$ and *low* if $d(v)=\Delta(G)-1$. When we write that subgraph $H$ is $f$-AT or $f$-KP without specifying $f$, we mean $f(v)=d_H(v)-1+\Delta(G)-d_G(v)$ (so $f(v)=d_H(v)-1$ when $v$ is high in $G$ and $f(v)=d_H(v)$ when $v$ is low).
A special case of the weak perfect graph theorem states that if $G$ is the complement of a bipartite graph, then $\chi(G)=\omega(G)$. In this section, we prove a strengthening of the analogous statement for Alon–Tarsi orientations. This result plays a key role in Section \[homogeneous-pairs\], where we handle non-linear homogeneous pairs of cliques.
It is well known that for a graph $G$, if $H\subseteq G$, then $\chi(H)\le
\chi(G)$ and ${\chi_{\ell}}(H)\le{\chi_{\ell}}(G)$. More generally, if $f$ is a list-size assignment and $G$ is $f$-choosable or $f$-paintable, then so is $H$. It is natural to expect that an analogous statement holds for Alon–Tarsi orientations. Indeed it does, as we show in Lemma \[subgraphLemma\].
Given a graph $G$, let $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ be an arbitrary ordering of $V(G)$. The *graph polynomial*, $g$, of $G$ is given by $g=\prod_{v_iv_j\in
E(G), i<j}(x_i-x_j)$. Note that $g$ is independent of the ordering of $V(G)$, up to a factor of $\pm1$. For a polynomial $g\in\mathbb{F}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$, we write $g_{k_1,\ldots,k_n}$ for the coefficient in $g$ of $x_1^{k_1}\cdots x_n^{k_n}$. Alon and Tarsi [@AlonTarsi Corollary 2.3] observed that $G$ is $f$-AT precisely when there exist $k_i$ such that $f(v_i)\ge k_i+1$ for all $i$ and the graph polynomial has $g_{k_1,\ldots,k_n}\ne 0$.
If a graph $G$ is $f$-AT (for any particular function $f$) and $e \in E(G)$, then $G-e$ is also $f$-AT. More generally, if $H$ is a subgraph of $G$ and $G$ is $f$-AT, then so is $H$. \[subgraphLemma\]
The second statement follows from the first by induction on $|E(G)\setminus
E(H)|$. If $|V(H)|<|V(G)|$, then for each vertex in $V(G)\setminus V(H)$, we first delete all of its incident edges. Now adding or removing an isolated vertex $v$ has no effect on the graph polynomial.
Fix a graph $G$ and a function $f$ such that $G$ is $f$-AT. As noted above, $G$ is $f$-AT if and only if the graph polynomial of $G$ has a nonzero term $x_1^{k_1}\cdots x_n^{k_n}$, where $x_i$ is the variable corresponding to vertex $v_i$, such that $f(v_i) > k_i$ for all $i$.
Suppose the lemma is false, that is, there exists $e\in E(G)$ such that $G-e$ is not $f$-AT. Let $v_1$ and $v_2$ denote the endpoints of $e$. Since $G-e$ is not $f$-AT, its graph polynomial has no nonzero term as above. That is, for every term $x_1^{j_1} \cdots x_n^{j_n}$, there exists $i$ such that $f(v_i) \le j_i$. Now the graph polynomial of $G$ is formed from that of $G-e$ by multiplying by $(x_1 - x_2)$. Terms may cancel, but the exponents never go down. Since $G-e$ is not $f$-AT, for every term $x_1^{j_1} \cdots x_n^{j_n}$ in the polynomial of $G-e$, there exists $i$ such that $f(v_i) \le j_i$. Thus, for any remaining term $x_1^{k_1} \cdots x_n^{k_n}$ in the graph polynomial of $G$, there exists $i$ such that $f(v_i) \le k_i$; in particular, we have $f(v_i)\le j_i\le k_i$, where $i$ is chosen to show that $G-e$ is not $f$-AT. Hence, $G$ is not $f$-AT, a contradiction.
Let $K_{2*t}$ denote the complete multipartite graph with $t$ parts of size 2. Both [@hefetz2011two] and [@ZhuEtAl] showed that $K_{2*t}$ is $f$-AT when $f(v)=t$ for all $v$. So a direct application of Lemma \[subgraphLemma\] yields the following.
If $G\subseteq K_{2*t}$, then $G$ is $f$-AT when $f(v)=t$ for all $v$. So, if $G$ is BK-free, then $G\not\subseteq K_{2*(\Delta(G)-1)}$. \[cor1\]
We need a refinement of Corollary \[cor1\] that works for $G\subseteq{K_s \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} K_{2*t}}$ when some of the lists are smaller than size $s+t$. The idea used to prove Theorem \[AT-thm\] was generalized [@Alon99; @AlonEtAl96] to what is now called the Combinatorial Nullstellensatz. Schauz [@schauz2008algebraically] further sharpened this result, by proving the following coefficient formula. Versions of this sharper result were also proved by Hefetz [@hefetz2011two] and Laso[ń]{} [@lason2010generalization]. Our presentation follows Laso[ń]{}. Recall that for a polynomial $g\in\mathbb{F}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$, we write $g_{k_1,\ldots,k_n}$ for the coefficient in $g$ of $x_1^{k_1}\cdots x_n^{k_n}$.
\[nullCoefficient\] Suppose $g \in \mathbb{F}[x_1, \ldots, x_n]$ and $k_1, \ldots, k_n \in {\mathbb{N}}$ with $\sum_{i \in {\left[n\right]}} k_i = \deg(g)$. For any $C_1, \ldots, C_n
\subseteq \mathbb{F}$ with ${\left|C_i\right|} = k_i + 1$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
g_{k_1, \ldots, k_n} = \sum_{(c_1, \ldots, c_n) \in C_1 \times \cdots \times
C_n} \frac{f(c_1, \ldots, c_n)}{N(c_1, \ldots, c_n)},
\label{coeffSum}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
N(c_1, \ldots, c_n) {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}\prod_{i \in {\left[n\right]}} \prod_{d \in C_i - c_i}
(c_i - d).
\label{coeffProd}\end{aligned}$$
Now we use Lemma \[nullCoefficient\] to prove the desired strengthening of Corollary \[cor1\].
\[CliqueJoinE2Power\] Let $G = {K_s \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} K_{2*t}}$, let $A$ be an $(s+t)$-clique in $G$, and let $B =
V(G) \setminus A$. Now $G$ is $f$-AT whenever $f(v) \ge s + t$ for all $v \in A$ and $f(v) \ge t$ for all $v \in B$.
Let $r = s+t$. Say $A = {\left\{ a_1, \ldots, a_r \right\}}$ and $B = {\left\{ b_1, \ldots, b_t \right\}}$. Let $g$ be the graph polynomial of $G$, with the vertex order $a_1,b_1,
\ldots, a_t, b_t, a_{t+1}, \ldots,a_r$. Recall that it suffices to show that $g_{k_1,\ldots,k_n}\ne 0$ for some choice of $k_1,\ldots,k_n$ with $f(v_i)>k_i$ for all $i$. To do this, we apply Lemma \[nullCoefficient\].
Now $\deg(g) = |E(G)| = \binom{r}{2} + \binom{t}{2} + t(r-1)$. For each $i \in {\left[t\right]}$, let $L(a_i) = {\left[r\right]}$ and $L(b_i) = {\left[t\right]}$. For each $i \in {\left[r\right]} \setminus {\left[t\right]}$, let $L(a_i) = {\left[i\right]}$. Note that $\sum_{i \in {\left[r\right]}} {\left( |L(a_i)| - 1 \right)} + \sum_{i \in {\left[t\right]}}
{\left( |L(b_i)| - 1 \right)} = t(r-1)+(r-t)(t+r-1)/2+t(t-1)=|E(G)|$, so these lists will work for the $A_j$ in Lemma \[nullCoefficient\]. Also note that $|L(a_i)| \le f(a_i)$ for all $i \in {\left[r\right]}$ and $|L(b_i)| \le f(b_i)$ for all $i \in {\left[t\right]}$, so showing that the corresponding coefficient of $g$ is nonzero will prove the lemma.
The sum in of Lemma \[nullCoefficient\] is zero at every term that is not a proper coloring of $G$ from $L$. By construction, all proper colorings of $G$ from $L$ must assign $1,\ldots, t$ to vertices of $B$. For each vertex $b_i$ of $B$, its only non-neighbor is $a_i$. Hence in every proper coloring of $G$ from $L$, each of colors $1,\ldots, t$ is assigned to some pair $(a_i,b_i)$. As a result, vertex $a_{t+1}$ must get color $t+1$, vertex $a_{t+2}$ must get color $t+2$, etc. More precisely, for every $i\in
\{t+1,\ldots,r\}$, vertex $a_i$ gets color $i$. Said differently, any coloring of $G$ from $L$ can be obtained from any given such coloring by permuting $1,\ldots, t$. Thus, the function $N$ in of Lemma \[nullCoefficient\] gives the same nonzero value on all such colorings (since for all $i,j\in[t]$, we have $L(a_i)=L(a_j)$ and $L(b_i)=L(b_j)$).
The previous paragraph implies that the sum in of Lemma \[nullCoefficient\] is a nonzero constant multiplied by the sum of the graph polynomial $g'$ of $G[a_1,
\ldots, a_t, b_1, \ldots, b_t]$ evaluated at some points where $a_i$ and $b_i$ get the same value for each $i \in {\left[t\right]}$. Any such evaluation is the fourth power of an integer, since edges $a_ia_j, a_ib_j, b_ia_j, b_ib_j$ each contribute the same factor. In particular, all the terms in the sum have the same sign. Hence, by Lemma \[nullCoefficient\], the coefficient in question is nonzero, so $G$ is $f$-AT.
\[ATPerfect\] Let $G$ be the complement of a bipartite graph with parts $A$ and $B$. If $f(v)
\ge \omega(G)$ for all $v \in A$ and $f(v) \ge |B|$ for all $v \in B$, then $G$ is $f$-AT.
Define $G$ and $f$ as in the lemma. We can assume that ${\left|A\right|}=\omega(G)$; so, in particular, ${\left|A\right|}\ge{\left|B\right|}$. If not, then add $\omega(G)-{\left|A\right|}$ vertices to $A$ that are adjacent only to vertices in $A$ (this does not increase $f(v)$ for any $v$). So we have ${\left|B\right|}\le
{\left|A\right|}=\omega(G)$. For each $S\subseteq A\cup B$, let $\overline{N}(S)$ denote the neighbors of at least one vertex of $S$ in $\overline{G}$, the complement of $G$. Since $\omega(G)=|A|$, for each $S\subseteq B$, we have $|\overline{N}(S)|\ge |S|$; otherwise $A\cup S\setminus
\overline{N}(S)$ is a clique of $G$ bigger than $A$. So Hall’s Theorem implies that $G \subseteq {K_{|A| - |B|} \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} K_{2*|B|}}$. Hence, by Lemma \[CliqueJoinE2Power\] and Lemma \[subgraphLemma\], $G$ is $f$-AT.
Reduction from Quasi-line Graphs to Line Graphs
===============================================
In this section, we prove that Theorem \[MainThm\] is true (for quasi-line graphs) if it is true for line graphs. Recall our general approach, based on the quasi-line structure theorem, given in Theorem \[QuasilineStructure\]. We assume that Theorem \[MainThm\] is false, and choose $G$ to be a minimal counterexample; thus, $G$ is BK-free. In Section \[circular-interval-graphs\], we prove that $G$ is not a circular interval graph. In Section \[homogeneous-pairs\], we prove that $G$ has no non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques. Finally, in Section \[2joins\], we consider when $G$ is a composition of linear interval strips (which include line graphs, as a special case). We reduce this case to the case of line graphs, which we handle in Section \[line-graphs\].
Handling circular interval graphs {#circular-interval-graphs}
---------------------------------
The following proof is nearly identical to the one we gave in [@BK-claw-free] for the list-coloring analogue, but we reproduce it here for completeness. One notable difference is that all of the list-coloring lemmas used to show reducibility in that proof have been replaced here by the Alon–Tarsi orientations in Figure \[ATpics1\].
\[NotCircularIntervalIfBKCritical\] Let $G$ be a BK-free graph with $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. If $G$ is a circular interval graph, then $\Delta(G) < 9$.
Suppose to the contrary that $G$ is a circular interval graph that is BK-free, has $\Delta(G) \ge 9$, and does not contain $K_{\Delta(G)}$. Let $K$ be a maximum clique in $G$. By symmetry we may assume that $V(K)=\{v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_t\}$ for some $t\le \Delta-1$; further, if possible we label the vertices so that $v_{t-3}\adj v_{t+1}$ and the edge goes through $v_{t-2},v_{t-1},v_t$.
[[**Claim 1.**]{} [*$v_1\nonadj v_{t+1}$ and $v_2\nonadj v_{t+2}$ and $v_1\nonadj v_{t+2}$.*]{} ]{} Assume the contrary. Clearly we cannot have $v_1\adj v_{t+1}$ and have the edge go through $v_2,v_3,\ldots, v_t$ (since then we get a clique of size $t+1$). Similarly, we cannot have $v_2\adj v_{t+2}$ and have the edge go through $v_3,v_4,\ldots,v_{t+1}$. So assume the edge $v_1v_{t+2}$ exists and goes around the other way. If $v_1\adj v_{t+1}$, then let $G'=G\setminus \{v_1\}$ and if $v_1\nonadj
v_{t+1}$, then let $G'=G\setminus \{v_1,v_{t+1}\}$. Now let $V_1=\{v_2,v_3,\ldots,v_t\}$ and $V_2=V(G')\setminus V_1$. Let $K'=G[V_1]$ and $L'=G[V_2]$; note that $K'$ and $L'$ are each cliques of size at most $\Delta-2$. Now for each $S\subseteq V_2$, we have $|N_{\overline{G}}(S)\cap V_1|\ge |S|$ (otherwise we get a clique of size $t$ in $G'$ and a clique of size $t+1$ in $G$). Now by Hall’s Theorem, we have a matching in $\overline{G}$ between $V_1$ and $V_2$ that saturates $V_2$. This implies that $G'\subseteq K_{2*(\Delta-2)}$, which in turn gives $G\subseteq K_{2*(\Delta-1)}$. This contradicts Corollary \[cor1\].
[[**Claim 2.**]{} [*$v_{t-3}\adj v_{t+1}$ and the edge passes through $v_{t-2},v_{t-1},v_t$.*]{} ]{} Assume the contrary. Since $t\le \Delta-1$ and $\delta(G)\ge\Delta-1$, each vertex in $K$ has a neighbor outside of $K$; in particular, $v_4$ has some neighbor outside of $K$. If $t\ge 7$, then by (reflectional) symmetry we could have labeled the vertices so that $v_{t-3}\adj v_{t+1}$ (and the edge passes through $v_{t-2},v_{t-1},v_t$). So we must have $t\le 6$. Each vertex $v$ that is high has either at least ${\left\lceil\Delta/2\right\rceil}$ clockwise neighbors or at least ${\left\lceil\Delta/2\right\rceil}$ counterclockwise neighbors. This gives a clique of size $1+{\left\lceil\Delta/2\right\rceil}\ge 6$. Thus, $t=6$ and $v_{t-3}=v_3$. If $v_3$ is high, then either $v_3$ has at least 4 clockwise neighbors, so $v_3\adj v_7$, or else $v_3$ has at least 6 counterclockwise neighbors, so $|K|\ge 7$. Thus, we may assume that $v_3$ is low; by symmetry (and our choice of labeling prior to Claim 1) $v_4$ is also low. Now since $v_4$ has only 3 counterclockwise neighbors, we get $v_4\adj
v_7$ (in fact, we get $v_4\adj v_9$). Thus, $\{v_3,v_4,v_5,v_6,v_7\}$ induces ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ with a low degree vertex in both the $K_3$ and the $E_2$, which is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\].
[[**Claim 3.**]{} [*$v_{t-2} \nonadj v_{t+2}$ and $v_{t-1}\nonadj v_{t+2}$.*]{} ]{} First, assume to the contrary that $v_{t-2}\adj v_{t+2}$. By Claim 1 the edge must go through $v_{t-1},v_t,v_{t+1}$. If $v_{t-3}\adj v_{t+2}$, then the set $\{v_1,v_2,v_{t-3},v_{t-2},v_{t-1}$, $v_t,v_{t+1},v_{t+2}\}$ induces ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$, where $B$ is not almost complete; this subgraph is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]–. If $v_{t-3}\nonadj v_{t+2}$, then the set $\{v_1, v_{t-3}, v_{t-2}, v_{t-1}$, $v_t, v_{t+1}, v_{t+2}\}$ induces ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} P_4}$ is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]. Hence, $v_{t-2}\nonadj v_{t+2}$.
So assume that $v_{t-1}\adj v_{t+2}$. Now $\{v_1,v_{t-3},v_{t-2},v_{t-1},v_t,v_{t+1},v_{t+2}\}$ induces ${K_2 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} \mbox{antichair}}$ (with $v_{t-1},v_t$ in the $K_2$), which is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\].
[[**Claim 4.**]{} [*The lemma is true.*]{} ]{} Let $S=\{v_{t-3},v_{t-2},v_{t-1},v_t\}$. If any vertex of $S$ is low, then $S\cup\{v_1,v_{t+1}\}$ induces ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ with a low vertex in the $K_4$, which is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]. So all of $S$ is high. If $v_t\nonadj v_{t+2}$, then $\{v_t,v_{t-1},\ldots, v_{t-\Delta+1}\}$ (subscripts are modulo $n$) induces $K_{\Delta}$. So $v_t\adj v_{t+2}$. Since $v_{t-1}\nonadj v_{t+2}$ and all of $S$ is high, there exists a vertex $v_n$ that is not adjacent to $v_t$ but is adjacent to the rest of $S$. Formally, $v_n\in (\cap_{v\in (S\setminus\{v_t\})}N(v))\setminus N(v_t)$. Clearly the edge from $v_{t-1}$ to $v_n$ must go through $v_{t-2}$. Since $v_n\nonadj v_t$, we have $n<1$. However, if $n<0$, then $G$ contains a clique larger than $K$. Thus, we may assume $v_n=v_0$.
If $v_n\adj v_{t+1}$, then $G$ can be covered by two cliques: $K$ and $G\setminus K$. As in Claim 1, we show that $\overline{G}$ has a matching between $K$ and $G\setminus K$ that saturates $G\setminus K$. Thus, $G\subseteq K_{2*(\Delta-1)}$, which contradicts Corollary \[cor1\]. Since $v_n\nonadj v_{t+1}$, we get ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} P_4}$ induced by $\{v_{t+1},v_t,v_{t-1},v_{t-2},v_{t-3},v_1,v_n\}$. Again, this subgraph is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\].
Handling non-linear homogeneous pairs of cliques {#homogeneous-pairs}
------------------------------------------------
\[NoNonLinear\] Let $G$ be a BK-free graph with $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. If $G$ has a non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques, then $\Delta(G)<9$.
Suppose to the contrary that $G$ is a BK-free graph with $\Delta(G) \ge 9$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ and that $G$ contains a non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques $(A,B)$. Let $H {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}G[A \cup B]$ and let $f_H(v) {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}d_H(v) - 1 + \Delta(G) - d_G(v)$ for all $v \in V(H)$. Now $H$ is not complete, since it it is non-linear and hence induces a $C_4$. Our general approach is to show that $G$ contains some induced $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\], where $f(v)=d(v)$ when $v$ is low and $f(v)=d(v)-1$ otherwise.
Note that $f_H(v) = d_H(v) - 1$ if $v$ is high and $f_H(v) = d_H(v)$ if $v$ is low. For each $X \in {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$, let $\delta_X {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}\min_{v \in X}
d_H(v)$ and $\Delta_X {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}\max_{v \in X} d_H(v)$. Since each vertex in $G$ has degree either $\Delta(G)$ or $\Delta(G)-1$, and $(A,B)$ is a homogeneous pair of cliques, we have $\Delta_X \le \delta_X + 1$ for each $X \in
{\left\{ A,B \right\}}$; equality holds when $X$ contains both a high and a low vertex. Also, $f_H(v) = \Delta_X - 1$ for each $v \in X$ whenever $X$ contains a high vertex. Let $W$ be an arbitrary maximum clique in $H$. [[**Claim 0.**]{} [*For ${\left\{ X,Y \right\}} = {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$, either $\Delta_X \le |W|$ or $\Delta_Y \le |Y|$.*]{} ]{} Since $G$ is BK-free, $f_H$ cannot satisfy the hypotheses of Lemma \[ATPerfect\]. Unpacking what that means gives precisely $\Delta_X \le
|W|$ or $\Delta_Y \le |Y|$.
[[**Claim 1.**]{} [*Either ${\left|W \cap A\right|} \le 1$ or ${\left|W \cap B\right|} \le 1$.*]{} ]{} Suppose instead that ${\left|W \cap X\right|} \ge 2$ for all $X \in {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$. Now $\Delta_X\ge |X|+1$ for all $X \in {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$, so applying Claim 0 gives $\Delta_X \le |W|$ for all $X \in {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$. For all $v \in W \cap X$, we have $d_H(v) \ge |W| - 1 + |X \setminus W|$. Hence $|W| \ge \Delta_X \ge |W| - 1 +
|X \setminus W|$, which gives $|X \cap W| \ge |X| - 1$ for all $X \in {\left\{ A,B \right\}}$.
Now we show that [$A \subseteq W$ or $B \subseteq W$.]{} Suppose instead that ${\left|W \cap A\right|} = |A| - 1$ and ${\left|W \cap B\right|} = |B| - 1$. Let ${\left\{ u \right\}} = A
\setminus W$ and ${\left\{ z \right\}} = B\setminus W$. If $u$ has a neighbor $v\in W \cap
B$, then $d_H(v)\ge |W|+1$, a contradiction. Similarly, $z$ has no neighbors in $W \cap A$. So $d_A(z)\le 1$ and $d_B(u) \le 1$, which implies that $\Delta_A
\le |A| + 1$ and $\Delta_B \le |B| + 1$. Now $|B|+1\ge\Delta_B \ge |B|-1+|W\cap
A|$, so $|W\cap A|\le 2$. By assumption $|W\cap A| = |A|-1$, so $|A|= |W\cap A|+1\le 3$; similarly, $|B|\le 3$.
Recall that $|W\cap A|\ge 2$, $|W\cap B|\ge 2$, $|A|\le 3$, and $|B|\le 3$. Now our assumption that ${\left|W \cap A\right|} = |A| - 1$ and ${\left|W \cap B\right|} = |B|
- 1$ gives $|A| = |B| = 3$. So $H$ must be as in Figure \[fig:AandBAre3\]. Hence $d_G(u) = d_G(z) =
\Delta(G) - 1$. But now either (i) some vertex outside $H$ is joined to just one side of $H$ and $G$ contains the forbidden induced subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\] or (ii) some vertex outside $H$ is joined to both sides of $H$ and $G$ contains the graph in Figure \[ATpics2\]. Each of these induced subgraphs is forbidden, which gives a contradiction. Thus, $A\subseteq W$ or $B\subseteq W$.
By symmetry, suppose $A\subseteq W$. Now we get ${\left|W\right|}\ge
{\left|A\right|}+{\left|B\cap W\right|} \ge {\left|A\right|}+({\left|B\right|}-1)$. Thus, $H$ is almost complete, so it does not contain an induced $C_4$; this contradicts the hypothesis of the lemma and so proves the claim. [[**Claim 2.**]{} [*Either $\omega(H) \le 2$ or the only possible maximum cliques in $H$ are $A$ and $B$.*]{} ]{} Suppose to the contrary that $\omega(H) \ge 3$ and that $W$ is a maximum clique in $H$ with ${\left|W \cap A\right|}\ge 1$ and ${{\left|W \cap B\right|} \ge 1}$. By Claim 1 and symmetry, we may assume ${\left|W \cap B\right|} = 1$. Let $z_1, \ldots, z_t$ be the vertices of $B \setminus W$. Since $|W|=\omega(H)\ge 3$ and $|W\cap B|=1$, we must have ${\left|W \cap A\right|} \ge 2$ and hence ${\left|W \cap A\right|} \ge |A| - 1$, as in the first paragraph of the proof of Claim 1.
So we have the two cases (i) $A\subseteq W$ and (ii) $|A\cap W|=|A|-1$. First suppose that $A\subseteq W$. We begin with the case $|A|=2$. Since $|W\cap B|=1$ and $3\le |W|\le
|A|+|W\cap B|\le 3$, we get that $|B|\le |W|\le 3$. We must have $|B|\ge 3$, since otherwise $H$ is almost complete, so it cannot induce $C_4$. So $|B|=3$, and $\Delta_B\ge |W| + 1$. Since $\Delta_B-\delta_B\le 1$, each of $z_1$ and $z_2$ has a neighbor in $A$; thus $\Delta_A\ge |A| + 1$, which contradicts Claim 0. Hence, ${\left|A\right|}\ge 3$.
Suppose now that $A\subseteq W$ and $|A|\ge 3$. Since $\Delta_B-\delta_B\le
1$, each $z_i$ is nonadjacent to exactly one vertex of $A$; call it $u_i$. By Claim 0, no vertex in $A$ can have two neighbors outside of $W$; so $t = 1$ and hence $|B| = 2$. Now again, $|W|\ge |A|+|B|-1$, so $H$ cannot induce a $C_4$; this contradicts the hypothesis of the lemma. Thus, $A\not\subseteq W$.
So assume instead that $|A\cap W| = |A|-1$. Note that $|A|\ge 3$, since $|A\cap W|\ge 2$.
Let $\{u\} = A \setminus W$ and $\{w\}= B \cap W$. Note that $u$ is not adjacent to $w$, since $u\notin W$. Since $|W \cap A| \ge 2$, Claim 0 implies that $\Delta_A \le |W|$. Hence each $v \in A \cap W$ has no neighbors in $B - w$. Also $w$ has at least two neighbors in $A$, so $\delta_B \ge |B|$. Now $\Delta_B - \delta_B \le 1$ implies that $|A| \le 3$. Since also $|A|\ge
3$, we have $|A|=3$ and each vertex of $W\setminus B$ is adjacent to $u$. Now $|A|=|W| \ge \Delta_A \ge d_H(u) = |A|-1+t$, so $t\le 1$. Actually $t = 1$, since otherwise $H$ is almost complete, so it cannot induce $C_4$.
Now $H$ must be as in Figure \[fig:AandBAre3\], with $z$ low. If some vertex outside of $H$ is adjacent to all of $H$, then $G$ contains the $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\], a contradiction. So each neighbor of $A$ outside of $H$ is adjacent to $A$ and not adjacent to $B$. Since $G$ is quasi-line and none of its neighbors outside $H$ is adjacent to $B$, all of these outside neighbors form a clique. If some vertex of $A$ is high, then these outside neighbors, together with $A$, form a $K_{\Delta(G)}$, which is a contradiction. Otherwise, all of $A$ is low. In this case, $G$ contains the reducible configuration in Figure \[ATpics2\]. By symmetry, we henceforth assume that $|A|\ge |B|$. [[**Claim 3.**]{} [*$A$ is a maximum clique in $H$ and $\Delta_A \le |A|$.*]{} ]{} First, suppose $\omega(H) \le 2$. Recall that $H$ induces a $C_4$, so $|A| \ge 2$. In fact, we must have $H=C_4$, since $2\ge \omega(H)\ge |A|\ge|B|\ge 2$. Hence, the degree condition is satisfied.
Now assume $\omega(H) > 2$. By Claim 2, no maximum clique in $H$ has vertices in both $A$ and $B$. In particular, $A$ is a maximum clique. If $\Delta_A > |A|$, then there exists $v\in A$ with at least two neighbors in $B$. Since $\Delta_A-\delta_A\le 1$, each other vertex in $A$ has at least one neighbor in $B$. Now, since $|A|\ge |B|$, some vertex in $B$ has at least two neighbors in $A$. However, now we get $\Delta_A>|A|$ and $\Delta_B>|B|$, which contradicts Claim 0. Thus, the degree condition holds. [[**Claim 4.**]{} [*If all of $A$ is low, then the lemma is true.*]{} ]{} First suppose that $|A|=|B|$. If all of $B$ is low, then we have an induced $C_4$ in the low vertex subgraph, which is $f$-AT. So suppose that some vertex $b\in B$ is high. Since $|A|=|B|$, Claim 3 also shows that $\Delta_B\le |B|$. Hence, each vertex in $B$ has at most one neighbor in $A$. So $b$ must have $\Delta-1$ neighbors in $G\setminus A$. If all neighbors of $b$ in $G\setminus
H$ induce a clique, then $G$ contains a copy of $K_{\Delta(G)}$, which contradicts that $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. So $b$ has nonadjacent neighbors $u_1,u_2$ in $G\setminus H$. Since $G$ is quasi-line, at least one of $u_1$ and $u_2$ is complete to $A$; by symmetry, say this is $u_1$. Now consider an induced $C_4$ in $H$, together with $u_1$. Since all of $A$ is low, this is the configuration shown in Figure \[ATpics2\], which is $f$-AT.
So assume instead that $|A|>|B|$. Since $\Delta_A\le |A|$ (and all of $A$ is low), each vertex of $A$ must have exactly one neighbor in $B$. Since $\Delta_B-\delta_B\le 1$, for some integer $k$, each vertex in $B$ has either $k$ or $k+1$ neighbors in $A$. Since $|A|>|B|$, we have $k\ge 1$. If there exist $b_1,b_2\in B$ each with at least two neighbors in $A$, then we have the configuration in Figure \[ATpics2\], which is $f$-AT. So we may assume that $k=1$ and $B$ has at most one high vertex. If $B$ has at least two low vertices, then we have an induced $C_4$ of low vertices, which is $f$-AT, a contradiction. So $B$ must contain exactly one high vertex and one low vertex. Now we have the configuration in Figure \[ATpics2\], which is $f$-AT. [[**Claim 5.**]{} [*There exists a unique vertex $w$ that is joined to all of $H$.*]{} ]{} Since $\Delta_A \le |A|$, each vertex of $A$ has at most one neighbor in $B$. Since $A$ is not all low, $A\cup N(A)\setminus H$ has $\Delta$ vertices. Since $G$ does not contain $K_{\Delta}$, some pair of neighbors of $A$ in $G\setminus H$ must be nonadjacent. Since $G$ is quasi-line, one of those neighbors is joined to $H$; call this vertex $w$. If two vertices outside $H$ are joined to $H$, then $G$ contains the $f$-AT configuration in Figure \[ATpics1\] or Figure \[ATpics2\]. Thus, $w$ is unique.
If $|A|\ge 4$, then $G$ contains the $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\]. So assume ${\left|A\right|}\le 3$. Suppose $\Delta_B>{\left|B\right|}$. Since $3\ge {\left|A\right|}\ge{\left|B\right|}\ge 2$ (and $\Delta_A\le{\left|A\right|}$), we have ${\left|A\right|}=3$ and ${\left|B\right|}=2$. Now $G$ contains the $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\] or Figure \[ATpics2\] (if the two vertices in $B$ have a common neighbor in $A$). So we conclude that $\Delta_B\le{\left|B\right|}$.
If all of $B$ is low, then $G$ contains the $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\]. So instead $B$ contains some high vertex $b$. Since $\Delta_B\le {\left|B\right|}$, and $b$ is high, $B\cup N(B)\setminus
H$ contains $\Delta$ vertices. Since $G$ contains no $K_\Delta$, the set $N(B)\setminus H$ contains some nonneighbor of $w$. If ${\left|B\cup (N(B)\setminus (H\cup\{w\}))\right|}\ge 4$, then $G$ contains the $f$-AT subgraph in Figure \[ATpics2\]. The same is true if ${\left|A\cup (N(A)\setminus (H\cup\{w\}))\right|}\ge 4$. Since $G$ is quasi-line, $N(w)$ is contained in $H\cup
N(H)=A\cup B\cup N(A)\cup N(B)$. This gives $d(w)\le 3+3$, which contradicts that $\delta(G)\ge \Delta(G)-1\ge 8$. This contradiction finishes the proof of the lemma.
Handling 2-joins {#2joins}
----------------
Our goal in this section is to write $G$ as a composition of linear interval strips, where each strip is complete or complete less an edge (since this implies that $G$ is very nearly a line graph). Our main tool is the following lemma, which we will apply to each interval 2-join in the representation.
\[Irreducible2Join\] Let $G$ be a BK-free graph with $\Delta(G) \ge 9$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. If $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ is an irreducible canonical interval $2$-join in $G$, then
1. $B_1 \cap B_2 = \emptyset$; and,
2. ${\left|A_1\right|}, {\left|A_2\right|} \le 3$; and,
3. either $H$ is complete, or $H = K_{|H|} - xy$ and $|H|\le 6$, where $x$ and $y$ are low in $G$.
The most interesting of the three conclusions in the lemma is (3). If $H$ is complete, for every choice of $H$, then $G$ is a line graph, which we handle in Section \[line-graphs\]. So (3) proves that $G$ is quite close to being a line graph.
Let $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ be an irreducible canonical interval $2$-join in $G$. Note that $G$ has no simplicial vertices, since $\delta(G)\ge \Delta(G)-1$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. Label the vertices of $H$ left-to-right as $v_1, \ldots, v_t$. Say $A_1 = {\left\{ v_1, \ldots, v_L \right\}}$ and $A_2 = {\left\{ v_R, \ldots, v_t \right\}}$. For $v \in V(H)$, let $r(v) {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}\max{\left\{ i \in {\left[t\right]} \mid v \adj
v_i \right\}}$ and $l(v) {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}\min{\left\{ i \in {\left[t\right]} \mid v \adj v_i \right\}}$. These are well-defined since ${\left|H\right|} \geq 2$ and $H$ is connected by the following claim.
[[**Claim 0.**]{} [*$H$ is connected and each of $A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2$ is nonempty.*]{} ]{} Otherwise $G$ contains a simplicial vertex.
[[**Claim 1.**]{} [*If $H$ is incomplete, then $r(v_L) = r(v_1) + 1$ and $l(v_R) =
l(v_t) - 1$. In particular, $v_1$ and $v_t$ are low and also ${\left|A_1\right|}\ge 2$ and ${\left|A_2\right|} \geq 2$.*]{} ]{} Suppose instead that $H$ is incomplete and $r(v_L) \neq
r(v_1) + 1$. By definition, $N_H(v_1) \subseteq N_H(v_L)$ and $v_1$ and $v_L$ have the same neighbors in $G\setminus H$. If $r(v_L) = r(v_1)$, then $N_H(A_1)\setminus A_1 =
N_H(v_1)\setminus A_1$, so $H$ is reducible, which is a contradiction. Thus $r(v_L) \ge r(v_1)+1$. If $r(v_L) \ge r(v_1) + 2$, then $d(v_L) - d(v_1) \geq
2$, which is impossible, since $\delta(G)\ge \Delta(G)-1$. So $r(v_L) = r(v_1) + 1$, as desired. Similarly, $l(v_R) = l(v_t) - 1$.
[[**Claim 2.**]{} [*If $H$ is complete or complete less an edge, then $R - L = 1$.*]{} ]{} Assume, for a contradiction, that $R-L\ne 1$, so $V(H) \neq A_1 \cup A_2$. First suppose that $H$ is complete. Now any $v \in V(H) \setminus A_1 \cup A_2$ is simplicial in $G$, which is a contradiction. So suppose instead that $H$ is complete less an edge, and choose $v \in V(H) \setminus(A_1 \cup A_2)$. Now $N[v]$ is complete less an edge; since $G$ has no $K_\Delta$, $v$ must be low. By Claim 1, $v_1$ and $v_t$ are also low, so $G$ contains a copy of $K_4-e$ in which one vertex in both triangles is high and the other three vertices are low. This subgraph is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\], which is a contradiction.
[[**Claim 3.**]{} [*$B_1 \not \subseteq B_2$, $B_2 \not \subseteq B_1$.*]{} ]{} If not, then by symmetry we can assume $B_2 \subseteq B_1$. First, suppose $H$ is complete or complete less an edge. By Claim 2, $R-L=1$. If $H$ is complete, then the vertices in $A_2$ are simplicial, which is impossible. If $H$ is complete less an edge, then for a high vertex $v$ in $A_2$ (which exists by Claim 1), $N[v]$ induces $K_{\Delta+1} - e$; this contains $K_\Delta$, which is a contradiction.
So $H$ is neither complete nor complete less an edge; in particular $v_1\nonadj
v_t$. If $v_1\adj v_{t-1}$, then $v_{t-1}$ is high, since $d(v_t)<d(v_{t-1})$. This implies $v_t\adj v_2$; now $H$ is complete less an edge, which is a contradiction. So $v_1\nonadj v_{t-1}$ and, by symmetry, $v_2\nonadj v_t$. If $|B_2| \ge 2$, then since $|A_1|\ge 2$ and $|A_2| \ge 2$ by Claim 1, then consider the subgraph induced by $v_1,v_L,V_R,v_t$, and two vertices of $B_2$. Since $B_2\subseteq B_1$, this induced subgraph is either Figure \[2JoinPics\] or Figure \[2JoinPics\], which is a contradiction, since $G$ is $BK$-free.
So we must have $|B_2|=1$. Let ${\left\{ w \right\}}=B_2$. Now $v_t$ is in a $K_{\Delta-1}$ in $H$, say with vertices $v_q, v_{q+1},
\ldots, v_t$. In particular, $w$ is not joined to $H$, so $R-L \ne 1$. If $|A_2| \ge 4$, then $\{v_t,v_{t-1},v_{t-2},v_{t-3},v_q,w\}$ induces ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$, where the $K_4$ has a low vertex, $v_t$. As shown in Figure \[ATpics1\], this is $f$-AT, which is a contradiction. So $|A_2| \le 3$.
First, suppose $v_{R-1}$ is low. Now $l(v_{R-1}) = q - 1$. Since $|A_2| \le 3$, the subgraph induced by $\{v_t, v_{R-1}, v_{R-2}, v_{R-3},
v_{R-4}, v_{q-1}\}$ is ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$, with a low vertex in the $E_2$. This is $f$-AT by Figure \[ATpics1\], which is a contradiction. So assume instead that $v_R$ is high. Now $l(v_{R-1})=q-2$, so the subgraph induced by $\{v_t,v_{t-1},v_{R-1},v_{R-2},v_{R-3},v_{R-4},v_{q-1},v_{q-2}\}$ is ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$, where $B$ is not almost complete. This subgraph is $f$-AT, as shown in Figures \[ATpics1\]–\[ATpics1\], which is a contradiction. [[**Claim 4.**]{} [*${\left|A_1\right|}, {\left|A_2\right|} \leq 3$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise, by symmetry, that ${\left|A_1\right|} \geq 4$. First, suppose $H$ is complete. By Claim 2, $V(H) = A_1
\cup A_2$. If $v_1$ is low, then for any $w_1 \in B_1 \setminus B_2$ the vertex set $\{v_1, \ldots, v_4, v_t, w_1\}$ induces a ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$, which contradicts Figures \[ATpics1\]. Hence $v_1$ is high. If ${\left|A_2\right|} \geq 2$ and ${\left|B_1 \setminus B_2\right|} \geq 2$, then for any $w_1, w_2 \in B_1 \setminus B_2$, the vertex set $\{v_1, \ldots,
v_4, v_{t-1}, v_t, w_1, w_2\}$ induces ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} 2K_2}$, which contradicts Figure \[ATpics1\]. Hence either ${\left|A_2\right|} = 1$ or ${\left|B_1 \setminus B_2\right|} = 1$. Suppose ${\left|A_2\right|} = 1$. Since $A_1 \cup B_1$ induces a clique and ${\left|A_1 \cup
B_1\right|} = d(v_1)$, $v_1$ must be low, which is impossible. Hence, we have ${\left|B_1 \setminus B_2\right|} = 1$, so ${\left|B_1 \cap B_2\right|} = {\left|B_1\right|} - 1$. Hence, $V(H) \cup (B_1 \cap B_2)$ induces a clique of size ${\left|A_1\right|} + {\left|A_2\right|} +
{\left|B_1\right|} - 1 = d(v_1) = \Delta$, which is a contradiction.
So $H$ must be incomplete. By Claim 1, $v_1$ is low. Now, as above, for any $w_1 \in B_1 \setminus B_2$, the vertex set $\{v_1, \ldots, v_4,
v_{L+1}, w_1\}$ induces a ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ that contradicts Figure \[ATpics1\]. Hence, ${\left|A_1\right|} \leq 3$ and, by symmetry, ${\left|A_2\right|} \leq 3$. [[**Claim 5.**]{} [*$R - L = 1$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise that $R - L \geq 2$. By Claim 2, $H$ is incomplete. Now by Claim 1, $r(v_L) = r(v_1) + 1$, $l(v_R) = l(v_t) -
1$, $v_1$ and $v_t$ are low, and ${\left|A_1\right|}\ge 2$ and ${\left|A_2\right|} \geq 2$. Now we will find an $f$-AT subgraph induced by some vertices of $H$. To this end, we describe $N(v_{L+1}),N(v_{L+2}),N(v_{L+3}),N(v_{L+4})$.
[[**Subclaim 5a.**]{} [*$L + \Delta - 2 \leq r(v_{L+1}) \leq L + \Delta - 1$.*]{} ]{} Since $v_{L+1}$ has exactly $L$ neighbors to the left, $r(v_{L+1}) \leq
L + 1 + \Delta - L = \Delta + 1 \leq L + \Delta - 1$. If $v_{L+1}$ is high, this computation is exact, so $r(v_{L+1}) = \Delta + 1 \geq L + \Delta - 2$. So suppose instead that $v_{L+1}$ is low. If $L=3$, then for some $w_1 \in B_1$ the vertex set ${\left\{ v_1, v_2, v_3, v_4, w_1 \right\}}$ induces a ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ that contradicts Figure\[ATpics1\]. Hence $L=2$ and $r(v_{L+1}) = L + 1 + \Delta - 1 - L = \Delta \geq L + \Delta - 2$.
[[**Subclaim 5b.**]{} [*$L + \Delta - 2 \leq r(v_{L+2}) \leq L + \Delta$.*]{} ]{} By Subclaim 5a, $r(v_{L+2}) \geq L + \Delta - 2$. Since $H$ contains no $\Delta$-clique, $v_{L+2}$ has at least $2$ neighbors to the left if it is high and at least $1$ neighbor to the left if it is low. Thus $r(v_{L+2}) \leq L + 2
+ \Delta - 2 = L + \Delta$.
[[**Subclaim 5c.**]{} [*If $v_{L+4}$ is high, then $l(v_{L+4}) \leq L$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise. Recall that $v_{L+1}\adj v_{L+4}$, since $d(v_{L+1})\ge
\Delta-1\ge 8$ and $|A_1|\le 3$. Now $v_{L+4}$ has exactly 3 neighbors to the left, so $r(v_{L+4}) = L + \Delta + 1$. Consider the subgraph induced on $\{v_{L+1}, v_{L+2}, v_{L+4}, v_{L+5}, v_{L+6}, v_{L+7}$, $v_{L+9}$, $v_{L+10}\}$. By Subclaims 5a and 5b, this subgraph contradicts Figure \[ATpics1\] or Figure \[ATpics1\].
[[**Subclaim 5d.**]{} [*$l(v_{L+3}) \leq L$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise. Since $v_{L+1}\adj v_{L+3}$, vertex $v_{L+3}$ has exactly $2$ neighbors to the left, so $r(v_{L+3}) \geq L + \Delta$. By Subclaim 5c, $v_{L+4}$ is low. By Subclaim 5a, $L + \Delta - 2 \leq r(v_{L+1}) \leq L + \Delta - 1$. Therefore ${\left\{ v_{L+1},
v_{L+3}, v_{L+4}, v_{L+5}, v_{L+6}, v_{L+\Delta} \right\}}$ induces a ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ that contradicts Figure \[ATpics1\].
[[**Subclaim 5e.**]{} [*$r(v_1) \geq L + 2$.*]{} ]{} By Subclaim 5d, $r(v_L) \geq L + 3$, so Claim 1 implies that $r(v_1) \geq L + 2$.
[[**Subclaim 5f.**]{} [*Claim 5 is true.*]{} ]{} If $r(v_{r(v_1)-1})=r(v_1)+1$, then $v_{r(v_1)-1}$ is low, so $\{v_1,v_{L+1},v_{L+2},v_{L+3},v_{r(v_1)-1},v_{r(v_1)+1}\}$ induces ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$, which contradicts Figure \[ATpics1\]. So assume $r(v_{r(v_1)-1})\ne r(v_1)+1$.
Consider the subgraph $Q$ induced on $\{v_1, v_L, v_{r(v_1) - 1}, v_{r(v_1)}$, $v_{r(v_1) + 1}, v_{r(v_{r(v_1) - 1})}\}$; these vertices must be distinct. Both $v_{r(v_1) - 1}$ and $v_{r(v_1)}$ are dominating vertices in $Q$. We show that ${\left\{ v_1,v_L,v_{r(v_1) + 1}, v_{r(v_{r(v_1) - 1})} \right\}}$ induces a $P_4$, so $Q$ is Figure \[ATpics1\], which is a contradiction. By definition, $v_1 \adj v_L$, $v_1 \nonadj v_{r(v_1) + 1}$, and $v_1\nonadj
v_{r(v_{r(v_1) - 1})}$. By Claim 2, $v_L \adj v_{r(v_1) + 1}$. By Subclaim 5e, $r(v_1) \ge L + 2$, so $r(v_1) - 1 \ge L+1$. Since $|B_1| > 0$ by Claim 0, this means $r(v_{r(v_1) - 1}) - (r(v_1) - 1) \ge r(v_L) - L$ and hence $r(v_{r(v_1) - 1}) \ge r(v_L) - L + (r(v_1) - 1) \ge r(v_L) + 1$. Therefore $v_L \nonadj v_{r(v_{r(v_1) - 1})}$, so ${\left\{ v_1,v_L,v_{r(v_1) + 1},
v_{r(v_{r(v_1) - 1})} \right\}}$ induces a $P_4$ as desired.
[[**Claim 6.**]{} [*$B_1 \cap B_2 = \emptyset$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise that we have $w \in B_1 \cap B_2$.
[[**Subclaim 6a.**]{} [*Each $v \in V(H)$ is low, ${\left|B_1\right|} = {\left|B_2\right|}$, ${\left|B_1 \setminus B_2\right|} = {\left|B_2 \setminus B_1\right|} = 1$, $d(v) = {\left|A_1\right|} +
{\left|A_2\right|} + {\left|B_1\right|} - 1$ for each $v \in V(H)$ and $H$ is complete.*]{} ]{} By Claim 5, we have $d(v) \leq {\left|A_1\right|} + {\left|A_2\right|} + {\left|B_1\right|} - 1$ for each $v \in A_1$ and $d(v) \leq {\left|A_1\right|} + {\left|A_2\right|} + {\left|B_2\right|} - 1$ for each $v \in A_2$. Since $B_1 \not \subseteq B_2$ and $B_2 \not \subseteq B_1$, we have $d(w) \geq \max{\left\{ {\left|B_1\right|}, {\left|B_2\right|} \right\}} +
{\left|A_1\right|} + {\left|A_2\right|}$. So $d(w) \geq d(v) + 1$ for every $v \in V(H)$. This implies that each $v \in V(H)$ is low, ${\left|B_1\right|} = {\left|B_2\right|}$, ${\left|B_1
\setminus B_2\right|} = {\left|B_2 \setminus B_1\right|} = 1$, and $d(v) = {\left|A_1\right|} +
{\left|A_2\right|} + {\left|B_1\right|} - 1$ for each $v \in V(H)$. Hence, $H$ is complete.
[[**Subclaim 6b.**]{} [*${\left|B_1 \cap B_2\right|} \leq 3$.*]{} ]{} Suppose otherwise that ${\left|B_1 \cap B_2\right|} \geq 4$. Pick $w_1 \in B_1 \setminus B_2$, $w_2 \in B_2
\setminus B_1$ and $z_1, z_2, z_3, z_4 \in B_1 \cap B_2$. Since $v_1\nonadj
w_2$ and $v_t\nonadj w_1$, the set ${\left\{ z_1, z_2, z_3, z_4, w_1, w_2, v_1,
v_t \right\}}$ induces an $f$-AT subgraph shown in Figure \[ATpics1\], \[ATpics1\], or Figure \[ATpics1\]; each case yields a contradiction. Hence ${\left|B_1 \cap B_2\right|} \leq 3$.
[[**Subclaim 6c.**]{} [*Claim 6 is true.*]{} ]{} By Subclaim 6a and Subclaim 6b we have $3 \geq {\left|B_1 \cap B_2\right|} = {\left|B_1\right|} - 1$, so ${\left|B_1\right|} =
{\left|B_2\right|} \leq 4$. If ${\left|A_1\right|} \leq 2$ and ${\left|A_2\right|} \leq 2$, then $\Delta - 1
= d(v_1) \leq 3 + {\left|B_1\right|} \leq 7$, which is a contradiction. Hence, by symmetry, we assume that ${\left|A_1\right|} \geq 3$. But now for any $w_1 \in B_1
\setminus B_2$, the set ${\left\{ v_1, v_2, v_3, v_t, w_1 \right\}}$ induces a ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} E_2}$ contradicting Figure \[ATpics1\].
[[**Claim 7.**]{} [*Either $H$ is complete, or $H = K_{|H|} - xy$ where $x$ and $y$ are low in $G$ and $|H|\le 6$.*]{} ]{} Suppose $H$ is incomplete. By Claim 5, $R - L =
1$. So, by Claim 1 $r(v_L) = r(v_1) + 1$ and $l(v_R) = l(v_t) - 1$. Since $v_1$ is not simplicial, $r(v_1) \geq L + 1 = R$. Hence $l(v_R) = 1$, so $l(v_t) = 2$. Similarly, $r(v_1) = t - 1$. So, $H$ is $K_t$ less an edge and $v_1$ and $v_t$ are low (by Claim 2). Finally, by Claims 5 and 4, $|H|=|A_1|+|A_2|\le 3+3=6$.
Recall our goal in this section: to write $G$ as a composition of linear interval strips, where each strip is complete or complete less an edge (since this implies that $G$ is very nearly a line graph). Our main tool in this endeavor is Lemma \[Irreducible2Join\], which we will apply to each interval 2-join in the representation. To this end, we would like that every interval 2-join is canonical and irreducible. Of course, trivial 2-joins are fine also, since their strips must be complete. So in Lemma \[TrivialOrCanonical\], we show that every interval 2-join is either trivial or canonical. Finally, in the proof of Lemma \[QuasiLineContainedInLine\] we choose a composition representation with the maximum number of strips; thus, every canonical interval 2-join is irreducible.
\[TrivialOrCanonical\] Let $G$ be a BK-free graph with $\Delta(G) \ge 9$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. Each interval $2$-join in $G$ is either trivial $(A_1=A_2)$ or canonical $(A_1\cap A_2=\emptyset)$.
Let $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ be an interval $2$-join in $G$. Suppose that $H$ is nontrivial ($A_1 \ne A_2$) and let $C {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}A_1 \cap A_2$. Now $(H \setminus C, A_1 \setminus C, A_2 \setminus C, C \cup B_1, C \cup B_2)$ is a canonical interval $2$-join. We reduce this $2$-join until we get an irreducible canonical interval $2$-join $(H', A_1', A_2', B_1', B_2')$ with $H'
\unlhd H \setminus C$. Since $C$ is joined to $H\setminus C$, it is also joined to $H'$. Hence $C \subseteq B_1' \cap B_2'$. Now Lemma \[Irreducible2Join\] implies $B_1' \cap B_2' = \emptyset$, so $A_1 \cap A_2 = C = \emptyset$. Thus, $H$ is canonical.
\[QuasiLineContainedInLine\] If $G$ is a quasi-line BK-free graph with $\Delta(G) \ge 9$ and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, then there is a line graph $G'$ with $G \subseteq
G'$ such that $\Delta(G') = \Delta(G)$ and $\omega(G') < \Delta(G')$.
By Lemma \[NotCircularIntervalIfBKCritical\], $G$ is not a circular interval graph. By Lemma \[NoNonLinear\], $G$ has no non-linear homogeneous pair of cliques. So, by Theorem \[QuasilineStructure\], $G$ is a composition of linear interval strips. Choose such a composition representation of $G$ using the maximum number of strips. By Lemma \[TrivialOrCanonical\], every interval 2-join is trivial or canonical. Let $(H, A_1, A_2)$ be a strip in the composition. Let $B_1 {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}N_{G\setminus H}(A_1)$ and $B_2 {\mathrel{\mathop:}=}N_{G\setminus
H}(A_2)$. Now $(H, A_1, A_2, B_1, B_2)$ is an interval $2$-join. If $A_1=A_2$, then $H$ is complete. So suppose $A_1 \ne A_2$. Now $H$ is canonical, by Lemma \[TrivialOrCanonical\]. If $H$ is reducible, then by symmetry we can assume that $N_H(A_1) \setminus A_1 = N_H(v_1) \setminus
A_1$. But now replacing the strip $(H, A_1, A_2)$ with the two strips $(G[A_1], A_1, A_1)$ and $(H\setminus A_1, N_H(A_1)\setminus A_1, A_2)$ gives a composition representation of $G$ using more strips, which is a contradiction. Hence $H$ is irreducible. Now by Lemma \[Irreducible2Join\], $H$ is complete or $K_t - xy$ where $x$ and $y$ are low in $G$ and $t \le 6$. Thus, $G$ is a composition of strips, each of which is either complete or $K_t
- xy$, where $x$ and $y$ are low in $G$ and $t \le 6$.
Note that each vertex can play the role of $x$ or $y$ in at most one incomplete strip. So, we can add a matching containing $xy$ for each strip of the form $K_t - xy$ without increasing the maximum degree. Let $G'$ be the resulting graph. Now we show that adding this matching does not create a $K_{\Delta(G)}$. For each strip of the form $K_t - xy$, exactly one maximal clique in $G'$ contains both $x$ and $y$ (since $B_1\cap
B_2=\emptyset$) and this clique has at most 6 vertices. Hence $\omega(G') \le
\max\{6,\omega(G)\}<\Delta(G)$, as desired.
Lemma \[QuasiLineContainedInLine\] completes our proof that if the list-coloring version of the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture (or its paintability analogue) is true for line graphs, then it is true for quasi-line graphs. If $G$ is a quasi-line counterexample, then the $G'$ guaranteed by the lemma is a line-graph counterexample, since ${\chi_{\ell}}(G')\ge{\chi_{\ell}}(G)$; similarly, $\chi_{OL}(G')\ge \chi_{OL}(G)$.
Line Graphs
===========
In this section we consider line graphs. The general idea is to show that if $G$ is a line graph of $H$, then some subgraph of $G$ is a line graph of a bipartite graph $B$ such that each edge of $B$ has many of its adjacent edges also in $B$. We then use a result of Borodin, Kostochka, and Woodall [@BKW] to show that the line graph of $B$ is $f$-AT or $f$-KP. This is the first place in our proof that relies heavily on subgraphs being kernel-perfect. In particular, the key result from [@BKW], shown below as Theorem \[BKWmain\], has no analogue for Alon–Tarsi orientations. (One example of this is that the line graph of $K_{3,3}$ has no Alon–Tarsi orientation with maximum outdegree at most 2.) Our main result in this section is the following theorem.
\[mainLineGraphs\] If $G$ is a BK-free line graph, then $\Delta(G)<69$. Thus, if $G$ is a line graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le \max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$.
In other words, we prove the Borodin–Kostochka conjecture, strengthened to online list-coloring, for the class of line graphs with maximum degree at least 69. (When combined with the previous section, this proves the same result for the larger class of quasi-line graphs with maximum degree at least 69.) Our proof relies mainly on the kernel method. This technique came to prominence when Galvin [@Galvin] used it to prove the List Coloring Conjecture for line graphs of bipartite graphs. More precisely, he showed that if $G$ is the line graph of a bipartite graph $H$, then $G$ is $\Delta(H)$-edge-choosable. A few years later Borodin, Kostochka, and Woodall [@BKW] sharpened Galvin’s result. They proved the following. (They only stated the result for list-coloring, but the same proof gives the result for kernel-perfection.)
\[BKWmain\] If $G$ is the line graph of a bipartite graph $B$, then $G$ is $f$-KP, where $f(uv)=\max\{d_B(u),d_B(v)\}$ for every edge $uv$ in $B$. Thus, $G$ is $f$-paintable.
This strengthening allowed for a surprisingly wide range of applications. One beautiful consequence of Theorem \[BKWmain\] is that for every constant $k$ there exists a constant $\Delta_k$ such that if ${{\textrm{mad}}}(G)<k$ and $\Delta(G)\ge \Delta_k$, then ${\chi_{\ell}}'(G)=\chi'(G)$. The main idea of the proof is to find as a subgraph of $G$ a certain type of bipartite graph $B$ such that any coloring of $E(G)\setminus E(B)$ can be extended to $E(B)$ by Theorem \[BKWmain\]. Recently, Woodall [@Woodall] gave a simpler proof of this result. In that paper he made explicit that it suffices to let $\Delta_k=\frac{k^2}2$. Since all of these proofs use the kernel method, they extend directly to online list-coloring, as observed by Schauz [@Schauz-Paint-Correct].
Galvin’s proof is well-known and it has been widely reproduced (for example, in [@PFTB] and [@Diestel]). The proofs for the extensions by Borodin, Kostochka, and Woodall [@BKW] and Schauz [@Schauz-Paint-Correct] are similar, so we do not reproduce them here. However, the result for bounded maximum average degree is much less well-known. (Further, we need one extra wrinkle, since the proofs in [@BKW] and [@Woodall] give an upper bound on $\Delta(H)$. We must translate this to an upper bound on $\Delta(G)$, but this final step is relatively easy.) We particularly like Woodall’s presentation, so we follow that below, in Theorem \[helperLineGraphs\].
The proof of our main result in this section has a simple outline. Let $G$ be the line graph of some graph $H$. In Lemmas \[mu-at-most-3-AT\]–\[6DegenerateHelper\], we show that if $G$ is BK-free, then $H$ is 6-degenerate. In particular, ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$. Next, in Lemma \[BKWalternater\] and Theorem \[helperLineGraphs\], we apply Theorem \[BKWmain\] to show that if $G$ is BK-free and has ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$, then $\Delta(G)\le 68$. This completes the proof for line graphs.
Now we recall how this section fits into the larger context of the paper. In the previous section, we showed that if there exists a BK-free quasi-line graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge
9$, $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, and $\chi(G) > \max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$, then there exists such a $G$ that is a line graph. In fact, the proof constructs the line graph with the same maximum degree as the original. Thus, our result that ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le\max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$ for every line graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$ immediately extends to prove the same bound for every quasi-line graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$. Combining this result with our previous work (Theorem 5.6 in [@BK-claw-free]), we get that ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)\le
\max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$ for every claw-free graph $G$ with $\Delta(G)\ge
69$.
In the rest of this section, we prove Theorem \[mainLineGraphs\]. We begin with two lemmas showing that certain graphs are $d_1$-AT or $d_1$-KP. The hypothesis $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ arises naturally from our interest in the Borodin–Kostochka Conjecture. When $G$ is a line graph of $H$, the edges incident to any common endpoint in $H$ form a clique in $G$, so $\Delta(H) \le
\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$.
\[mu-at-most-3-AT\] If $G$ is BK-free with $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ and $G$ is the line graph of some graph $H$, then $\mu(H)\le 3$. Further, no edge of multiplicity 3 in $H$ appears on a triangle.
Suppose, to the contrary, that $H$ has some edge $e$ of multiplicity at least 4; let $v\in V(G)$ be a vertex corresponding to $e$. First suppose that $d_G(v)=\Delta(G)$. Now $G[\{v\}\cup N(v)]={K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$, for some graph $B$, since $e$ has multiplicity at least 4. Since $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, we get that $\omega(B)\le {\left|B\right|}-2$. Since $G$ is a line graph, $B$ has independence number 2, so $B$ contains two disjoint pairs of non-adjacent vertices. Thus, ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$ is $d_1$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]–. Now suppose instead that $d_G(v)=\Delta(G)-1$. The argument is essentially the same; however, now we only get that $\omega(B)\le {\left|B\right|}-1$, so $B$ is incomplete. Now ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$ is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\], since $v$ is low. This completes the proof of the first statement.
Now we prove the second statement. Suppose, to the contrary, that $H$ has an edge $e$ of multiplicity 3 on a triangle. Let $x_1, x_2, x_3$ be the vertices of the triangle, with $x_1$ and $x_2$ the endpoints of $e$. Let $v_1, v_2, v_3$ be the vertices corresponding to edges with endpoints $x_1$ and $x_2$. Let $v_4$ and $v_5$ be vertices corresponding to edges $x_1x_3$ and $x_2x_3$. Similar to above, $G[\{v\}\cup N(v)]={K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$, for some graph $B$. If $d_G(v)=\Delta(G)-1$, then $\omega(G)\le {\left|B\right|}-1$. So some edge of $H$ incident to $x_1$ or $x_2$ has an endpoint outside of $\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}$. By symmetry, say it is incident $x_1$; let $v_6$ be the corresponding vertex of $G$. Now $v_1,\ldots,v_6$ induce in $G$ a subgraph that is $f$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\], since $v_1$ is low.
Assume instead that $d_G(v)=\Delta(G)$, so $\omega(G)\le {\left|B\right|}-2$. Recall that ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} P_4}$ is $d_1$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]. Suppose that an edge incident to $x_1$ has an endpoint outside $\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}$ and also that an edge incident to $x_2$ has an endpoint outside $\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}$. If these endpoints are distinct, then $G$ has a copy of ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} P_4}$, which is $d_1$-AT. If these endpoints are identical, then $G$ has a copy of ${K_2 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} C_4}$, which is $d_1$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\]. So we conclude that either $x_1$ or $x_2$ has no incident edges with endpoints outside of $\{x_1,x_2,x_3\}$; by symmetry, assume it is $x_2$. Now we can view ${K_3 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} B}$ as ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} (B-v_4)}$, since $v_4$ dominates $B$. Since $\omega(B)\le |B|-2$, we conclude that $B-v_4$ contains two disjoint pairs of nonadjacent vertices. Thus, ${K_4 \mbox{\hspace{2 pt}$\vee$\hspace{2 pt}} (B-v_4)}$ is $d_1$-AT, as shown in Figure \[ATpics1\].
Before proving our next lemma, we need a bit more information about kernel-perfect orientations. We can easily show that if $D$ is a kernel-perfect digraph, then every clique of $D$ is oriented transitively (possibly with some bidirected edges); otherwise $D$ would have some cyclically oriented 3-cycle, which has no kernel. Further, every directed odd cycle must have a chord. In general, these condition are not sufficient to imply that $D$ is kernel-perfect. However Borodin, Kostochka, and Woodall [@BKW-kp] showed that if the underlying undirected graph $G$ of $D$ is a line graph, then these conditions are indeed sufficient.
\[KP-iff-line\] Let $H$ be a line graph of a multigraph. An orientation $D$ of $H$ is kernel-perfect if and only if every clique of $H$ is transitively oriented (possibly with some bidirected edges) and every directed odd cycle of $D$ has a chord (also possibly bidirected).
Now we use Theorem \[KP-iff-line\] to prove that three particular line graphs have $f$-KP orientations, where $f(v)=d(v)$ for a few specified vertices $v$ and $f(v)=d(v)-1$ otherwise.
\[mu-3-KP\] The line graphs of the subgraphs shown in Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\] are $f$-KP, where $f(v)=d(v)$ for vertices corresponding to the six bold edges in (b) and $f(v)=d(v)-1$ otherwise.
In each case, let $H$ denote the graph shown and let $G$ denote its line graph. The orientation for the second line graph comes from the orientation for the first, simply by deleting a vertex. Since the lists sizes don’t go down, the reducibility of the first line graph implies the reducibility of the second. Our orientations $D$ will actually orient some edges in both directions. This is fine, as long as $d^+_D(v)\le d_G(v)-2$.
We begin with Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\](a). We refer to the edges of the subgraph and the vertices of its line graph interchangably. From left to write, label the edges as $u_1$, $u_2$, $v_1$, $v_2$, $v_3$, $w$, $x_1$, $x_2$, $x_3$, $y_1$, $y_2$; if vertices differ only in their subscript, then they correspond to parallel edges.
To form $D$, take all of the directed edges implied by transitivity in the three linear orders $v_1\to v_2\to u_1\to u_2\to v_3$; $x_1\to x_2\to y_1\to y_2\to x_3$; $v_3\to x_3\to w\to v_1\to v_2\to x_1\to x_2$ (one order for each maximal clique in $G$). Theorem \[KP-iff-line\] immediately implies that $D$ is kernel-perfect, since $G$ is chordal. All that remains is to verify that the outdegrees are small enough. In the table below we give the degree of each vertex in $G$ and its outdegree in $D$.
$$\begin{array}{c|ccccccccccc}
& u_1 & u_2 & v_1 & v_2 & v_3 & w & x_1 & x_2 & x_3 & y_1 & y_2\\
\hline
d_G & 4 & 4 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 6 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 4 & 4\\
d^+_D & 2 & 1 & 6 & 5 & 6 & 4 & 4 & 3 & 5 & 2 & 1
\end{array}$$
This completes the proof for Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\](a), and also for Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\](b).
Now consider Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\](c). From left to write, label the edges as $u, v_1, v_2, v_3, w, x_1, x_2, y$. To form $D$, take all directed edges implied by the four linear orders $v_3,w,
u, v_1, v_2$; $v_1, v_2, x_1, x_2, v_3$; $x_1, x_2, y$; $y,w$ (one order for each maximal clique in $G$). Again, Theorem \[KP-iff-line\] immediately implies that $D$ is kernel-perfect (now $G$ is no longer chordal, but every chordless cycle is even, which is sufficient). Again, we need only verify that the outdegrees are small enough. In the table below we give the degree of each vertex in $G$ and its outdegree in $D$.
$$\begin{array}{c|cccccccc}
& u & v_1 & v_2 & v_3 & w & x_1 & x_2 & y\\
\hline
d_G & 4 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 3\\
d^+_D & 2 & 4 & 3 & 4 & 3 & 3 & 2 & 1
\end{array}$$
This completes the proof of the lemma.
If one or both pairs of parallel edges incident to leaves in Figure \[fig:mu-3-KP\](a) ended instead at distinct leaves, then the resulting line graph would be unchanged; so it is again $f$-KP. In proving our next lemma, we use this observation implicitly.
\[6DegenerateHelper\] Let $G$ be the line graph of some graph $H$. If $\delta(H) \ge 7$ and $\mu(H) \le 3$, then $G$ is not BK-free. Thus, if $G$ is BK-free and $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, then $H$ is 6-degenerate. \[6Degenerate\]
We begin by proving the first statement. Choose a partition $\{A, B\}$ of $V(H)$ to
1. maximize $||A, B||$; and subject to that to
2. minimize $\sum_{xy \in E(A, B)} \mu(xy)^2$
Here (2) is just giving preference to things like 3 single edges over one triple edge.
Let $Q$ be the bipartite graph with parts $A$ and $B$ and edges $E(A, B)$. Note that $d_Q(x) \ge d_H(x) / 2$ for all $x \in V(Q)$ by (1); otherwise we could move $x$ to the other part and increase $||A, B||$. For each $x \in V(Q)$, let $\mu(x)$ be the maximum multiplicity of an edge in $Q$ incident to $x$. We apply Theorem \[BKWmain\] to show that the line graph of $Q$ is a $d_1$-KP subgraph of $G$ (or else $G$ contains some subgraph from Lemma \[mu-3-KP\] that is $d_1$-KP).
The hypothesis for Theorem \[BKWmain\] requires that $\max\{d_Q(x),d_Q(y)\}\le
(d_Q(x)+d_Q(y)-2-(\mu(xy)-1))-1$ if edge $xy$ is high. So it suffices to show that $d_Q(x)\ge \mu(xy)+2$ and $d_Q(y)\ge \mu(xy)+2$. Similarly, if $xy$ is a low edge, then we need $d_Q(x)\ge \mu(xy) + 1$ and $d_Q(y)\ge \mu(xy) + 1$. Since $\mu(H)\le 3$, and $d_Q(z)\ge d_H(z)/2$ for all $z\in V(Q)$, it would suffice to have $\delta(H) \ge 9$. Thus, we may assume $\delta(H) \le 8$. Since $\delta(Q) \ge 4$, we may apply Theorem \[BKWmain\] unless there is a vertex $x$ with $d_Q(x) = 4$ incident to a high edge $xy$ with $\mu(xy) = 3$. So suppose this is true. We have two cases: $d_H(x)=8$ and $d_H(x)=7$.
**$d_H(x) = 8$**: By (2), $x$ must be incident to two multiplicity 3 edges and two multiplicity 1 edges; otherwise we could move $x$ to the other part of the partition and contradict that the partition is extremal. But now we have a $d_1$-AT subgraph, by Lemma \[mu-3-KP\].
**$d_H(x) = 7$**: We have $d_H(x) + d_H(y) - \mu(xy) - 1 = \Delta(G)$. Since $d_H(x)=7$, we get $d_H(y)=\Delta(G)-3$. Pick $w \in N_H(y) - x$. Now $\Delta(G)\ge d_H(y) + d_H(w) - \mu(yw) - 1$, so $\mu(yw) + 4\ge d_H(w) \ge 7$. Thus $\mu(yw) \ge 3$. But now $y$ is incident to two multiplicity 3 edges, so we again have a $d_1$-AT subgraph, by Lemma \[mu-3-KP\]. This second statement of the lemma follows from the first one. Note that $\mu(H)\le 3$, by Lemma \[mu-at-most-3-AT\]. If $H$ has a subgraph $H'$ with $\delta(H')\ge 7$, then we apply the first part of the lemma to $H'$ and conclude that $G$ is not BK-free. Instead every subgraph $H'$ of $H$ must have a vertex of degree at most 6. Thus, by definition, $H$ is 6-degenerate.
Let $G$ be the line graph of some graph $H$ such that $\Delta(H) < \Delta(G)$. If $G$ is BK-free, then $H$ has no bipartite subgraph $B$ such that for every edge $xy \in E(B)$ the endpoint of smaller degree has all of its incident edges in $H$ also appearing in $B$. In other words, $H$ cannot contain a bipartite subgraph $B$ such that for each $xy\in E(B)$ either (a) $d_B(y) \ge d_B(x) = d_H(x)$; or (b) $d_B(x) \ge d_B(y) = d_H(y)$. \[BKWalternater\]
Suppose, to the contrary, that we have graphs $G$, $H$, and $B$ as in the lemma. Let $D$ denote the line graph of $B$. We use Theorem \[BKWmain\] to show that $D$ is $f$-AT, where $f(v):=d_D(v)-1+\Delta(G)-d_G(v)$ for all $v\in V(D)$. This contradicts the fact that $G$ is BK-free.
Consider a vertex $v$ of $D$ and let $xy$ denote the corresponding edge in $B$. To apply Theorem \[BKWmain\], we must show that $f(v)$ is sufficiently large; namely, we must show that $d_D(v)-1+\Delta(G)-d_G(v)\ge
\max\{d_B(x),d_B(y)\}$. By symmetry, assume that $d_B(y) \ge d_B(x) =
d_H(x)$. Recall that $d_D(v)=d_B(x)+d_B(y)-\mu(xy)-1$. Now $f(v)=d_D(v)-1+\Delta(G)-d_G(v) = (d_B(x)+d_B(y)-\mu(xy)-1)-1 +
\Delta(G)-(d_H(x)+d_H(y)-\mu(xy)-1) =d_B(y)-1+\Delta(G)-d_H(y)\ge d_B(y)$, since $\Delta(H)<\Delta(G)$.
To simplify our presentation of the key lemma from [@BKW] and [@Woodall], we state it only for the specific case needed for our application: ${{\textrm{mad}}}(G)<12$. However, the proof extends easily to the more general case that ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<C$, for some constant $C$.
\[helperLineGraphs\] Suppose that $G$ is BK-free, $G$ is the line graph of a graph $H$, and ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$. If $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, then $\Delta(G)\le 68$.
Suppose the lemma is false, and let $G$ be a counterexample. We use the discharging method to get a contradiction; since we know ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$, we use discharging on the vertices of $H$. Give each vertex $v\in V(H)$ initial charge ${{\textrm{ch}}}(v)=d_H(v)$. We have 10 successive rounds of discharging, rounds 2 through 11. On round $i$, each vertex of degree at most $i$ receives charge 1 from some high degree neighbor. Thus, for each $v$ with $d(v)\le 11$, vertex $v$ receives charge 1 on a total of $12-d(v)$ rounds. Hence, each such vertex receives total charge $12-d(v)$, and ends with final charge $d(v)+(12-d(v))=12$. We also must verify that no vertex gives away too much charge. Thus, each vertex finishes with charge at least 12, which contradicts our assumption that ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$. The details forthwith.
For each round of discharging, we use Lemma \[BKWalternater\] repeatedly. For each $i$ with $2 \le i \le 11$, let $V_i$ be the vertices of $H$ of degree at most $i$. Let $B_i$ be the bipartite subgraph of $H$ containing $V_i$ and all edges incident to $V_i$. Since $G$ is BK-free, $\delta(G)\ge \Delta(G)-1$. Thus, each edge $uv$ in $H$ has $d(u)+d(v)-2\ge \Delta(G)-1$, so $d(u)+d(v)\ge \Delta(G)+1$. Since $\Delta(H)\le \omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, we have $d(u)+d(v)\ge \Delta(H)+2$ for each edge $uv$. In particular, $\delta(H)\ge 2$. This also implies that for each $i$ with $2\le i\le 11$ the set $V_i$ is independent in $H$.
For every $u \in V_i$, we have $d_{B_i}(u) = d_H(u)$, so Lemma \[BKWalternater\] shows that there must exist $v \in V(B_i)
\setminus V_i$ with $d_{B_i}(v) < d_{B_i}(u) \le i$. Thus, on round $i$, we give charge 1 from $v$ to each of its neighbors in $B_i$; afterwards, we delete from $B_i$ vertex $v$ and all of its neighbors in $B_i$. Now again applying Lemma \[BKWalternater\] gives another vertex $v'$ with $d_{B_i - v - N(y)}(v') < i$. We can repeat this process until $B_i \cap V_i$ is empty, at which time each $v \in V_i$ has received charge 1. On round $i$, each $v \in V(B_i) \setminus V_i$ has lost charge at most $i-1$, since it gave charge 1 to at most $i-1$ neighbors.
Recall that $d(u)+d(v)\ge \Delta(G)+1 \ge \Delta(H)+2$ for each edge $uv\in E(H)$. Thus, on round 2, only $\Delta(H)$-vertices give charge (and only $2$-vertices receive it). Analogously, on an arbitrary round $i$, only vertices of degree at least $\Delta(H) + 2 - i$ give charge. So if a vertex gives charge only on rounds $i$ through 11, then it gives away charge at most $(i-1)+i+\cdots+10$. Since charge is first given on round $\delta(H)$, in general each vertex loses at most $55 - (1 + 2 + \cdots + (\delta(H) - 2))$. This maximum amount of charge can only be lost by a vertex of degree at least $\Delta(H)-\delta(H)+2$. So, if some vertex of $H$ finishes the discharging rounds with insufficient charge, then $(\Delta(H)-\delta(H)+2)-(55 - (1 + 2 + \cdots + (\delta(H) - 2)))\le 11$. This simplifies to $\Delta(H)+\frac{(\delta(H)-2)(\delta(H)-3)}2\le 66$. Thus, if $\delta(H)\ge 5$, we have $\Delta(H)+\delta(H)-2\le 66$; if $\delta(H)=4$, then $\Delta(H)\le 65$. Finally, if $2\le \delta(H)\le
3$, then we still have $\Delta(H)\le 66$.
Now we are almost done. However, we must still translate our upper bound on $\Delta(H)$ into an upper bound on $\Delta(G)$. Let $u$ be a minimum degree vertex in $H$ and $v$ a neighbor of $u$. Then, in $G$ we have $d_G(uv) = d_H(u) + d_H(v) - 1 - \mu(uv) \le \delta(H) + \Delta(H) - 2$. Since $G$ is BK-free, every vertex has degree at least $\Delta(G) - 1$. So $\Delta(G) - 1 \le \delta(H) + \Delta(H) - 2$. Now we apply the bounds from the previous paragraph. If $\delta(H)\ge 5$, then $\Delta(G)\le \delta(H)+\Delta(H)-1\le 67$. If, instead, $\delta(H)=4$, then $\Delta(G)\le 65+4-1=68$. Finally, if $\delta(H)\le 3$, then $\Delta(G)\le
66+3-1=68$.
Now we combine Lemmas \[mu-at-most-3-AT\]–\[helperLineGraphs\] to prove Theorem \[mainLineGraphs\]. For convenience, we restate it.
If $G$ is a BK-free line graph with $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$, then $\Delta(G)<69$. Thus, if $G$ is a line graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le \max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$.
Let $G$ be a BK-free graph such that $G$ is the line graph of some graph $H$. First, suppose that $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$. Now $H$ is 6-degenerate, by Lemma \[6DegenerateHelper\], so ${{\textrm{mad}}}(H)<12$; thus, the first statement follows from Lemma \[helperLineGraphs\]. Now consider the second statement. If $\omega(G)\ge\Delta(G)$, then the result holds by Brooks’ Theorem (more precisely, its generalization to Alon–Tarsi orientations, proved in [@Brooks-AT]). So assume that $G$ is a minimal counterexample; now $\omega(G)<\Delta(G)$ and $\Delta(G)\ge 69$. The minimality of $G$ implies that $G$ is BK-free. Now the first statement implies that $\Delta(G)<69$, which is a contradiction.
If $G$ is a quasi-line graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{OL}}(G)\le
\max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$. Further, if $G$ is a claw-free graph with $\Delta(G)\ge 69$, then ${\chi_{\ell}}(G)\le \max\{\omega(G),\Delta(G)-1\}$.
The first statement follows from Lemma \[QuasiLineContainedInLine\]. The second statement follows from a similar reduction from claw-free graphs to quasi-line graphs for the list-coloring version of the Borodin-Kostochka conjecture, which we proved in [@BK-claw-free Theorem 5.6].
[^1]: Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics, Viriginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; `[email protected]`; Research of the first author is partially supported by NSA Grant 98230-15-1-0013.
[^2]: LBD Data Solutions, Lancaster, PA; `[email protected]`
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Merging two means creating a single “new-born” by starting from two parents functions. Specifically, given a “father” function, shaped by the state constraints, and a “mother” function, designed with some optimality criterion, the merging should be similar to the father close to the constraints and similar to the mother close to the origin. To successfully merge two CLFs, the control-sharing condition is crucial: the two functions must have a common control law that makes both Lyapunov derivatives simultaneously negative. Unfortunately, it is difficult to guarantee this property a-priori, i.e., while computing the two parents functions. In this paper, we propose a technique to create a constraint-shaped “father” function that has the control-sharing property with the “mother” function. To this end, we introduce a *partial* control-sharing, namely, the control-sharing only in the regions where the constraints are active. We show that imposing partial control-sharing is a convex optimization problem. Finally, we show how to apply the partial control-sharing for merging constraint-shaped functions and the Riccati-optimal functions, thus generating a with bounded complexity that solves the constrained linear-quadratic stabilization problem with local optimality.'
author:
- Franco Blanchini
- Filippo Fabiani
- 'Sergio Grammatico[^1][^2][^3]'
title: '**On merging constraint and optimal control-Lyapunov functions** '
---
Introduction
============
For solving constrained optimal-control problems, we need to face the following issue: in general, the cost-to-go function of the unconstrained problem is quite different from the one that shapes the constraints. An efficient solution can be achieved by combining the two functions via merging [@andrieu2010uniting; @grammatico2014control]. Specifically, the merging function is a generated by two parent , and represents an important trade-off since, for instance, it may approximate the constraint-shaped function (father function) far from the origin, i.e, where the state constraints may be active, while being similar to the optimal one (mother function) close to the origin. However, there is a major issue in the merging procedure: although any pair of can be successfully merged in dimension two [@grammatico2014control Th. 1], this does not hold in higher dimensions. Remarkably, a crucial condition for merging two is the control-sharing property, which is not necessarily satisfied in non-planar systems.
In this paper, we investigate a weaker property, hereby called *partial* control-sharing, by considering a , e.g. associated with the optimal for the unconstrained system, and a family of linear state constraints. We say that the quadratic function and the constraint functions have the partial control-sharing property if the shares a control law with the constraint functions, provided that the latter are “active”.
Why merging?
------------
There are several approaches to deal with constrained optimal-control problems. The most popular one is [@SznDam87; @AllZhe00; @GooSerDed06], possibly in its explicit version [@BemMorDuaPis02]. While is powerful for discrete-time systems, it can become troublesome for continuous-time systems, as it requires fast sampling, hence long prediction horizons – issues related to fast sampling can be partially accommodated via sub-optimal control approaches [@BlaMiaPel03].
Perhaps the most popular approach is based on invariant sets and associated Lyapunov functions [@Ber72; @GutHag85; @HuLin01; @BoyElgFerBal04; @BlaMia15; @HuTeeZac06], where one faces the well-known trade-off between optimality and complexity by choosing among quadratic or non-quadratic functions (see [@HuLin01; @BlaMia15; @HuTeeZac06] for a more complete list of references). In this framework, constrained optimality can be tackled by means of gain-switching [@WreBel94]. Specifically, an “external guard" control is in charge to keep the state inside an invariant set (possibly the largest) compatible with the constraints. Next, this control is switched to the locally-optimal gain, as soon as the state reaches the largest constraint-compatible set [@GilTan91] of such a local regulator. The problem with this procedure is twofold: the high complexity of the representation of the sets involved and the discontinuity of the control law.
Contribution
------------
In this paper, we aim at solving the constrained control problem with local optimality in continuous time. After formalizing the problem (§\[sec:preliminaries\]), the main contributions are:
- We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for the partial control-sharing property in the case of a , $x^\top P x$, and a single linear constraint, $|f^\top x| \leq 1$. We provide sufficient conditions in the case of multiple constraints, $|f_i^\top x| \leq 1$, for $i \in \{1, \ldots, s\}$.
- We verify the partial control-sharing in the region where $x^\top P x\leq \mu$ and $|f_i^\top x| \leq 1$, for $i \in \{1, \ldots,s\}$, via convex programming (§\[sec:partial\_c-s\]). By following a bisection procedure, one can find the largest $\mu$ for which the partial control-sharing property holds;
- We derive the newborn by first smoothing the piecewise-quadratic function $\textrm{max}_i \{|f_i^\top x|^2, x^\top P x\}$, and then by merging it with the optimal function, $x^\top P x$, with full control-sharing guarantee (§\[sec:merging\]). The resulting has a bounded complexity, being generated by the constraints and the optimal function.
Problem formulation and preliminaries {#sec:preliminaries}
=====================================
### Notation {#notation .unnumbered}
${\mathbb{R}}$, ${\mathbb{R}}_{> 0}$ and ${\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ denote the set of real, positive real, non-negative real numbers, respectively. ${\mathbb{N}}$ denotes the set of natural numbers. For any positive (semi)definite function $V:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ and $\mu > 0$, the $\mu$-sublevel set is denoted by ${\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)} \coloneqq \left\{x \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n} \mid V(x) \leq \mu\right\}$.
An illustrative example
-----------------------
![State behaviour of the pre-stabilized system in . The blue arrows represent the derivative directions at every point inside the level curves of the associated $V(x)$. The red lines denote the constraint on $x_2$.[]{data-label="fig:DoubleInt"}](DoubleInt.pdf){width=".8\columnwidth"}
We start the paper with a simple, yet significant, example, to clarify the general problem addressed in the paper.
\[exa:ex1\]Optimal constrained state feedback design. $$\label{eq:Ex1}
\begin{cases}
\dot{x} = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & 1\\
0 & 0
\end{bmatrix} x + \begin{bmatrix}
0\\
1
\end{bmatrix} u, \\ \\
y = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & 2
\end{bmatrix} x.
\end{cases}$$
Let us consider the double integrator system in , with performance output $y$, subject to linear constraint $\lvert y \rvert \leq 1$. The control input $u$ is preliminary chosen as an optimal feedback gain: $u_0(x) = - R^{-1} B^\top P x = -(x_1 + \sqrt{2} \, x_2)$, where $P$ solves the classic with $Q = \left[\begin{smallmatrix}
1 & 0\\
0 & 0
\end{smallmatrix}\right]$ and $R = 1$. We refer to this optimal control input as a pre-stabilizing compensator, which may fail when the constraint come into play. As shown in Fig. \[fig:DoubleInt\], although the trajectories converge to the origin, there is a (symmetric) region close to the red boundaries where the optimal control drives the state outside the constraint. $\square$
In view of the previous example, throughout this paper we consider a generic system: $$\label{eq:OrigLTI}
\dot{x} = Ax + Bu,$$ with state variable $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$, control input $u \in {\mathbb{R}}^m$, $A \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$ and $B \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times m}$. As in Example \[exa:ex1\], we suppose that the system in is subject to linear constraints acting on the output variable. To tackle this problem, we also assume that the control $u$ may be chosen as the sum of two terms:
1. a pre-stabilizing compensator $u_0(x) = -\hat{K} x$, $\hat{K} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{m \times n}$, that meets some optimality (local) conditions in absence of constraints;
2. an additional control input $v = v(x) \in {\mathbb{R}}^m$, suitable to steer the system within the constraints.
We aim at designing the additional control $v$ in order to “enlarge” the set of initial states that generates safe trajectories, while preserving local optimality.
Merging control Lyapunov functions: Background
----------------------------------------------
By referring to the linear system in , in the following, we give some useful definitions.
\[def:CLF\] A positive definite, radially unbounded, smooth away from zero, function $V:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ is a control Lyapunov function (CLF) for if there exists a locally bounded control law $u:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^m$ such that, for all $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n$, we have: $$\label{eq:CLF}
\nabla V(x) (Ax + Bu(x)) < 0.$$ $V$ is a control Lyapunov function with domain ${\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}$, for $\mu > 0$, if holds for all $x \in {\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}$.
Given some $\beta > 0$, the set ${\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}$ is $\beta$-contractive for with control input $u(\cdot)$ if and only if: $$\nabla V(x) (Ax + Bu(x)) \leq - \beta V(x),$$ holds for all $x \in {\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}$. $\square$
\[def:C-S\] Two $V_1$ and $V_2$ for have the control-sharing property if there exists a locally bounded control law $u:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^m$ such that, for all $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n$, the following inequalities are simultaneously satisfied: $$\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&\nabla V_1(x) (A x + B u(x)) < 0\\
&\nabla V_2(x) (A x + B u(x)) < 0.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ $\square$
\[def:M\_CLF\] Let $V:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ be positive definite and smooth away from zero. $V$ is a gradient-type merging candidate if there exist two continuous functions $\gamma_1, \gamma_2 : {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ such that $(\gamma_1(x), \gamma_2(x)) \neq (0, 0)$ and $$\nabla V(x) = \gamma_1(x) \nabla V_1(x) + \gamma_2(x) \nabla V_2(x).$$ $V$ is a gradient-type merging if it is also a . $\square$
In [@grammatico2014control], a solution to the constrained control problem with local optimality is based on the following steps:
1. *Mother function*: Find the optimal , $x^\top P x$, for the unconstrained system;
2. *Father function*: Find a constraint-shaped , e.g. by computing or approximating the largest controlled-invariant set;
3. *Merging*: Derive a that is similar to the father close to the constraints and to the mother near the origin.
The third step is critical for two reasons. First, the possibility to merge two functions requires the control-sharing property [@grammatico2014control Th. 2]. Unless we are dealing with a planar system, for which any two share a control [@grammatico2014control Th. 1], the control-sharing property may be not satisfied. Second, the high complexity of the maximal invariant set, i.e., the representation of the father function, might be inherited by the final merging function, which complicates the on-line computation of the control inputs. We face both problems by investigating a different condition, namely the partial control-sharing property.
Problem formulation: Partial control-sharing
--------------------------------------------
We consider a region of bounded complexity of representation, which is shaped by the optimal and the constraint functions. Then, let us consider the following assumption, which guarantees that the Riccati-optimal control, with infinite-horizon quadratic performance cost $J \coloneqq \int_0^\infty \|x\|^2_{Q} + \|u\|^2_{R} \, dt$, where $R \succ 0$ and $Q \succcurlyeq 0$, is stabilizing.
\[ass:1\] The pair $(A, B)$ in is controllable and the pair $(A, Q)$ is observable. $\square$
We also assume that the state variable is subject to $s$ linear constraints, given by $|f_i^\top x| \leq 1$, for all $i \in \{1, \ldots, s\}$. By rearranging $f_i$ into the matrix $F \coloneqq [f_1, \ldots, f_s]^\top \in {\mathbb{R}}^{s \times n}$, we characterize the admissible state space as $$\mathcal{F} \coloneqq \{x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n \mid {\left\lVertF x\right\rVert}_{\infty} \leq 1\}.$$ For each constraint, we also introduce the functions $\psi_i:{\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$, defined as $\psi_i(x) \coloneqq |f_i^\top x|^2$, so that $\mathcal{F}$ is characterized by the inequality $$\label{consfunct}
\Psi(x) \coloneqq \underset{i \in \{1, \ldots, s\}}{\textrm{max}} \psi_i(x) \leq 1.$$
The optimal control gain matrix is $\hat{K} = R^{-1}B^\top P$ where $P \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$ is the solution of the , $A^\top P + PA -PBR^{-1}B^\top P + Q =0$, and $V(x) = x^\top P x$ is the optimal unconstrained cost-to-go function (positive definite in view of Assumption \[ass:1\]). Then, we shape the working region based on on $V$ and the constraints, i.e., $$\mathcal{G}_\mu \coloneqq \mathcal{F} \cap {\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}.$$ The following definition limits the requirement of control-sharing only when the boundaries are active.
Let $\alpha, \beta > 0$ be given. The functions $V$ and $\Psi$ have the $(\alpha, \beta)$-partial control-sharing property if there exists a locally-bounded control law $u: {\mathbb{R}}^{n} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^m$ such that, for all $x \in \mathcal{G}_\mu$ and $i$ s.t $f_i^\top = \pm 1$, the following inequalities simultaneously hold: $$\label{partial}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&\nabla \psi_i(x) (A x + B u(x)) \leq -\alpha\\
&\nabla V(x) (A x + B u(x)) \leq -\beta \, V(x).\\
\end{aligned}
\right.$$$\square$
We note that, if the partial control-sharing holds, then $\mathcal{G}_\mu$ is a control-invariant set. This type of regions has been considered as candidate control-invariant sets, see [@hu2010non; @Ode02]. However, we ask something stronger than control invariance, which however only requires that $\dot{\psi}_i(x) < 0$ when the $i$-th constraint is active. Thus, we require that, with the *same* control input that keeps the state inside the set, we also have $\dot V(x) < 0$ on the boundary. In view of the final merging, this condition will ensure the full control-sharing property between the constraint-shaped function and the optimal one. $\square$
Partial control-sharing conditions {#sec:partial_c-s}
==================================
![By referring to Example , the shaded area represents the elliptical convex cone $\mathcal{C}$.[]{data-label="fig:C_set"}](C_set_complete){width=".9\columnwidth"}
Without restrictions, we parametrize the control law as $u(x) = u_0(x) + v(x) = - \hat{K}x + v(x)$. Then, the system in becomes: $$\label{eq:LTI}
\dot{x} = \hat{A} x + B v,$$ with $\hat{A} \coloneqq (A - B \hat{K}) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$. We note that the optimal $V(x)$ satisfies $$\label{eq:negder}
\dot{V}(x) = 2x^\top P \hat{A} x = -x^\top \hat Q x,$$ with $\hat Q \coloneqq Q + PBR^{-1}B^\top P \succ 0$.
MISO systems: Single state constraint
-------------------------------------
First, we consider the case of a single constraint acting on the system in , i.e., $|f^\top x| \leq 1$. Then, let us define the following elliptical convex cone (an instance in Fig. \[fig:C\_set\]) $${\mathcal{C}} \coloneqq \left\{ x/\lambda \in {\mathbb{R}}^n \mid x \in {\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)} \cap \partial {\mathcal{F}} , \, \lambda > 0 \right\}.$$
Then, we have the following equivalence result.
\[th:Th\_MISO\] Let $V(x) = x^\top P x$ satisfy , the function $\Psi(x) = \psi(x) = |f^\top x|^2$ be associated with the unique constraint, and let $\alpha, \beta, \mu > 0$ be given. The following statements are equivalent:
1. $V$ and $\Psi$ have the $(\alpha,\beta)$-partial control-sharing property on ${\mathcal{G}}_\mu$;
2. $z^\top (\hat{Q} - \beta P) z - f^\top ( \hat{A} + \tfrac{\alpha}{2} I ) z \geq 0$ for all $z\in \mathcal{C}$, where $2 z^\top P B + f^\top B = 0$. $\square$
![Conditions in in the case of two inputs ($m = 2$). The arrows represent the normal vectors to the hyperplanes.[]{data-label="fig:2DRegion"}](2DRegion){width=".7\columnwidth"}
We consider the case $f^\top x =1$ only, as the proof for the symmetric one $f^\top x =-1$ is identical. Let $x \in {\mathcal{G}}_\mu$, and $\tilde{\alpha}=\alpha/2$. Then, the following conditions must hold: $$\label{eq:Hyperplanes}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&f^\top (\hat{A}x+B v) \leq -\tilde{\alpha} \\
&2 (x^\top P \hat{A} x + x^\top P B v) \leq - \beta x^\top P x,
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ namely, $$\label{eq:Hyperplanes1}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
& -f^\top B v \geq f^\top (\hat{A} + \tilde{\alpha} I) x\\
& 2 x^\top P B v \leq x^\top (\hat{Q} - \beta P) x.
\end{aligned} \right.$$ These two inequalities are always satisfied if the vectors $-f^\top B$ and $2 x^\top P B$ are not aligned (see Fig. \[fig:2DRegion\], that shows the situation with one constraint and $m = 2$). Hence, let us focus on the aligned case, i.e., when $2 x^\top P B + \lambda f^\top B = 0$ for some $\lambda > 0$. To guarantee the non-emptiness of the solution set in , we must have that: $$\begin{aligned}
\text{if} \quad & 2 x^\top P B + \lambda f^\top B = 0 \\
\text{then} \quad & x^\top (\hat{Q}-\beta P) x \geq \lambda f^\top (\hat{A} + \tilde{\alpha} I) x.
\end{aligned}$$ Thus, by dividing the first equality by $\lambda$ and both sides of the second inequality by $\lambda^2$, introducing the state transformation $z \coloneqq \left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right) \in \mathcal{C}$, we obtain the desired condition.
The tolerance $\beta>0$ can be small to make $(\hat{Q}-\beta P)$ positive definite[^4]. Thus, condition ii) in Theorem \[th:Th\_MISO\] can be checked via convex optimization by minimizing $z^\top (\hat{Q} - \beta P) z - f^\top ( \hat{A} + \tilde{\alpha} I ) z$ on the convex domain $\mathcal{C}$ with linear constraint $2 z^\top P B + f^\top B = 0$. $\square$
For $\mu$ sufficiently small, we surely have feasibility. To enlarge the domain ${\mathcal{G}}_\mu$, we can progressively increase the parameter $\mu$ (i.e., consider larger level curves in $\mathcal{L}_{(V/\mu)}$) as long as the condition of the theorem is met, thus guaranteeing the existence of a common control law between $\Psi$ and $V$ with the largest $\mu$.
-- --------- ----------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
$0.001$ [43.57]{} [11.22]{} [6.43]{} [3.62]{} [1.78]{} [0.71]{}
$0.05$ [41.96]{} [10.76]{} [6.13]{} [3.42]{} [1.64]{} [0.61]{}
$0.2$ [37.15]{} [9.36]{} [5.24]{} [2.83]{} [1.24]{} [0.33]{}
$0.001$ [43.17]{} [11.04]{} [6.30]{} [3.54]{} [1.73]{} [0.69]{}
$0.05$ [41.56]{} [10.58]{} [6.01]{} [3.34]{} [1.59]{} [0.59]{}
$0.2$ [36.75]{} [9.18]{} [5.12]{} [2.75]{} [1.19]{} [0.30]{}
-- --------- ----------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
: Optimal value of $z^\top (\hat{Q} - \beta P) z - f^\top ( \hat{A} + \tilde{\alpha} I ) z$ for Example \[exa:ex1\], with different parameter values.[]{data-label="tab:ex1_val"}
[exa:ex1]{} By applying the the conditions in to $V(x)$ and $\psi(x) = x_2^2/4$ we obtain: $$\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&-2 v \geq -2 [x_1 + (\sqrt{2} - \tilde{\alpha}) x_2]\\
&2(x_1 + \sqrt{2} x_2) v \leq (1-\sqrt{2})(x_1^2 + x_2^2) + (\sqrt{2} - 2\beta) x_1 x_2,
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ Thus, by introducing $\lambda > 0$ and following the same steps of the proof of Theorem \[th:Th\_MISO\], for $z \in \mathcal{C}$, if $z_1 + \sqrt{2} z_2 = - 1$, we must have $$(1 - \beta \sqrt{2}) (z_1^2 + z_2^2) + (\sqrt{2} - 2 \beta) z_1 z_2 \geq - 2[ z_1 + (\sqrt{2} - \tilde{\alpha}) z_2].$$ As summarized in Tab. \[tab:ex1\_val\], with small $\alpha$ and $\beta$, the latter condition is satisfied also for large values of $\mu$, guaranteeing the $(\alpha,\beta)$-partial sharing property between $\Psi$ and $V$ on ${\mathcal{G}}_\mu$.
$\square$
MIMO systems: Multiple constraints
----------------------------------
Let us now consider the general case involving several state constraints. We must have that, whenever a set of constraints is active, i.e., $\psi_i(x) = 1$, the corresponding derivatives $\dot{\psi}_i$ and $\dot{V}$ shall be simultaneously negative by adopting the same control $v$. Specifically, given any set of indices $K$, $H$ that denote active constraints, the $(\alpha,\beta)$-partial control-sharing property shall be ensured on each set: $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathcal{A}}_{K,H} \coloneqq \left\{x \in {\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)} \mid f_k^\top x = 1,\; f_h^\top x = -1, \right.\\
\left. \textup{ for all } (k, h) \in K \times H \right\},\end{gathered}$$ Let us restrict our investigation to the case in which all the constraints are equal to $1$; the other cases can be addressed by replacing $f$ by $-f$. We call ${\mathcal{A}}$ the set of states where all $s$ constraints are active.
Before stating a sufficient condition for the partial control-sharing in MIMO systems, let us introduce the following set: $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathcal{V}} \coloneqq \left\{ v \in {\mathbb{R}}^m \mid f_i^\top B v \leq - f_i^\top (\hat{A} + \tfrac{\alpha}{2} I) x, \right. \\
\left. \textup{ for all } (x, i) \in {\mathcal{A}} \times \{1, \ldots,s\} \right\}.\end{gathered}$$
\[th:Th\_MIMO\] Under the same assumptions of Theorem \[th:Th\_MISO\], the functions $V$ and $\Psi$ have the $(\alpha , \beta )$-partial control-sharing property if, for any set ${\mathcal{A}}_{K,H}$, it holds: $$\label{eq:Th_MIMO}
\underset{v \in {\mathcal{V}}}{\textrm{min}} \; \underset{x \in {\mathcal{A}}_{K,H}}{\textrm{max}} \; x^\top (\beta P - \hat{Q}) x + 2 x^\top P B v \leq 0.$$ $\square$
By construction, for any choice of active constraints in $K$ and $H$, when $x \in {\mathcal{A}}_{K,H}$, the conditions on the derivatives $\dot \psi_i(x) \leq -\alpha$ are satisfied for any $v \in {\mathcal{V}}$. Thus, the only concern refers to $V$. To ensure $\dot{V} < 0$, we must have $v \in {\mathcal{V}}$ such that $$2 x^\top P \hat A x + 2 x^\top P B v \leq -\beta x^\top P x,$$ which can be written as .
![Feasible set of the two dimensional problem $\Phi$.[]{data-label="fig:VertReg"}](VertReg){width=".7\columnwidth"}
Here, $\beta$ shall be small enough to make $(\beta P - \hat{Q})$ negative definite. For computational purposes, we may bound $v$ as $\| v \|_\infty \leq M$, with large $M$, and define the new set $\bar{{\mathcal{V}}}$ as $$\bar{{\mathcal{V}}} = \{v \in {\mathbb{R}}^m \mid \|v\|_\infty \leq M\} \cap {\mathcal{V}}.$$
In that case, in view of [@rockafellar2009variational Cor. 37.3.2], since $\bar{{\mathcal{V}}}$ and ${\mathcal{A}}_{K,H}$ are two compact and convex sets and the function in is concave in $x$ and convex in $v$, we can exchange “” and “”. Moreover, $$\Phi(x) \coloneqq \underset{v \in \bar{{\mathcal{V}}}}{\textrm{min}} \; x^\top (\beta P - \hat{Q}) x + 2 x^\top P B v$$ is an problem on the compact set $\bar{{\mathcal{V}}}$. Then, if the feasible set is non-empty, an optimal solution does exist, and at least one these belongs to the set of vertices of the feasible region, namely $\textrm{Vert}(\bar{{\mathcal{V}}})$, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:VertReg\]. Thus, we obtain that $$\label{eq:Th_MIMO_minfirst}
\underset{x \in {\mathcal{A}}_{K,H}}{\textrm{max}} \overbrace{\underset{v \in \textrm{Vert}(\bar{{\mathcal{V}}})}{\textrm{min}} \; x^\top (\beta P - \hat{Q}) x + 2 x^\top P B v}^{\eqqcolon \Phi(x)} \leq 0,$$ where $\Phi(x)$ is a concave function in $x$. As in the MISO case, the associated condition can be checked via convex optimization. $\square$
Application: smoothing and merging constraint and control-Lyapunov functions {#sec:merging}
============================================================================
In this section, we consider the problem of shaping a starting from an optimal and some constraint functions. We first construct an intermediate function from $V$, suitably scaled by some $\mu$ that ensures partial control-sharing, and the constraint functions $\{ \psi_i \}_{i=1}^{s}$. Then, after a smoothing procedure, we obtain a new that has the full control-sharing property with the optimal $V$.
A smoothing method
------------------
If there exists a control law such that $V$ and $\{\psi_i\}_{i = 1}^{s}$ simultaneously decrease along the solution to the system in , we can consider the following piecewise-quadratic candidate : $$\label{eq:PiecQuadLyapFun}
\hat{V}(x) \coloneqq \underset{i \in \{1, \ldots, s\}}{\textrm{max}}\left\{V(x), \psi_i(x)\right\}.$$
Since $\hat{V}$ is not a differentiable function, let us introduce the smoothed function, for some parameter $p \in {\mathbb{N}}$, $$\label{eq:SmoothedV}
V_p(x) \coloneqq \sqrt[p]{ \textstyle V^p(x) + \sum_{i = 1}^{s} \psi^{p}_i(x)}.$$
In the following result, we show that for $p$ large enough, the function $V_p$ is a $\beta$-contractive .
\[prop:betaEx\] Assume that $\hat{V}(x)$ is a $\beta$-contractive for with control law $v$. Then, there exists $\bar{p} \in {\mathbb{N}}$ and $\beta_p > 0$ such that, for all $p \geq \bar{p}$, $V^p_p(x)$ is a for with the same control law $v$. $\square$
![Angular outline of $\hat{V}(x)$ (coloured level curves) inside the region bounded from the constraints (red lines) and $\partial\mathcal{L}_{V}$ (black dashed line). []{data-label="fig:AngularHatV"}](AngularHatV){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
Since $\hat{V}(x)$ is a piecewise quadratic candidate , there exists some $\hat{\beta} > 0$ such that $D^+ \hat{V}(x) \leq - \hat{\beta} \, \hat{V}(x)$, where $D^+$ denotes the upper-right Dini derivative. Then, let us define the Euler Auxiliary System (EAS) $x^+ \coloneqq x + \tau (\hat{A} x + B v)$, with $\tau > 0$ small enough. In view of [@blanchini1995nonquadratic Lemma 4.1], there exists $\hat{\rho} \in \left[0, 1\right)$ such that, for the EAS, we have $\hat{V}(x^+) \leq \hat{\rho} \, \hat{V}(x)$. Without any restriction, the latter allows to consider an angular region that is bounded by the constraints and the (the coloured level curves in Fig. \[fig:AngularHatV\]). Moreover, it follows from [@blanchini1999new Th. 3.2] that, for $V_p(x)$ in , there exists some $\bar{p} \in {\mathbb{N}}$ and $\tilde{\rho} \in \left[0, 1\right)$ such that, for $p \geq \bar{p}$, $V_p(x^+) \leq \tilde{\rho} \, V_p(x)$. Introducing two scale factors $\xi_i \in \left[0, 1\right)$, $i = 1, 2$, the idea is to enclose two level surfaces among the original bounded region ${\mathcal{G}}_{\mu}$ and the angular region previously introduced. As $p$ grows, such level curves approach the boundaries within which they are confined. Hence, the following chain of inequalities holds: $$\hat{V}(x) \leq V_p(x) \leq \frac{1}{\xi_1} V_p(x) \leq \frac{1}{\xi_2} \hat{V}(x),$$ which leads to $\partial\mathcal{L}_{\hat{V}} \supset \partial\mathcal{L}_{V_p} \supset \xi_1 \, \partial\mathcal{L}_{V_p} \supset \xi_2 \, \partial\mathcal{L}_{\hat{V}}$. Then, the function $V_p(x)$ is $\rho_p$-contractive, with $\rho_p \coloneqq \hat{\rho}/\xi_2$, so $V_p(x^+) \leq \rho_p V_p(x)$. Directly from [@blanchini1999new Lemma 4.2], with $v$, as $p \rightarrow \infty$, there exist a coefficient of contractivity $\beta_p \coloneqq (1 - \rho_p)/\tau$ such that $D^+ V_p(x) \leq - \beta_p V_p(x)$. Consequently, since $V_p(x)$ is a positively homogeneous function, we have $D^+ V^p_p(x) \leq - \beta_p \, p \, V_p(x)$ as desired.
\[prop:sharing\] Let $V$ and $\Psi$ have the $(\alpha,\beta)$-partial control-sharing property. Then, for any $p \geq \bar{p}$, the functions $V^p_p$ and $V$ have the full control-sharing property. $\square$
By noticing that, if the optimal $V$ and the constraints have the $(\alpha,\beta)$-partial control-sharing property, the control law $v$ in Prop. \[prop:betaEx\] can be taken in such a way that $\dot V(x) \leq - \beta V(x)$, the proof directly follows from the results of the previous section.
A gradient-type merging: R-composition
--------------------------------------
Once we have guaranteed the full control-sharing property between $V^p_p$ and $V$, we are in the position to achieve a successful merging. Next, we briefly recall the R-composition as a possible approach to merge two , see [@balestrino2012new; @balestrino2012multivariable; @grammatico2013universal] for technical details. To obtain a merging function $V_{\wedge}$ that looks like $V$ close to the origin (locally optimal) and like the smoothed $V^p_p$ close to the constraints, the R-composition consists of the following steps:
- Define $R_1, R_2: {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$, as $R_1(x) \coloneqq 1 - V_p^p(x)$ and $R_2(x) \coloneqq 1 - V(x)$;
- Fix $\phi > 0$, define the function $R_{\wedge} : {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$ (omitting the dependence on $\phi$) as $$R_{\wedge}(x) \!\coloneqq \!\rho(\phi) \!\left(\phi R_1(x) \!+\! R_2(x) \!-\! \sqrt{\phi^2 R_1^2(x) \!+\! R_2^2(x)} \right)$$ where $\rho(\phi) \coloneqq \left(\phi + 1 - \sqrt{\phi^2 + 1}\right)^{-1}$ is a normalization factor;
- Define the R-composition, $V_{\wedge} : {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$, as $$V_{\wedge}(x) \coloneqq 1 - R_{\wedge}(x).$$
By computing the gradient $\nabla V_{\wedge}(x)$, it turns out from [@grammatico2014control Prop. 5] that $V_{\wedge}$ is a gradient-type merging candidate and can be used as a candidate .
$p$ $1$ $2$ $4$ $30$
----- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
$J$ [82.95]{} [24.95]{} [23.13]{} [27.17]{}
: Performance index $J$ for different values of $p$.[]{data-label="tab:ex1_Jval"}
[exa:ex1]{}
![State behaviour (solid lines) of the system in with gradient-type controller, for different values of $p$. The dashed-dotted lines corresponds to $V_{\wedge}(x) = \mu$, with $\mu = 1.4$, $\alpha = \beta = 0.1$, $\phi = 10$ and $x(0) = [-1.05, -0.1]^\top$.[]{data-label="fig:comparison_p"}](comparison_p){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
Finally, we show an example of the correction made by gradient-based controller $v = - b^\top \nabla V_{\wedge}(x)$, with $V_{\wedge}$ obtained via the smoothing procedure and R-composition for different values of $p$. In Fig. \[fig:comparison\_p\], we shown controlled state trajectories, where the additional control input $v$ forces the state to remain inside the feasible region, ${\mathcal{L}}_{(V/\mu)}$, providing the values for the performance index $J$ in Tab. \[tab:ex1\_Jval\]. $\square$
Conclusion and outlook
======================
Merging constraint functions and (locally) optimal control Lyapunov functions is key to design low-complexity (sub-) optimal control for constrained linear systems. Partial control-sharing is a promising approach for merging constraint and control-Lyapunov functions, under mild assumptions that can be checked via convex optimization.
Future research will investigate necessary and sufficient conditions for partial control-sharing in the presence of multiple state constraints. Control input constraints shall be considered as well. We shall also investigate sub-optimality bounds of certain merging procedures.
[1]{}
V. Andrieu and C. Prieur, “Uniting two control [Lyapunov]{} functions for affine systems,” *IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control*, vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 1923–1927, 2010.
S. Grammatico, F. Blanchini, and A. Caiti, “Control-sharing and merging control [Lyapunov]{} functions,” *IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control*, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 107–119, 2014.
M. Sznaier and M. J. Damborg, “Control of linear systems with state and control inequality constraint.” In [*Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Los Angeles, USA*]{}, pp. 761–762, 1987.
F. Allg[ö]{}wer and A. Zheng, [*Nonlinear model predictive control*]{}, vol. 26. Birkh[ä]{}user Basel, 2000.
G. C. Goodwin, M. M. Seron, and J. A. De Don[á]{}, [*Constrained control and estimation: an optimisation approach*]{}. Springer, 2006.
A. Bemporad, M. Morari, V. Dua, and E.N. Pistikopoulos, “The explicit linear quadratic regulator for constrained systems,” , vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 3–20, 2002.
F. Blanchini, S. Miani, and F.A. Pellegrino, “Suboptimal receding horizon control for continuous-time systems,” , vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1081–1086, 2003.
D. P. Bertsekas, “Infinite-time reachability of state-space regions by using feedback control,” , vol. 17, pp. 604–613, 1972.
P. Gutman and P. Hagander, “A new design of constrained controllers for linear systems,” [*IEEE Trans. Automat. Control*]{}, Vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 22–33, 1985.
T. Hu and Z. Lin, [*Control of systems with actuator saturation*]{}. Birkhauser, Boston, MA, 2001.
S. Boyd, L. El Ghaoui, E. Feron, and V. Balakrishnan, [*Linear Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory*]{}. SIAM, 2004.
F. Blanchini, S. Miani, [*Set-theoretic methods in control*]{}. Birkhauser, Boston, MA, 2015.
T. Hu, A. Teel, and L. Zaccarian, “Stability and performances for saturated systems via quadratic and non–quadratic [L]{}yapunov functions,” [*IEEE Trans. Automat. Control*]{}, Vol. 51 no. 11, pp. 1770–1786, 2006.
G.F. Wredenhagen and P.R. Belanger, “Piecewise–linear [LQ]{} control for systems with input constraint.,” , Vol. 30, no 3, pp. 403–416, 1994.
E. G. Gilbert and K. K. Tan, “Linear systems with state and control constraints: the theory and the applications of the maximal output admissible sets.” [*IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control*]{}, vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 1008–1020, 1991.
T. Hu and F. Blanchini, “Non-conservative matrix inequality conditions for stability/stabilizability of linear differential inclusions,” *Automatica*, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 190–196, 2010.
R. T. Rockafellar and R. J.-B. Wets, *Variational analysis*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emSpringer Science & Business Media, 2009, vol. 317.
F. Blanchini, “Nonquadratic [Lyapunov]{} functions for robust control,” *Automatica*, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 451–461, 1995.
F. Blanchini and S. Miani, “A new class of universal [Lyapunov]{} functions for the control of uncertain linear systems,” *IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control*, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 641–647, 1999.
B.D. O’Dell and E.A. Misawa, “Semi-ellipsoidal controlled invariant sets for constrained linear systems,” [*[ASME]{}’s Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control*]{}, vol. 124, no. 1, pp. 98–103, 2002.
A. Balestrino, A. Caiti, and S. Grammatico, “A new class of Lyapunov functions for the constrained stabilization of linear systems,” , vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 2951–2955, 2012.
A. Balestrino, A. Caiti, and S. Grammatico, “Multi-variable constrained process control via Lyapunov R-functions,” , vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 1762–1772, 2012.
S. Grammatico, F. Blanchini, and A. Caiti, “A universal class of non-homogeneous control Lyapunov functions for linear differential inclusions,” In *Proc. of the IEEE European Control Conference*, pp. 2331–2336, 2013.
[^1]: F. Blanchini is with the Department of Mathematics and Informatics, University of Udine, Italy [([email protected])]{}
[^2]: F. Fabiani is with the Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, Italy [([email protected])]{}
[^3]: S. Grammatico is with the Delft Center for Systems and Control, TU Delft, The Netherlands [([email protected])]{}
[^4]: Precisely, $\beta$ must be smaller than the smallest eigenvalue of $\hat{Q}P^{-1}$.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We introduce a nonconvex Mean Field Games system by studying a model with a large number of identical pairs of players who are all rational, and each pair plays an identical zero-sum differential game. We study existence and uniqueness of solutions for a simple system in this context.'
address: ' Department of Mathematics, University of Wisconsin Madison, Van Vleck hall, 480 Lincoln drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA'
author:
- Hung Vinh Tran
title: A Note on Nonconvex Mean Field Games
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Heuristic derivation
--------------------
Mean Field Games were introduced independently by Caines, Huang, Malhamé [@CHM1; @CHM2] and Lasry, Lions [@LaLi1; @LaLi2; @LaLi3] to study systems with large numbers of identical agents in competition. In the competition, each agent is rational and seek to optimize a value (payoff) functional by choosing appropriate controls. The interactions between them are given by a mean field coupling term that aggregates their individual contributions. We then let the number of agents tend to infinity and take the average to obtain a mean field limit, in which we observe the distribution of the agents as a probability measure. A typical Mean Field Games system looks like $${\rm (MFG)} \quad
\begin{cases}
u_t + H(x,Du) ={\varepsilon}{\Delta}u + F(x,m) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
-m_t - \text{div}(D_pH(x,Du)m) = {\varepsilon}{\Delta}m \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
u(x,0)=u_0(x), m(x,T)=m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ Here $T>0$, ${\varepsilon}\geq 0$ are given parameters, and ${\mathbb{T}}^n={\mathbb{R}}^n/{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ is the $n$-dimensional torus. The first equation, a Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman type equation, is forward in time and associated with an optimal control problem, and the unknown $u=u(x,t)$ is the value (payoff) function of an average agent. The second equation, a Fokker-Planck equation, is backward in time and the unknown $m=m(x,t)$ describes the density (distribution) of the agents. For each fixed $t\in [0,T]$, $m(\cdot,t)$ is a probability measure. In this context, the Hamiltonian $H=H(x,p):{\mathbb{T}}^n \times {\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is assumed to be convex in $p$ because of the optimal control framework. The coupling term $F(x,m):{\mathbb{T}}^n \times \mathcal{P}({\mathbb{T}}^n) \to {\mathbb{R}}$ encodes the interactions between each agent and the mean field. Here $\mathcal{P}({\mathbb{T}}^n)$ is the set of all Radon probability measures on ${\mathbb{T}}^n$.
In the lecture notes of Cardaliaguet [@Car1], and Gomes, Pimentel, Voskanyan [@GPV], the time direction in (MFG) is reversed. To go from this setting to theirs, we simply set ${\overline}{u}(x,t)=u(x,T-t)$, ${\overline}{m}(x,t)=m(x,T-t)$ for all $(x,t) \in {\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]$. Then $({\overline}{u},{\overline}{m})$ satisfies $$\label{MFG'}
\begin{cases}
-{\overline}{u}_t + H(x,D{\overline}{u}) ={\varepsilon}{\Delta}{\overline}{u} + F(x,{\overline}{m}) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
{\overline}{m}_t - \text{div}(D_pH(x,D{\overline}{u}){\overline}{m}) = {\varepsilon}{\Delta}{\overline}{m} \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
{\overline}{u}(x,T)=u_0(x), {\overline}{m}(x,0)=m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$
A quick and heuristic way in [@Car1; @GPV] to derive is the following. An average agent controls a stochastic differential equation $$dX_t = {\alpha}_t\,dt +\sqrt{2{\varepsilon}}dB_t$$ where $B_t$ is a standard Brownian motion. He/she aims at minimizing the value functional $${\mathbb{E}}\left[ \int_0^T (L(X_s,{\alpha}_s)+F(X_s,{\overline}{m}(s))\,ds + u_0(X_T) \right].$$ Here the Lagrangian $L=L(x,q):{\mathbb{T}}^n \times {\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is the Legendre transform of $H$. It is important noting that $F$ plays a role in this minimizing problem.
The value functional of an average agent is then given by the first equation in . Heuristically, his/her optimal control is given in a feedback form by ${\alpha}^*(x,t) = -D_pH(x,D{\overline}{u})$. As all agents are rational, they all move with a velocity which is due to both the diffusion and the drift term $-D_pH(x,D{\overline}{u})$, which leads to the second equation in .
We also refer the readers to the surveys of Guéant, Lasry, Lions [@GLL] and Gomes, Saúde [@GS] for further discussions on (MFG) and applications.
Nonconvex Mean Field Games
--------------------------
We give a heuristic derivation here in case ${\varepsilon}=0$. For now, let us just assume that $F(x,m):{\mathbb{T}}^n \times \mathcal{P}({\mathbb{T}}^n) \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is nice enough.
We consider a large number of identical pairs of players who are all rational, and each pair plays an identical zero-sum differential game. In each pair, player I aims at maximizing while player II aims at minimizing a certain payoff functional by controlling the dynamics of a particle in ${\mathbb{T}}^n$, which represents the location of the pair in the game.
Fix $T>0$. Let $A,B$ be two compact metric spaces. For $t \in [0,T)$, let $$\begin{aligned}
&{\mathcal{A}}_t:=\left\{a:[t,T]\to A\,:\, a \text{ is measurable}\right\},\\
&{\mathcal{B}}_t:=\left\{b:[t,T]\to B\,:\, b \text{ is measurable}\right\},\end{aligned}$$ be the set of possible controls in time $[t,T]$ of players I and II, respectively. We henceforth identify any two controls which agree a.e.
Assume that the dynamics is given by an ordinary differential equation $${\rm(ODE)} \quad
\begin{cases}
y_x'(s) = f(y_x(s), a(s),b(s)) \quad \text{ for } s\in (t,T),\\
y_x(t) =x \in {\mathbb{T}}^n,
\end{cases}$$ for given controls $a(\cdot) \in {\mathcal{A}}_t$ of player I, and $b(\cdot) \in {\mathcal{B}}_t$ of player II. Here, $f:{\mathbb{T}}^n \times A\times B \to {\mathbb{T}}^n$ is a given vector field satisfying: there exists $C>0$ such that $$\begin{cases}
f \in C({\mathbb{T}}^n \times A \times B),\\
|f(y_1,a,b)-f(y_2,a,b)| \leq C|y_1-y_2| \quad \text{ for all } y_1, y_2 \in {\mathbb{T}}^n, a\in A, b\in B.
\end{cases}$$ Under the conditions on $f$, (ODE) has a unique solution. Associated with (ODE) is the payoff functional $$C_{x,t}(a(\cdot),b(\cdot))=\int_t^T (h(y_x(s),a(s),b(s))+F(y_x(s),{\overline}{m}(s)))\,ds + u_0(x(T)),$$ where $h:{\mathbb{T}}^n \times A \times B \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is a given function satisfying: there exists $C>0$ so that $$\begin{cases}
h \in C({\mathbb{T}}^n \times A \times B),\\
|h(y_1,a,b)-h(y_2,a,b)| \leq C|y_1-y_2| \quad \text{ for all } y_1, y_2 \in {\mathbb{T}}^n, a\in A, b\in B.
\end{cases}$$ The interpretation is that $h$ is the running payoff and $u_0$ is the terminal payoff. For this generic pair of players, at time $s$, their only knowledge of the whole world is the distribution of other agent represented by the density ${\overline}{m}(s)$. At location $y_x(s)$ and with the knowledge of the density ${\overline}{m}(s)$, player I gains a further payoff value $F(y_x(s),{\overline}{m}(s))$. Of course, the goal of player I is to maximize the payoff functional $C_{x,t}(a(\cdot),b(\cdot))$. On the other hand, player II wants to minimize it (or to maximize $-C_{x,t}(a(\cdot),b(\cdot))$). One way to interpret this situation is that generic player I prefers to be close to other pairs to gain more value, while generic player II prefer to avoid the crowds.
The set of strategies for player I beginning at time $t$ is $${\Sigma}_t:=\left\{{\alpha}:{\mathcal{B}}_t \to {\mathcal{A}}_t \text{ non-anticipating} \right\},$$ where non-anticipating means that, for all $b_1(\cdot), b_2(\cdot) \in {\mathcal{B}}_t$ and $s \in [t,T]$, $$b_1(\cdot)=b_2(\cdot) \text{ on } [t,s) \Rightarrow {\alpha}[b_1](\cdot)={\alpha}[b_2](\cdot) \text{ on } [t,s).$$ Similarly, the set of strategies for player II beginning at time $t$ is $${\Gamma}_t:=\left\{\beta:{\mathcal{A}}_t \to {\mathcal{B}}_t \text{ non-anticipating}\right\}.$$ We call $$\begin{aligned}
&V(x,t):=\inf_{\beta \in {\Gamma}_t} \sup_{a(\cdot) \in {\mathcal{A}}_t} C_{x,t}(a(\cdot),\beta[a](\cdot)),\\
&U(x,t):=\sup_{{\alpha}\in {\Sigma}_t} \inf_{b(\cdot) \in {\mathcal{B}}_t} C_{x,t}({\alpha}[b](\cdot),b(\cdot)),\end{aligned}$$ the lower value and the upper values of the game, respectively.
Let $$\begin{aligned}
&H^-(x,t,p):=\min_{a \in A} \max_{b \in B} \left\{ -f(x,a,b)\cdot p -h(x,a,b)-F(x,{\overline}{m}(t))\right\},\\
&H^+(x,t,p):=\max_{b \in B} \min_{a \in A} \left\{ -f(x,a,b)\cdot p -h(x,a,b)-F(x,{\overline}{m}(t))\right\},\end{aligned}$$ be the lower and upper Hamiltonians of the game, respectively. It was shown by Evans, Souganidis [@EvS] that, $V$ is the viscosity solution to the lower Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation $$\begin{cases}
-V_t + H^-(x,t,DV) = 0 \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
V(x,T) = u_0(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n,
\end{cases}$$ and $U$ is the viscosity solution to the upper Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equation $$\begin{cases}
-U_t + H^+(x,t,DU) = 0 \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
U(x,T) = u_0(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ Since $H^-\geq H^+$, we get $V \leq U$ by using the comparison principle. Assume further that the zero-sum differential game has a value, that is, $H^-=H^+$. This means we assume that $$\label{game-value}
H(x,p)=\min_{a\in A} \max_{b\in B}\left\{ -f(x,a,b)\cdot p -h(x,a,b)\right\}=\max_{b \in B} \min_{a \in A} \left\{ -f(x,a,b)\cdot p -h(x,a,b)\right\}.$$ Once holds, then we have $$H^-(x,t,p)=H^+(x,t,p)= H(x,p)-F(x,{\overline}{m}(t)).$$ Thus, $U=V$ solves the first equation in . Heuristically, for $(x,t)\in {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T)$, the optimal strategies of the pair is given by $(a^*,b^*)$ such that, for $Y_x(s)=y_x(s,a^*(s),b^*(s))$, we have $Y_x'(s) = -D_pH(Y_x(s), D{\overline}{u}(Y_x(s))$ (see Cardaliaguet [@Car0]). As all players are rational, all pairs move with a velocity due to the drift term $-D_pH(x,D{\overline}{u})$, which gives us the second equation in . We thus obtain , hence (MFG), with $H$ not convex in $p$.
A simple system - A case study
------------------------------
Our main focus in this paper is the following system, which is a simplified version of the full system (MFG), $$\label{MFG}
\begin{cases}
u_t + H(Du) = {\Delta}u + \rho*(\rho*m) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
-m_t - \text{div}(DH(Du) m) = {\Delta}m \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
u(x,0) = u_0(x), m(x,T) = m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ Here, the coupling term $F(x,m)=\rho*(\rho*m)$ is very simple and is of nonlocal type.
We assume the following conditions
- The Hamiltonian $H:{\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is smooth and there exists $c_0>0$ such that $$|DH(p)|+|D^2 H(p)| \leq c_0 \qquad \text{ for all } p \in {\mathbb{R}}^n.$$
- The convolution kernel $\rho \in C_c^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n, [0,\infty))$ satisfying that $\rho$ is symmetric, that is, $\rho(x) = \rho(-x)$ for all $x\in {\mathbb{T}}^n$, and $\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho\,dx=1$.
- $u_0 \in C^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)$ and $m_T \in C({\mathbb{T}}^n,[0,\infty))$ with $\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m_T\,dx=1$.
Organization of the paper {#organization-of-the-paper .unnumbered}
-------------------------
Our main goal here is to study existence and uniqueness of solutions to . In Section \[sec:exist\], we prove that there exist solutions to . In Section \[sec:unique\], we show that, under some additional conditions, we have uniqueness results for .
Notations {#notations .unnumbered}
---------
We use the following notations $$\begin{aligned}
&C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) =\left\{ u: {\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T] \to {\mathbb{R}}\,:\, u, Du, D^2u, u_t \in C({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) \right\},\\
&C([0,T], L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))=\left\{ \mathbf{v}:[0,T] \to L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)\,:\, \mathbf{v} \text{ is continuous}\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
Existence of solutions {#sec:exist}
======================
Let $M = \max_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m_T$. Set $$X=\left\{ m\in C([0,T], L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))\,:\, 0 \leq m \leq M \ \text{ a.e. on } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]\right\}.$$ The main result in this section is
\[thm:exist\] Assume that [(A1)–(A3)]{} hold. Then has a pair of solution $(u,m)\in C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) \times C([0,T],L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))$.
For each $m \in X$, there exists a unique solution, $U\in C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])$, of $$\label{HJB}
\begin{cases}
U_t + H(DU) = {\Delta}U+ \rho*(\rho*m) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
U(x,0) = u_0(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ Thanks to Proposition \[prop:apriori\] below, we have that $$\|DU\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} + \|D^2 U\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq C,$$ where $C$ depends only on $c_0, M, T, \|u_0\|_{C^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)}, \|\rho\|_{C^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)}$ and not on $m$. This also implies that $\|U_t\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq C$. Let $\widetilde m$ be the solution to the Fokker-Planck equation $$\label{FP}
\begin{cases}
-\widetilde m_t - \text{div}(DH(DU)\widetilde m) = {\Delta}\widetilde m \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
\widetilde m(x,T) = m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ In light of the maximum principle, $\widetilde m \in X$.
Define the map $\Phi\,:\, X \to X$ as $\Phi(m)=\widetilde m$.
[**Claim 1.**]{} The map $\Phi$ is continuous.
Let $m_k \to m$ in $X$. Then $\rho*(\rho*m_k) \to \rho*(\rho*m)$ uniformly on ${\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]$. By stability of viscosity solutions and , we get that $U_k \to U$ uniformly on ${\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]$, where $U$ is the solution of . The a priori estimate yields further that $DU_k(\cdot,t) \to DU(\cdot,t)$ uniformly on ${\mathbb{T}}^n$ for each $t\in [0,T]$.
Let $v_k=\Phi(m_k) - \Phi(m)$. Then $v_k$ satisfies $$\begin{cases}
-(v_k)_t - \text{div}(DH(U_k) v_k) - \text{div}((DH(DU_k)-DH(DU))\widetilde m)= {\Delta}v_k \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
v_k(x,T) = 0 \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ Multiply this PDE by $v_k$ and integrate on ${\mathbb{T}}^n$ to get $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \frac{-|v_k(x,t)|^2}{2}\,dx\\
=\ & \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left(-|Dv_k|^2 - v_k DH(DU_k)\cdot Dv_k - \widetilde m (DH(DU_k)-DH(DU))\cdot Dv_k \right)\,dx\\
\leq \ & C \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left(|v_k|^2 + |D(U_k-U)|^2 \right)\,dx.\end{aligned}$$ We employ Gronwall’s inequality to yield further that, for $t \in [0,T]$, $$\|v_k(\cdot,t)\|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)}^2 \leq C \|D(U_k-U)\|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])}^2.$$ Let $k \to \infty$ to conclude that $\Phi$ is continuous.
[**Claim 2.**]{} The set $K = {\overline}{\Phi(X)}$ is compact.
Fix a sequence $\{m_k\} \subset X$. As $U_k$ satisfies estimate for all $k \in {\mathbb{N}}$, we also have that $\|(U_k)_t\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq C$ for some constant $C>0$ independent of $k$. We use the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem to extract a subsequence $\{U_{k_j}\}$ of $\{U_k\}$ such that $$U_{k_j} \to U \quad \text{ uniformly on } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T],$$ for some $U \in {{\rm Lip\,}}({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])$. The estimate gives further that, for each $t\in [0,T]$, $$DU_{k_j}(\cdot,t) \to DU(\cdot,t) \quad \text{ uniformly on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.$$ Repeat the argument in Claim 1 to deduce that $\{\Phi(m_{k_j})\}$ is a Cauchy sequence in $X$. Therefore, $K$ is compact.
We use Claims 1,2 and Schauder’s fixed point theorem to conclude that, there exists $m\in K$ such that $\Phi(m)=m$.
\[prop:apriori\] Assume that [(A1)–(A3)]{} hold. Let $U$ be the solution to with $m \in X$ given. There exists $C>0$ depends only on $c_0, M, T, \|u_0\|_{C^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)}, \|\rho\|_{C^2({\mathbb{T}}^n)}$ such that $$\label{apriori}
\|DU\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} + \|D^2 U\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq C.$$
Let $f=\rho*(\rho*m)$. It is straightforward to see that $$\|Df\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq M \|D\rho\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n)}
\quad \text{and} \quad
\|D^2f\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T])} \leq M \|D^2\rho\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n)}.$$ Fix $(x_0,t_0) \in {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T]$. We use the nonlinear adjoint method to prove . See Evans [@Ev], Tran [@Tr], Cagnetti, Gomes, Mitake, Tran [@CGMT], Gomes, Pimentel, Voskanyan [@GPV], Mitake, Tran [@MT-LN] and the references therein for the development of this method.
Consider the adjoint equation to the linearized operator of : $$\label{adj}
\begin{cases}
-{\sigma}_t -\text{div}(DH(DU){\sigma}) = {\Delta}{\sigma}\qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,t_0),\\
{\sigma}(x,t_0) = {\delta}_{x_0} \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$ It is clear that ${\sigma}>0$ in ${\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,t_0)$ and $\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} {\sigma}(x,t)\,dx=1$ for all $t\in [0,t_0]$. Differentiate with respect to $x_i$, multiply by ${\sigma}$ and integrate to yield that $$U_{x_i}(x_0,t_0) = \int_0^{t_0} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} f_{x_i} {\sigma}\,dxdt + \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u_0)_{x_i} {\sigma}\,dx.$$ Hence, $$\label{bdd-1}
|U_{x_i}(x_0,t_0)| \leq t_0 M \|D\rho\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n)} + \|Du_0\|_{L^\infty} \leq TM \|D\rho\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^n)} + \|Du_0\|_{L^\infty}.$$
Let $\phi=\frac{|DU|^2}{2}$. Differentiate with respect to $x_i$, multiply by $U_{x_i}$ and sum over $i$ to get $$\phi_t + DH(DU)\cdot D\phi - Df\cdot DU={\Delta}\phi - |D^2U|^2.$$ Multiply the above by ${\sigma}$ and integrate to imply $$\label{bdd-2}
\int_0^{t_0} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D^2U|^2 {\sigma}\,dxdt = \int_0^{t_0} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (Df\cdot DU){\sigma}\,dxdt + \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \phi(x,0){\sigma}\,dx - \phi(x_0,t_0) \leq C.$$
Next, we differentiate with respect to $x_i$ then $x_j$, $$(U_{x_i x_j})_t + DH(DU)\cdot DU_{x_i x_j} + H_{p_k p_l} U_{x_k x_i} U_{x_l x_j} = {\Delta}U_{x_i x_j} + f_{x_i x_j}.$$ Multiply this identity by ${\sigma}$, integrate and use (A1), (A3), to conclude that $$\label{bdd-3}
|U_{x_i x_j}(x_0,t_0)| \leq \int_0^{t_0} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (c_0 |D^2 U|^2 + |f_{x_i x_j}|) {\sigma}\,dxdt +\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |(U_0)_{x_i x_j}| {\sigma}\,dx \leq C.$$
The arguments in the proof of the existence result (Theorem \[thm:exist\]) are quite standard and not new. A similar form of the proof already appeared in [@GPV Section 10.2]. In [@GPV], Gomes, Pimentel and Voskanyan used the convexity of $H$ to achieve the uniform semiconcavity estimate of $U_k$, which was then used to get Claim 2 (the compactness of $K={\overline}{\Phi(X)}$). The main difference here is that we do not require convexity of $H$, and estimate is obtained thanks to the appearance of the diffusion term and the nonlinear adjoint method.
Uniqueness of solutions {#sec:unique}
=======================
We obtain uniqueness of solutions to in this section. As $H$ is not necessarily convex, it is much harder to perform this task. We add the following assumption
- The constant $c_0$, which appears in [(A1)]{}, satisfies $$c_0 < \frac{1}{12M},$$ where $M = \max_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m_T$.
Note first that $M \geq 1$ as $m_T \geq 0$ and $\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m_T(x)\,dx=1$. Hence, $$\label{eq:c0}
c_0 < \min\left\{\frac{1}{4(M+2)}, \frac{1}{2\sqrt{5}}\right\}.$$ Assumption (A4) is like a smallness condition, which is quite restrictive but nevertheless quantitative. Note further that the smallness of $c_0$ does not depend on $T$, and thus, there is no restriction on $T>0$. See Ambrose [@Am] for related results.
Here is one of the main results in this section.
\[thm:unique\] Assume that [(A1)–(A4)]{} hold. Then has at most one pair of solution $(u,m)\in C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) \times C([0,T],L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))$.
Let $(u^1,m^1)$ and $(u^2, m^2)$ be two pairs of solutions in $C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) \times C([0,T],L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))$ to : $$\label{MFG1}
\begin{cases}
u^1_t + H(Du^1) = {\Delta}u^1 + \rho*(\rho*m^1) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
-m^1_t - \text{div}(DH(Du^1) m^1) = {\Delta}m^1 \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
u^1(x,0) = u_0(x), m^1(x,T) = m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n,
\end{cases}$$ and $$\label{MFG2}
\begin{cases}
u^2_t + H(Du^2) = {\Delta}u^2 + \rho*(\rho*m^2) \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
-m^2_t - \text{div}(DH(Du^2) m^2) = {\Delta}m^2 \qquad &\text{ in } {\mathbb{T}}^n \times (0,T),\\
u^2(x,0) = u_0(x), m^2(x,T) = m_T(x) \qquad &\text{ on } {\mathbb{T}}^n.
\end{cases}$$
Take the difference of first equations of and and use (A1) to get $$(u^1-u^2)_t + DH(Du^2)\cdot D(u^1-u^2) - c_0 |D(u^1-u^2)|^2 \leq {\Delta}(u^1-u^2) +\rho*(\rho*(m^1-m^2)).$$ Multiply this by $m^2$ and integrate on ${\mathbb{T}}^n$ to yield $$\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2) m^2\,dx \leq \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho*(\rho*(m^1-m^2)) m^2\,dx + c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2 m^2\,dx.$$ A similar computation gives $$\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^2-u^1) m^1\,dx \leq \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho*(\rho*(m^2-m^1)) m^1\,dx + c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2 m^1\,dx.$$ Combine the two above inequalities and use (A2), (A3) to imply $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2) (m^2-m^1) \,dx\\
\leq & - \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho*(\rho*(m^1-m^2)) (m^1-m^2)\,dx + c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2 (m^1+m^2)\,dx\\
\leq &- \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n \times {\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho(x-y) (\rho*(m^1-m^2))(y) (m^1-m^2)(x)\,dydx + 2c_0 M \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx\\
= &-\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(m^1-m^2)(y) \right|^2\,dy + 2c_0 M\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx.
\end{aligned}$$ Thus, $$\label{imp-1}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2) (m^2-m^1) \,dx \leq -\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(m^1-m^2) \right|^2\,dx +2c_0 M \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx.$$
Next, we take the difference of first equations of and , multiply by $2(u^1-u^2)$ and integrate to imply $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx\\
= & - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (H(Du^1)-H(Du^2))(u^1-u^2)\,dx\\
& \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad\qquad + 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \rho*(\rho*(m^1-m^2)) (u^1-u^2)\,dx\\
\leq & -2 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx + 2c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)| \cdot |u^1-u^2|\,dx\\
&\qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad\qquad +2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (\rho*(m^1-m^2))( \rho *(u^1-u^2))\,dx\\
\leq & -\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx +c_0^2 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx+4\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(m^1-m^2) \right|^2\,dx \\
&\qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad
+\frac{1}{4} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(u^1-u^2) \right|^2\,dx,\end{aligned}$$ where we use Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality in the last line. Besides, $$\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(u^1-u^2) \right|^2\,dx \leq \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx.$$ Hence, $$\begin{gathered}
\label{imp-2}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx \leq -\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx
+\left(\frac{1}{4}+c_0^2\right) \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx\\
+4\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left| \rho*(m^1-m^2) \right|^2\,dx.\end{gathered}$$
We continue by taking the difference of the second equations of and , multiply by $2(m^1-m^2)$ and integrate $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} -(m^1-m^2)^2\,dx\\
= & -2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|^2\,dx - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2) D(m^1-m^2)\cdot DH(Du^1) \,dx\\
& \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad
-2 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m^2 D(m^1-m^2)\cdot (DH(Du^1)-DH(Du^2))\,dx\\
\leq & -2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|^2\,dx + 2c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|\cdot |m^1-m^2|\,dx\\
& \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad\qquad
+2c_0 M \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|\cdot |D(u^1-u^2)|\,dx\\
\leq & -(2-c_0(1+M))\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|^2\,dx + c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left((m^1-m^2)^2+M|D(u^1-u^2)|^2\right)\,dx.\end{aligned}$$ Note that Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality is used in the last line of the above computation. Note further that $\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2)\,dx =0$. Hence, Poincaré’s inequality gives $$\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)|^2\,dx \geq \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2)^2\,dx.$$ Combine this with the previous computation, we arrive at $$\label{imp-3}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} -(m^1-m^2)^2\,dx \leq -(2-c_0(2+M))\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2)^2\,dx
+ c_0 M \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n}|D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx.$$
Define $$\varphi(t) = \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \left((u^1-u^2)(m^2-m^1)+\frac{(u^1-u^2)^2}{4} - (m^1-m^2)^2 \right)\,dx.$$ Multiply by $\frac{1}{4}$, combine the result with and to get that $$\begin{gathered}
\varphi'(t) \leq -\left(\frac{1}{4}-3c_0 M \right) \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)|^2\,dx +\left(\frac{1}{16}+\frac{c_0^2}{4} \right) \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx\\
-(2-c_0(2+M))\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2)^2\,dx.\end{gathered}$$ We use (A4) and to get further that $$\label{imp-4}
\varphi'(t) \leq \left(\frac{1}{16}+\frac{1}{80} \right) \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (u^1-u^2)^2\,dx- \frac{7}{4} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2)^2\,dx
\leq \frac{1}{2} \varphi(t).$$ Thus, $t\mapsto e^{-t/2} \varphi(t)$ is non-increasing on $[0,T]$. Note that $$\varphi(0)=\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} - (m^1-m^2)^2 \,dx \leq 0 \quad \text{and} \quad
\varphi(T)=\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} \frac{(u^1-u^2)^2}{4}\,dx \geq 0,$$ which imply that $\varphi \equiv 0$ and in fact $(u^1,m^1)=(u^2,m^2)$.
\[rem:restrict\] Condition (A4) is quite restrictive as it requires that both $\|DH\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{R}}^n)}$ and $\|D^2H\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb{R}}^n)}$ are small enough (smaller than $c_0$). In particular, if $M=\max_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} m_T$ is sufficiently large, then Theorem \[thm:unique\] gives the uniqueness result in a perturbative regime only. This is of course not so satisfying. To some extend, this is related to the result of Ambrose [@Am].
The monotonicity of $\varphi(t)$ is interesting in its own right. See [@GV Section 6] for some related discussions.
We provide next another uniqueness result, where the appearance of a constant drift is allowed.
\[thm:unique-new\] Let $b\in {\mathbb{R}}^n$ be a fixed vector, and $K:{\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$ be a smooth function such that [(A1)–(A4)]{} hold with $K$ in place of $H$. Define $H:{\mathbb{R}}^n \to {\mathbb{R}}$ as $$H(p) = b\cdot p + K(p) \quad \text{for all $p\in {\mathbb{R}}^n$.}$$ Then has at most one pair of solution $(u,m)\in C^2_1({\mathbb{T}}^n \times [0,T]) \times C([0,T],L^2({\mathbb{T}}^n))$.
It is clear that this uniqueness result is stronger that that in Theorem \[thm:unique\]. We choose to present the two results separately to emphasize an important point that there are some good cancelations corresponding to the constant drift term.
The proof is basically the same as that of Theorem \[thm:unique\] except the fact that we need to handle the drift term $b\cdot p$ in a careful manner. We cannot just use brute force bounds here. Let us provide the computations related to these terms here.
The first term we need to take care of is $$\begin{aligned}
&- 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (H(Du^1)-H(Du^2))(u^1-u^2)\,dx\\
=\, & - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (K(Du^1)-K(Du^2))(u^1-u^2)\,dx - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} b\cdot D(u^1-u^2)(u^1-u^2)\,dx\\
\leq \ & 2 c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)| \cdot |u^1-u^2|\,dx - \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} b \cdot D((u^1-u^2)^2)\,dx\\
=\, & 2 c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(u^1-u^2)| \cdot |u^1-u^2|\,dx.\end{aligned}$$ The second term that we need to pay attention to is handled in the same way $$\begin{aligned}
&- 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2) D(m^1-m^2)\cdot DH(Du^1) \,dx\\
= \, & - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2) D(m^1-m^2)\cdot DK(Du^1) \,dx- 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2) D(m^1-m^2)\cdot b \,dx\\\
=\, & - 2\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} (m^1-m^2) D(m^1-m^2)\cdot DK(Du^1) \,dx \\
\leq \, & 2 c_0 \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^n} |D(m^1-m^2)| \cdot |m^1-m^2|\,dx.\end{aligned}$$
[1]{}
D. M. Ambrose, *Strong solutions for time-dependent mean field games with non-separable Hamiltonians*, arXiv:1605.01745 \[math.AP\].
F. Cagnetti, D. Gomes, H. Mitake, H. V. Tran, *A new method for large time behavior of convex Hamilton–Jacobi equations: degenerate equations and weakly coupled systems*, [Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré - Analyse non linéaire]{} 32 (2015), 183–200.
P. Cardaliaguet, Introduction to differential games, 2010.
P. Cardaliaguet, Notes on Mean Field Games, 2012.
L. C. Evans, *Adjoint and compensated compactness methods for Hamilton–Jacobi PDE*, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis [**197**]{} (2010), 1053–1088.
L.C. Evans, P. E. Souganidis, *Differential games and representation formulas for solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs equations*, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 33 (no. 5) 1984, 773–797.
O. Guéant, J.-M. Lasry and P.-L. Lions, Mean field games and applications, in Paris-Princeton Lectures on Mathematical Finance 2010, Lecture Notes in Math., Springer, Berlin, 2011, pp. 205–266.
D. A. Gomes, E. A. Pimentel and V. Voskanyan, Regularity Theory for Mean-Field Game Systems, Springer Briefs in Mathematics.
D. Gomes and J. Saúde, *Mean field games models–a brief survey*, Dynam. Games Appl. 4 (2014) 110–154.
D. A. Gomes and V. Voskanyan, *Extended deterministic mean-field games*, SIAM J. Control Optim. 54 (2016), no. 2, 1030–1055.
M. Huang, P. E. Caines and R. P. Malhamé, *Large population stochastic dynamic games: closed-loop McKean-Vlasov systems and the Nash certainty equivalence principle*, [Communication in information and systems]{}, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 221-252, 2006.
M. Huang, P. E. Caines and R. P. Malhamé, *Large-population cost-coupled LQG problems with nonuniform agents: individual-mass behavior and decentralized ${\varepsilon}$-Nash equilibria*, [IEEE Trans. Automat. Control]{} 52(9), 1560–1571 (2007).
J.-M. Lasry and P.-L. Lions, *Jeux a champ moyen. I. Le cas stationnaire*, [C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris]{} 343 (2006), no. 9, 619–625.
J.-M. Lasry and P.-L. Lions, *Jeux a champ moyen. II. Horizon fini et contrôle optimal*, [C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris]{} 343 (2006), no. 10, 679–684.
J.-M. Lasry and P.-L. Lions, *Mean field games*, [Jpn. J. Math.]{} 2 (2007), no. 1, 229–260.
P.-L. Lions, College de France course on mean-field games, 2007–2011, http://www.college-de-france.fr/site/pierre-louis-lions/.
H. Mitake and H. V. Tran, Dynamical properties of Hamilton–Jacobi equations via the nonlinear adjoint method: Large time behavior and Discounted approximation, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics, to appear.
H. V. Tran, *Adjoint methods for static Hamilton-Jacobi equations*, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations [**41**]{} (2011), 301–319.
[^1]: The author is partially supported in part by NSF grant DMS-1615944.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Let $f_\mathbf{S}$ be a quadratic polynomial with a fixed Siegel disc of bounded type. Using an adaptation of complex a priori bounds for critical circle maps, we prove that $f_\mathbf{S}$ is conformally mateable with the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}(z) := z^2-1$.'
author:
- Jonguk Yang
title: Mating the Basilica with a Siegel Disk
---
The Definition of Mating {#defnmating}
========================
The simplest non-linear examples of holomorphic dynamical systems are given by quadratic polynomials in $\mathbb{C}$. By a linear change of coordinates, any quadratic polynomial can be uniquely normalized as $$f_c (z) := z^2 + c, \hspace{5 mm} c \in \mathbb{C}.$$ This is referred to as the [***quadratic family***]{}.
The critical points for $f_c$ are $\infty$ and $0$. Observe that $\infty$ is a superattracting fixed point for $f_c$. Let $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ be the attracting basin of $\infty$. It follows from the maximum modulus principle that $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ is a connected set. The complement of $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ is called the filled Julia set $K_c$. The boundary of $K_c$ is equal to the Julia set $J_c$.
The non-escape locus in the parameter space for $f_c$ (referred to as the [***Mandelbrot set***]{}) is defined as a compact subset of $\mathbb{C}$: $$\mathcal{M} := \{c \in \mathbb{C} \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} 0 \notin \mathbf{A}^\infty_c\},$$ which is known to be connected (see [@DH]). It is not difficult to prove that $J_c$ is connected (and therefore, $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ is simply connected) if and only if $c \in \mathcal{M}$. In fact, if $c \notin \mathcal{M}$, then $J_c=K_c$ is a Cantor set, and the dynamics of $f_c$ restricted to $J_c$ is conjugate to the dyadic shift map (see [@M2]). We also define the following subset of the Mandelbrot set: $$\mathcal{L} := \{c \in \mathcal{M} \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} J_c \text{ is locally connected}\}.$$
![The Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$. The 1/2-limb $L_{1/2}$ is highlighted.[]{data-label="fig:mandelbrot"}](mandelbrot.eps)
The quadratic family has been the center of attention in holomorphic dynamics for the past three decades, and we now have an almost complete understanding of its dynamics (see e.g. [@M2]). It should be noted however, that the main conjecture in the field (the local connectedness property of the Mandelbrot set, or *MLC* for short) remains open (see [@DH]).
In contrast to the quadratic family, the dynamics of non-polynomial quadratic rational maps is still a wide open area of research. In this section, we describe a construction originally put forward by Douady and Hubbard (see [@Do]) which produces quadratic rational maps by combining the dynamics of two quadratic polynomials.
Suppose $c \in \mathcal{L}$. Since $J_c$ is connected, $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ must be a simply connected domain. Let $$\phi_c : \mathbf{A}^\infty_c \to \mathbb{D}$$ be the unique conformal Riemann mapping such that $\phi_c(\infty) = 0$, and $\phi_c'(\infty) > 0$. It is not difficult to prove that the following diagram commutes: [ $$\begin{CD}
\mathbf{A}^\infty_c @> f_c >> \mathbf{A}^\infty_c\\
@VV \phi_c V @VV \phi_c V\\
\mathbb{D} @> z \mapsto z^2 >> \mathbb{D}
\end{CD}$$ ]{} and hence, $\phi_c$ is the Böttcher uniformization of $f_c$ on $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$. Moreover, since $J_c$ is locally connected, Carathéodory’s theory implies that the inverse of $\phi_c$ extends continuously to the boundary of $\mathbb{D}$ (see [@M1]). If we let $$\tau_c := \phi_c^{-1}|_{\partial \mathbb{D}},$$ we obtain a continuous parametrization of $J_c$ by the unit circle $\partial \mathbb{D} = \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z}$ known as a [***Carathéodory loop***]{}. Observe that $f_c$, when restricted to $J_c$, acts via $\tau_c$ as the angle doubling map: $$f_c(\tau_c(t)) = \tau_c(2t).$$
Now, suppose $c_1, c_2 \in \mathcal{L}$. Using $\tau_{c_1}$ and $\tau_{c_2}$, we can glue the dynamics of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ together to construct a new dynamical system as follows.
First we construct a new dynamical space $K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$ by gluing the filled Julia sets $K_{c_1}$ and $K_{c_2}$: $$\label{gluing def}
K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2} : = (K_{c_1} \sqcup K_{c_2}) / \{ \tau_{c_1}(t) \sim \tau_{c_2}(-t) \}.$$ We refer to the resulting equivalence relation $\sim$ as [***ray equivalence***]{}, and denote it by $\sim_{\text{ray}}$. For $x \in K_{c_i}$, $i = 1, 2$, we denote the ray equivalency class of $x$ by $[x]_{\text{ray}}$.
We now define a new map $$f_{c_1} \vee f_{c_2} : K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2} \to K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2},$$ called the [***formal mating of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$***]{}, by letting $f_{c_1} \vee f_{c_2} \equiv f_{c_1}$ on $K_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_1} \vee f_{c_2} \equiv f_{c_2}$ on $K_{c_2}$.
![The Douady rabbit $f_c$, $c \approx -0.123+0.754i$, mated with the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}$.[]{data-label="fig:douadyrabbit"}](matingdouadybasilica.eps)
If the space $K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$ is homeomorphic to the 2-sphere, then $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ are said to be [***topologically mateable***]{}. If, in addition, there exists a quadratic rational map $R$ and a homeomorphism $$\Lambda : K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$$ such that $\Lambda$ is conformal on $\mathring{K}_{c_1} \sqcup \mathring{K}_{c_2} \subset K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$, and the following diagram commutes: $$\begin{CD}
K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2} @>f_{c_1} \vee f_{c_2}>> K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}\\
@VV\Lambda V @VV\Lambda V\\
\hat{\mathbb{C}} @>R>> \hat{\mathbb{C}}
\end{CD}$$ then $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ are said to be [***conformally mateable***]{}. The quadratic rational map $R$ is called a [***conformal mating of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$***]{}. We also say that $R$ [***realizes the conformal mating of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$***]{}.
In applications, it is sometimes more useful to work with the following reformulation of the definition of conformal mateability:
\[mating def\] Suppose $c_1, c_2 \in \mathcal{L}$. Then $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ are conformally mateable if and only if there exists a pair of continuous maps $$\Lambda_1 : K_{c_1} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}, \hspace{5mm} \Lambda_2 : K_{c_2} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$$ such that for all $i, j \in \{1, 2\}$ the following three conditions are satisfied:
1. $\Lambda_i(z) = \Lambda_j(w)$ if and only if $z \sim_{\text{ray}} w$
2. $\Lambda_i$ is conformal on $\mathring{K}_{c_i}$
3. there exists a rational function $R$ of degree 2 such that the following diagrams commute: $$\begin{CD}
K_{c_1} @>f_{c_1}>> K_{c_1}\\
@VV\Lambda_1 V @VV\Lambda_1 V\\
\hat{\mathbb{C}} @>R>> \hat{\mathbb{C}}
\end{CD}
\hspace{20 mm}
\begin{CD}
K_{c_2} @>f_{c_2}>> K_{c_2}\\
@VV\Lambda_2 V @VV\Lambda_2 V\\
\hat{\mathbb{C}} @>R>> \hat{\mathbb{C}}
\end{CD}$$
Suppose $R$ is a conformal mating of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ for some $c_1, c_2 \in \mathcal{L}$. Then $R$ has a locally connected Julia set $J(R)$.
Let $\Lambda_1 : K_{c_1} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ and $\Lambda_2 : K_{c_2} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ be as given in proposition \[mating def\]. Note that $$J(R) = \Lambda_1(J_{c_1}) = \Lambda_2(J_{c_2}).$$ Since the continuous image of a compact locally connected set is locally connected, the result follows.
\[triv ex\] For every $c \in \mathcal{L}$, $f_c$ is trivially conformally mateable with the squaring map $f_0(z) = z^2$. This follows from choosing $\Lambda_1$ and $\Lambda_2$ in proposition \[mating def\] to be the identity map on $K_c$ and the inverse of the Böttcher uniformization of $f_c$ on $\mathbf{A}^\infty_c$ respectively. Note that the conformal mating of $f_c$ and $f_0$ is given by $f_c$ itself.
The converse is given by the following easy result:
\[polytriv\] Suppose a quadratic polynomial $P : \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ is a conformal mating of $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ for some $c_1, c_2 \in \mathcal{L}$. Then either $f_{c_1}$ or $f_{c_2}$ must be equal to the squaring map $f_0$.
Let $J(P)$ and $\mathbf{A}^\infty_P$ denote the Julia set and the attracting basin of infinity for $P$ respectively. We have $$J(P) = \Lambda_1(J_{c_1}) = \Lambda_2(J_{c_2}).$$ Hence, $\mathbf{A}^\infty_P$ must be contained in either $\Lambda_1(\mathring{K}_{c_1})$ or $\Lambda_2(\mathring{K}_{c_2})$. Assume for concreteness that it is contained in the former. Since $\Lambda_1|_{\mathring{K}_{c_1}}$ is conformal, and $$f_{c_1}(z) = \Lambda_1^{-1} \circ P \circ \Lambda_1(z)$$ for all $z \in K_{c_1}$, we see that $\Lambda_1^{-1}(\infty)$ must be a superattracting fixed point for $f_{c_1}$. The only member in the quadratic family that has a bounded superattracting fixed point is the squaring map $f_0$.
By proposition \[polytriv\], we see that except in the trivial case, the mating construction yields non-polynomial dynamical systems.
\[no half limb\] Consider the formal mating of the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}(z):= f_{-1}(z) = z^2 -1$ with itself. The glued space $K_\mathbf{B} \vee K_\mathbf{B}$ consists of infinitely many spheres connected together at discrete nodal points (refer to section \[basilica bubble\]). Hence, it is not homeomorphic to the 2-sphere. Therefore, $f_\mathbf{B}$ is not conformally mateable with itself (since it is not even topologically mateable with itself). This is actually a specific instance of a more general result, which we state below.
Let $H_0$ be the [***principal hyperbolic component***]{} defined as the set of $c\in\mathcal M$ for which $f_c$ has an attracting fixed point $z_c\in\mathbb C$. It is conformally parametrized by the multiplier of $z_c$: $$\lambda : c \mapsto \mu_c := f_c'(z_c)$$ (see e.g. [@M2]). Note that $\lambda$ extends to a homeomorphism between $\overline{H_0}$ and $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$.
A connected component of ${\mathcal M}\setminus \overline{H_0}$ is called a [***limb***]{}. It is known (see e.g. [@M2]) that the closure of every limb intersects $\partial H_0$ at a single point. Moreover, the image of this point under $\lambda$ is a root of unity. Henceforth, the limb growing from the point $\lambda^{-1}(e^{2\pi ip/q})$, $p/q\in\mathbb Q$, will be denoted by $L_{p/q}$. For example, the parameter value $-1$ for the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}(z)= z^2 -1$ is contained in the 1/2-limb $L_{1/2}$.
The following standard observation is due to Douady [@Do]:
Suppose $c_1$ and $c_2$ are contained in complex conjugate limbs $L_{p/q}$ and $L_{-p/q}$ of the Mandelbrot set $\mathcal{M}$. Then $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ are not topologically mateable.
There exists a unique repelling fixed point $\alpha_1 \in K_1$ (resp. $\alpha_2 \in K_2$) such that $K_1\setminus \{\alpha_1\}$ (resp. $K_2 \setminus \{\alpha_2\}$) is disconnected. Since $c_1$ and $c_2$ are contained in complex conjugate limbs, $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$ are in the same ray equivalency class. Hence they are glued together to a single point in $K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$. Removing this single point from $K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$ leaves it disconnected, which is impossible if $K_{c_1} \vee K_{c_2}$ is homeomorphic to the 2-sphere. For more details, see [@M2].
Matings with the Basilica Polynomial {#motivate}
====================================
Matings can be particularly useful in describing the dynamics in certain one-parameter families of rational maps. The best studied example of such a family is $$R_a(z) := \frac{a}{z^2 + 2z}, \hspace{5mm} a \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{0\},$$ which is referred to as the [***basilica family***]{}.
The critical points for $R_a$ are $\infty$ and $-1$. Observe that $\{\infty, 0\}$ is a superattracting 2-periodic orbit for $R_a$. Let $\mathcal{A}^\infty_a$ be the attracting basin of $\{\infty, 0\}$. The boundary of $\mathcal{A}^\infty_a$ is equal to the Julia set $J(R_a)$.
\[super 2orbit\] Suppose $f : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ is a quadratic rational map with a superattracting 2-periodic orbit. Then $f$ can be normalized as $R_a$ for some unique $a \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{0\}$ by a linear change of coordinates.
First we show that any quadratic rational map $f$ that has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit $\{\infty, 0\}$ with critical points at $\infty$ and $-1$ must be of the form $R_a$ for some unique $a \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{0\}$.
To this end, let $$f(z) = \frac{a_2 z^2 + a_1 z + a_0}{b_2 z^2 + b_1 z + b_0}.$$ If $f(\infty) = 0$ then $a_2 = 0$ and $b_2 \neq 0$. If $f(0) = \infty$, then $a_0 \neq 0$ and $b_0 = 0$. Hence, $f$ can be uniquely expressed as $$f(z) = \frac{a_1 z + a_0}{z^2 + b_1 z}.$$
If $a_1 \neq 0$, then for $r$ sufficiently large, $$f(r e^\theta) \sim \frac{a_1}{r} e^{-\theta}.$$ Which implies that $\infty$ cannot be a critical point for $f$ by the argument principle. Hence, $a_1 = 0$.
Finally, we compute $$f'(-1) = \frac{2a_0 - a_0 b_1}{(1 - b_1)^2} = 0.$$ Hence, $b_1 = 2$.
In the general case, suppose $f : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit $\{z_\infty, z_0\}$ and critical points at $z_\infty$ and $z_{-1}$. Then there exists a unique linear change of coordinates which sends $z_\infty$ to $\infty$, $z_0$ to $0$, and $z_{-1}$ to $-1$. The result follows.
Analogously to $\mathcal{M}$, the non-escape locus in the parameter space for $R_a$ is defined as $$\mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B} := \{a \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{0\} \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} -1 \notin \mathcal{A}^\infty_a\}.$$ We also define the following subset of $\mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$: $$\mathcal{L}_\mathbf{B} := \{a \in \mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B} \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} J(R_a) \text{ is locally connected}\}.$$
![The non-escape locus $\mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$ for $R_a$ (in black). Compare with figure \[fig:mandelbrot\]. Note the absence of a copy of the 1/2-limb $L_{1/2}$ (see example \[no half limb\]).[]{data-label="fig:matedmandelbrot"}](matedmandelbrot.eps)
The basilica polynomial $$f_\mathbf{B}(z) := z^2 -1$$ is the only member of the quadratic family that has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit. Let $K_\mathbf{B}$ be the filled Julia set for $f_\mathbf{B}$. The following result is an analogue of the Böttcher uniformization theorem for the quadratic family. Refer to [@AY] for the proof.
\[basilica unif\] Suppose $a \in \mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$. Then there exists a unique conformal map $\psi_a : \mathcal{A}^\infty_a \to \mathring{K}_\mathbf{B}$ such that the following diagram commutes: [ $$\begin{CD}
\mathcal{A}^\infty_a @> R_a >> \mathcal{A}^\infty_a\\
@VV \psi_a V @VV \psi_a V\\
\mathring{K}_\mathbf{B} @> f_\mathbf{B} >> \mathring{K}_\mathbf{B}
\end{CD}$$ ]{} Moreover, if $B$ is a connected component of $\mathcal{A}^\infty_a$, then $\phi_a$ extends to a homeomorphism between $\overline{B}$ and $\phi_a(\overline{B})$.
Suppose for some $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$, $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable. If $F : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ is a conformal mating of $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$, then $F$ has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit. By proposition \[super 2orbit\], $F$ can be normalized as $R_a$ for some $a \in \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{B}$.
In view of proposition \[basilica unif\], it is natural to ask whether for every $a \in \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{B}$, $R_a$ is a conformal mating of $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ for some $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$. It turns out this cannot be true: for some $a \in \mathcal{L}_\mathbf{B}$, $R_a$ is the result of a more general form of mating called *mating with laminations* between $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ with $c \notin \mathcal{L}$ (see [@Du]). However, the following weaker statement does hold. The proof is completely analogous to the proof of proposition \[polytriv\], so we omit it here.
Suppose $R_a$ is a conformal mating. Then $R_a$ is a conformal mating of $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ for some $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$.
The principal motivation for this paper is to answer the following question:
Suppose $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$. Are $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ conformally mateable? If so, is there a unique member of the basilica family that realizes their conformal mating?
We now summarize the known results on this topic.
\[Rees, Tan, Shishikura [@Re; @Tan; @S]\] \[rees\] Suppose $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$. If $f_c$ is hyperbolic, then $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable. Moreover, their conformal mating is unique up to conjugacy by a Möbius map.
Theorem \[rees\] is actually a corollary of a much more general result which states that two post-critically finite quadratic polynomials $f_{c_1}$ and $f_{c_2}$ are (essentially) mateable if and only if $c_1$ and $c_2$ do not belong to conjugate limbs of the Mandelbrot set. See [@Tan] for more details.
\[Aspenberg, Yampolsky [@AY]\] \[asp\] Suppose $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$. If $f_c$ is at most finitely renormalizable and has no non-repelling periodic orbits, then $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable. Moreover, their conformal mating is unique up to conjugacy by a Möbius map.
\[Dudko [@Du]\] \[dudko\] Suppose $c \in \mathcal{L} \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus L_{1/2})$. If $f_c$ is at least 4 times renormalizable, then $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable. Moreover, their conformal mating is unique up to conjugacy by a Möbius map.
Together, theorem \[rees\], \[asp\] and \[dudko\] provide a positive answer to the main question in almost all cases. However, the parameters contained in the boundary of hyperbolic components that are not too “deep” inside the Mandelbrot set are still left unresolved. We discuss these parameters in greater detail in the next section.
Matings in the Boundary of Hyperbolic Components {#mainthms}
================================================
Let $H$ be a hyperbolic component of $\mathcal{M} \setminus L_{1/2}$. By theorem \[rees\], the quadratic polynomial $f_c$ and the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable for all $c \in H$. Our goal is to determine if this is also true for $c \in \partial H \cap \mathcal{L}$.
Choose a parameter value $c_0 \in H$, and let $a_0 \in \mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$ be a parameter value such that $R_{a_0}$ is a conformal mating of $f_{c_0}$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$. Since $R_{a_0}$ must be hyperbolic, $a_0$ is contained in some hyperbolic component $H_\mathbf{B}$ of $\mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$.
For all $c \in \overline{H}$, $f_c$ has a non-repelling $n$-periodic orbit $\mathbf{O}_c := \{f_c^i(z_c)\}_{i=0}^{n-1}$ for some fixed $n \in \mathbb{N}$ (see e.g. [@M2]). Likewise, for all $a \in \overline{H_{\mathbf{B}}}$, $R_a$ has a non-repelling $n$-periodic orbit $\mathcal{O}_a := \{R_a^i(w_a)\}_{i=0}^{n-1}$. Define the multiplier maps $\lambda: \overline{H} \to \overline{\mathbb{D}}$ and $\mu : \overline{H_\mathbf{B}} \to \overline{\mathbb{D}}$ by: $$\lambda(c) := (f_c^i)'(z_c) \hspace{2.5 mm} \text{and} \hspace{2.5 mm} \mu(a) := (R_a^i)'(w_a).$$ It is known that $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are homeomorphisms which are conformal on the interior of their domains (see [@M2]).
The following result can be proved using a standard application of quasiconformal surgery (see chapter 4 in [@BF]).
\[hyper comp unif\] Define a homeomorphism $\phi_H : \overline{H} \to \overline{H_\mathbf{B}}$ by $$\phi_H := \mu^{-1} \circ \lambda.$$ Then for all $c \in H$, $R_{\phi_H(c)}$ is a conformal mating of $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$.
Our goal is to extend this result to the boundary of $H$ where possible.
Consider $c \in \partial H$, and let $a = \phi_H(c) \in \partial H_\mathbf{B}$. The multiplier of $\mathbf{O}_c$ and $\mathcal{O}_a$ is equal to $e^{2\pi \theta i}$ for some $\theta \in \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z}$. The number $\theta$ is referred to as the [***rotation number***]{}. If $\theta$ is rational, then $\mathbf{O}_c$ and $\mathcal{O}_a$ are parabolic. In this case, an application of trans-quasiconformal surgery due to Haïssinsky implies the following result (see [@Ha]).
Suppose that the rotation number $\theta$ is rational, so that $\mathbf{O}_c$ and $\mathcal{O}_a$ are parabolic. Then $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable, and $R_a$ is the unique member of the basilica family that realizes their conformal mating.
If $\theta$ is irrational, then $\mathbf{O}_c$ is either Siegel or Cremer. In the latter case, it is known that the Julia set $J_c$ for $f_c$ is non-locally connected (see e.g. [@M1]). This means that the formal mating of $f_c$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ cannot be defined, and hence, they are not conformally mateable.
For our discussion of the Siegel case, we first recall a classical result of Siegel [@S]. An irrational number $x$ is said to be [***Diophantine of order $\kappa$***]{} if there exists a fixed constant $\epsilon > 0$ such that for all $\frac{p}{q} \subset \mathbb{Q}$, the following inequality holds: $$|x - \frac{p}{q}| \geq \frac{\epsilon}{q^\kappa}.$$ The set of all irrational numbers that are Diophantine of order $\kappa$ is denoted $\mathcal{D}(\kappa)$. The smallest possible value of $\kappa$ such that $\mathcal{D}(\kappa)$ is non-empty is $2$ (see [@M1]).
\[Siegel [@S]\] \[siegel thm\] Let $f : U \to V$ be an analytic function. Suppose $f$ has an indifferent periodic orbit $\mathcal{O}$ with an irrational rotation number $\theta$. If $\theta \in \mathcal{D}(\kappa)$ for some $\kappa \geq 2$, then $\mathcal{O}$ is a Siegel orbit.
There is a classical connection between Diophantine classes and continued fraction approximations (see e.g. [@M1]). In particular, if $$x = \cfrac{1}{a_1+\cfrac{1}{a_2+ \ldots{}}}$$ is the continued fraction representation of $x$, then $x \in \mathcal{D}(2)$ if and only if all the $a_i$’s are uniformly bounded. In view of this, we say that the numbers $x \in \mathcal{D}(2)$ are of [***bounded type***]{}. Siegel quadratic polynomials of bounded type are prominently featured in the study of renormalization (see e.g. [@P; @Mc; @Y1; @Y2]).
\[Peterson [@P]\] \[bounded type lc\] Suppose a quadratic polynomial $f_c$ has an indifferent periodic orbit with an irrational rotation number of bounded type. Then $f_c$ has a locally connected Julia set $J_c$.
In this paper, we present a positive answer to the main question (stated in section \[motivate\]) for quadratic polynomials $f_\mathbf{S}$ that have an indifferent fixed point with an irrational rotation number of bounded type. Note that by theorem \[siegel thm\], the indifferent fixed point is Siegel, and by theorem \[bounded type lc\], the formal mating of $f_\mathbf{S}$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ is well defined.
The solution to the uniqueness part of the main question is elementary.
\[uniqueness mat\] Suppose $\lambda \in \overline{\mathbb{D}}$. Then there exists a unique $c \in \mathcal{M}$ (resp. $a \in \mathcal{M}_\mathbf{B}$) such that $f_c$ (resp. $R_a$) has a bounded non-repelling fixed point $z_0 \neq \infty$ with multiplier $\lambda$.
Suppose $f_c$ has a fixed point $z_0 \neq \infty$ with multiplier $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}$. It is easy to check that the value of $c$ is given by $$c = \frac{\lambda}{2} - \frac{\lambda^2}{4}.$$ Hence, $c$ is uniquely determined.
Likewise, suppose $R_a$ has a fixed point with multiplier $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}$. Then the value of $a$ is given by $$a = -\frac{8\lambda}{(\lambda-1)^3}.$$ Hence, $a$ is uniquely determined.
Our main results are stated below.
Suppose $\nu \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is of bounded type. Let $R_\nu$ be the unique member of the basilica family that has a Siegel fixed point $z_0$ with rotation number $\nu$. Let $\mathcal{S}_0$ be the fixed Siegel disc containing $z_0$. Then $\mathcal{S}_0$ is a quasidisk, and contains a unique critical point in its boundary.
Suppose $\nu \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is of bounded type. Let $f_\mathbf{S}$ be the unique member of the quadratic family that has a Siegel fixed point with rotation number $\nu$. Then $f_\mathbf{S}$ and $f_\mathbf{B}$ are conformally mateable, and $R_\nu$ is the unique member of the basilica family that realizes their conformal mating.
![Mating of a Siegel polynomial $f_c$, $c = \frac{\lambda}{2} - \frac{\lambda^2}{4}$, $\lambda = e^{(\sqrt{5}-1) \pi i}$, and the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}$. The Siegel disc is highlighted.[]{data-label="fig:matingsiegelbasilica"}](matingsiegelbasilica.eps)
The Construction of a Blaschke Product Model and the Proof of Theorem A
=======================================================================
Suppose $\nu \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is of bounded type. It follows from proposition \[uniqueness mat\] that there exists a unique member of the basilica family $R_\nu$ that has a fixed Siegel disc $\mathcal{S}_0$ with rotation number $\nu$. In this section, we use quasiconformal surgery to show that $\mathcal{S}_0$ is a quasidisc. Refer to [@BF] for generalities about quasiconformal maps and quasiconformal surgeries.
Consider the Blaschke product $$F_{a,b}(z) := -\frac{1}{e^{i \theta}} \frac{z(z-a)(z-b)}{(1-\bar{a}z)(1-\bar{b}z)},$$ where $$ab = r e^{i \theta}, \hspace{5 mm} r \in \mathbb{R}^+, \hspace{2 mm} \theta \in [0, 2 \pi).$$ Note that $0$ is a fixed point with multiplier $-r$.
\[crit\] For any value of $r$ and $\theta$, $a = a(r, \theta)$ and $b = b(r, \theta)$ can be chosen such that $F_{a,b}$ has a double critical point at $1$.
Let $$F_{a,b}'(z) = \frac{P(z)}{Q(z)}.$$ Then $$F_{a,b}''(z) = \frac{P'(z)Q(z) - P(z)Q'(z)}{Q(z)^2}.$$ Thus, the condition $$F_{a,b}'(1) = F_{a,b}''(1) = 0$$ is equivalent to $$P(1) = P'(1) = 0.$$
A straightforward computation shows that $$P(z) = \overline{\kappa}z^4 - 2 \overline{\zeta}z^3 + (3 - |\kappa|^2 + |\zeta|^2)z^2 - 2 \zeta z + \kappa,$$ where $$\kappa := ab, \hspace{5 mm} \zeta := a+b.$$ Thus, $F_{a,b}$ has a double critical point at $1$ if the following two equations are satisfied: $$\label{1}
2\kappa - 3 \zeta + (3 - |\kappa|^2 + |\zeta|^2) = \overline{\zeta}$$ $$\label{2}
3\kappa - 2 \zeta + (3 - |\kappa|^2 + |\zeta|^2) = \overline{\kappa}.$$
Subtracting from , we see that $$\kappa - \zeta = \overline{\kappa} - \overline{\zeta}.$$ Substituting $\kappa = x + i y$ and $\zeta = u + i y$ into , we obtain $$\label{3}
u^2 -4u+(2x-x^2+3)=0.$$ has two solutions: $u = -x+3$ and $u = x+1$. The first solution corresponds to the relation $$\zeta = -\overline{\kappa} + 3.$$ Therefore, by choosing $a$ and $b$ to be the solutions of $$z^2 + (re^{-i\theta}-3)z + re^{i\theta} = 0,$$ we ensure that the map $F_{a,b}$ has a double critical point at $1$.
\[conv coord\] Let $a = a(r, \theta)$ and $b = b(r, \theta)$ satisfy the condition in lemma \[crit\]. Then for all $r > 1$ sufficiently close to $1$, there exists a local holomorphic change of coordinates $\phi$ at $0$ so that the map $G := \phi^{-1} \circ F_{a,b}^2 \circ \phi$ takes the form $$G(z) = r^2 z (1 + z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z)).$$
Expanding $F_{a,b}(z)$ as a power series around $0$, we have $$F_{a,b}(z) = -rz + \lambda z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z^3)$$ for some $\lambda = \lambda(r, \theta)$ depending continuously on $r$ and $\theta$. Define $$\psi_\mu(z) := z + \mu z^2, \hspace{5mm} \mu \in \mathbb{C}.$$ A straightforward computation shows that $$H(z) := \psi_\mu^{-1} \circ F_{a,b} \circ \psi_\mu (z) = -rz + (\lambda + (1+r) \mu) z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z^3).$$ Thus, by choosing $\mu = \frac{-\lambda}{1+r}$, we have $$H(z) = -rz(1 + \nu z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z^3))$$ for some $\nu = \nu(r, \theta)$ depending continuously on $r$ and $\theta$.
Observe that the second iterate of $H$ is equal to $$H^2(z) = r^2 z (1 + (1+r^2) \nu z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z^3)).$$ When $r = 1$, $0$ is a parabolic fixed point of multiplicity $2$. This means that $\nu(1, \theta)$ cannot be equal to zero for all $\theta \in [0, 2\pi)$. Hence, for some $\epsilon>0$ sufficiently small, $\nu(r, \theta)$ is not equal to zero for all $r \in (1 , 1+\epsilon)$ and $\theta \in [0, 2\pi)$. After one more change of coordinates, we arrive at $$G(z) := \sqrt{(1+r^2)\nu} \cdot H^2(\frac{z}{\sqrt{(1+r^2)\nu}}) = r^2 z (1 + z^2 + \mathcal{O}(z^3)).$$
\[attract\] Let $a = a(r, \theta)$ and $b = b(r, \theta)$ satisfy the condition in lemma \[crit\]. Then for all $r > 1$ sufficiently close to $1$, $F_{a,b}$ has an attracting 2-periodic orbit near $0$.
Consider the map $G := \phi^{-1} \circ F_{a,b}^2 \circ \phi$ defined in lemma \[conv coord\]. We prove that $G$ has two attracting fixed points near $0$.
Observe that $G$ satisfies $$|G(z)| = r^2 |z| (1+ \text{Re}(z^2) + (\text{higher terms}))$$ and $$\text{arg}(G(z)) = \text{arg}(z) + \text{Im}(z^2) + (\text{higher terms}).$$ Consider the wedge shaped regions $$V^+_\epsilon := \{\rho e^{2\pi i t} \in \mathbb{C} \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} 0 \leq \rho \leq \epsilon, \frac{3}{16} \leq t \leq \frac{5}{16}\}$$ and $$V^-_\epsilon := - V^+_\epsilon.$$ It is easily checked that $G(V^+_\epsilon) \subset V^+_\epsilon$ and $G(V^-_\epsilon) \subset V^-_\epsilon$. Since $0$ is the only fixed point on the boundary of these regions, and it is repelling, $V^+_\epsilon$ and $V^-_\epsilon$ must each contain an attracting fixed point for $G$.
\[fnu\] Given any angle $\nu \in [0, 2 \pi)$, there exists a Blaschke product $F_\nu$ that satisfy the following three properties:
1. $F_\nu$ has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit $\mathcal{O} = \{\infty, F_\nu(\infty)\}$ with $F_\nu'(\infty) = 0$.
2. $F_\nu$ has a double critical point at $1$.
3. The rotation number of the map $F_\nu |_{\partial \mathbb{D}}$ is equal to $\nu$.
The family of Blaschke products $\{F_{a,b}\}$ that satisfy lemma \[crit\] and \[attract\] are continuously parameterized by $r$ and $\theta$. Let $\rho(r, \theta)$ denote the rotation number of the map $F_{a,b}|_{\partial \mathbb{D}}$. In [@YZ], it is proved that $\rho(1, \cdot)$ is not nullhomotopic. By continuity, $\rho(r, \cdot)$ is also not nullhomotopic. Thus, for any angle $\nu \in [0, 2 \pi)$, there exists $\theta$ such that $\rho(r, \theta) = \nu$.
So far, we have proved the existence of a Blaschke product $F_{a, b}$ that has an attracting 2-periodic orbit near zero, has a double critical point at $1$, and whose restriction to $\partial \mathbb{D}$ has rotation number equal to $\nu$. A standard application of quasiconformal surgery turns the attracting 2-periodic orbits of $F_{a,b}$ into superattracting orbits (the surgery must be symmetric with respect to the unit circle to ensure that the resulting map is also a Blaschke product). Then after conjugating by the appropriate Blaschke factor, we obtain the desired map $F_\nu$.
\[mod blaschke\] Suppose $\nu$ is irrational and of bounded type. Let $F_\nu$ be the Blaschke product constructed in theorem \[fnu\]. Then there exists a quadratic rational function $R_\nu$ and quasiconformal maps $\psi : \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{D}$, and $\phi : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ such that $\psi$ fixes $0$ and $1$; $\phi$ fixes $0$, $1$ and $\infty$; and $$R_\nu(z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\phi \circ \psi^{-1} \circ \emph{Rot}_\nu \circ \psi \circ \phi^{-1}(z) & : \text{if } z \in \phi(\mathbb{D})\\
\phi \circ F_\nu \circ \phi^{-1}(z) & : \text{if } z \in \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \phi(\mathbb{D}).
\end{array}
\right.$$
Since $\nu$ is of bounded type, there exists a unique homeomorphism $\psi : \partial \mathbb{D} \to \partial \mathbb{D}$ such that $\psi(1) = 1$, and $$\psi^{-1} \circ \text{Rot}_\nu \circ \psi = F_\nu|_{\partial \mathbb{D}}.$$ Moreover, $\psi$ extends to a quasiconformal map on $\mathbb{D}$.
Define $$g(z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\psi^{-1} \circ \text{Rot}_\nu \circ \psi (z) & : \text{if } z \in \mathbb{D}\\
F_\nu(z) & : \text{if } z \in \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathbb{D}.
\end{array}
\right.$$ By construction, $g$ is continuous.
To obtain a holomorphic map with the same dynamics as $g$, we define and integrate a new complex structure $\mu$ on $\hat{\mathbb{C}}$. Start by defining $\mu$ on $\mathbb{D}$ as the pull back of the standard complex structure $\sigma_0$ by $\psi$. Next, pull back $\mu$ on $\mathbb{D}$ by the iterates of $g$ to define $\mu$ on the iterated preimages of $\mathbb{D}$. Finally, extend $\mu$ to the rest of $\hat{\mathbb{C}}$ as the standard complex structure $\sigma_0$.
Let $\phi : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ be the unique solution of the Beltrami equation $$\partial_{\overline{z}} \phi(z) = \mu(z) \partial_z \phi(z)$$ for which $\phi$ is a quasiconformal map fixing the points $0$, $1$ and $\infty$. The map $$R_\nu := \phi \circ g \circ \phi^{-1}$$ gives us the desired quadratic rational function.
![Illustration of the quasiconformal surgery in theorem \[mod blaschke\].[]{data-label="fig:blaschkeconstruction"}](blaschkeconstruction.eps)
Theorem A stated in \[mainthms\] now follows as a corollary of theorem \[mod blaschke\].
The Construction of Bubble Rays
===============================
For the basilica polynomial {#basilica bubble}
---------------------------
Consider the basilica polynomial $$f_\mathbf{B} := z^2 -1.$$ $f_\mathbf{B}$ has a superattracting 2-periodic orbit $\{0, -1\}$, and hence, is hyperbolic. Denote the Julia set and the filled Julia set for $f_\mathbf{B}$ by $J_\mathbf{B}$ and $K_\mathbf{B}$ respectively. The following is a consequence of the hyperbolicity of $f_\mathbf{B}$ (see e.g. [@M1]).
The Julia set $J_\mathbf{B}$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$ is locally connected.
A connected component of $\mathbf{B} := \mathring{K_\mathbf{B}}$ is called a [***bubble***]{}. Let $\mathbf{B}_0$ be the bubble containing the critical point $0$. We have $$\mathbf{B} = \bigcup_{n=0}^\infty f_\mathbf{B}^{-n}(\mathbf{B}_0).$$ Let $B \subset \mathbf{B}$ be a bubble. The [***generation of***]{} $B$, denoted by gen$(B)$, is defined to be the smallest number $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $f_\mathbf{B}^n(B) = \mathbf{B}_0$.
\[b fixed\] There exists a unique repelling fixed point $\mathbf{b}$ contained in $\partial \mathbf{B}_0$.
Note that the repelling fixed point $\mathbf{b}$ in proposition \[b fixed\] is the $\alpha$-fixed point of $f_\mathbf{B}$ (see [@M2]).
Let $b \in J_\mathbf{B}$ be an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$. The [***generation of***]{} $b$, denoted by gen$(b)$, is defined to be the smallest number $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $f_\mathbf{B}^n(b) = \mathbf{b}$. Suppose $b$ is contained in the boundary of some bubble $B$. If the generation of $b$ is the smallest among all iterated preimages of $\mathbf{b}$ that are contained in $\partial B$, then $b$ is called the [***root of $B$***]{}.
\[parentchild\] Let $b \in J_\mathbf{B}$ be an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$. Then there are exactly two bubbles $B_1$ and $B_2$ in $\mathbf{B}$ which contain $b$ in their closures.
There are exactly two bubbles, $\mathbf{B}_0$ and $f_\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{B}_0)$, that contain $\mathbf{b}$ in their closure. There exists a neighbourhood $N$ containing $b$ such that $N$ is mapped conformally onto a neighbourhood of $\mathbf{b}$ by $f_\mathbf{B}^{\text{gen}(b)}$. The result follows.
Let $b \in J_\mathbf{B}$ be an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$, and let $B_1$ and $B_2$ be the two bubbles that contain $b$ in their closures. Suppose gen$(B_1) > $ gen$(B_2)$. Then $B_1$ and $B_2$ are referred to as the [***parent***]{} and the [***child at $b$***]{} respectively. It is easy to see that $b$ must be the root of $B_2$.
Consider a set of bubbles $\{B_i\}_{i=0}^n$ in $\mathbf{B}$, and a set of iterated preimages $\{b_i\}_{i=1}^n$ of $\mathbf{b}$ such that the following properties are satisfied:
1. $B_0 = \mathbf{B}_0$.
2. $B_i$ and $B_{i+1}$ are the parent and the child at $b_{i+1}$ respectively.
The set $$\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B} := \overline{f_\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{B}_0)} \cup (\bigcup \limits_{i=0}^n \overline{B_i})$$ is called a [***bubble ray for $f_\mathbf{B}$***]{} (the inclusion of $\overline{f_\mathbf{B}(\mathbf{B}_0)}$ is to ensure that a bubble ray is mapped to a bubble ray). For conciseness, we use the notation $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B} \sim \{B_i\}_{i=0}^n$. $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ is said to be [***finite***]{} or [***infinite***]{} according to whether $n < \infty$ or $n = \infty$. Lastly, $\{b_i\}_{i=1}^n$ is called the [***set of attachment points for $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$***]{}.
Let $\mathcal{R}^{\mathbf{B}} \sim \{B_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ be an infinite bubble ray. We say that [***$\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ lands at $z \in J_\mathbf{B}$***]{} if the sequence of bubbles $\{B_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ converges to $z$ in the Hausdorff topology. The following result is a consequence of the hyperbolicity of $f_\mathbf{B}$ (see [@DH]).
\[basilica landing\] There exists $0 < s < 1$, and $C >0$ such that for every bubble $B \subset \mathbf{B}$, we have $$\emph{diam}(B) < C s^{\emph{gen}(B)}.$$ Consequently, every infinite bubble ray for $f_\mathbf{B}$ lands.
Denote the attracting basin of infinity for $f_\mathbf{B}$ by $\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty$. Let $$\phi_{\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty} : \mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}$$ and $$\phi_{\mathbf{B}_0} : \mathbf{B}_0 \to \mathbb{D}$$ be the Böttcher uniformization of $f_\mathbf{B}$ on $\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty$ and $\mathbf{B}_0$ respectively. Using $\phi_{\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty}$ and $\phi_{\mathbf{B}_0}$, we can encode the dynamics of bubble rays for $f_\mathbf{B}$ in two different ways: via external angles, and via bubble addresses.
Suppose that $\mathcal{R}^{\mathbf{B}}$ is an infinite bubble ray, and let $z \in J_\mathbf{B}$ be its landing point. Then there exists a unique external ray $$\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t} := \{\text{arg}(\phi_{\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{B}^\infty}) = -t\}$$ which lands on $z$. The [***external angle of $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$***]{} is defined to be $t$. Henceforth, the infinite bubble ray with external angle $t$ will be denoted $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_t$.
Let $b \in \partial\mathbf{B}_0$ be an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$. Define $$\text{adr}(b) := \text{ arg}(\phi_{\mathbf{B}_0}(b)).$$ If $b'$ is an interated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$, and $b' \notin \partial \mathbf{B}_0$, then there exists a unique bubble $B \subset \mathbf{B}$ such that $B$ is the parent at $b$. In this case, define $$\text{adr}(b') := \text{ adr}(f_\mathbf{B}^{\text{gen}(B)}(b')).$$
Let $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ be a bubble ray and let $\{b_i\}_{i=0}^n$ be the set of attachment points for $\mathcal{R}^{\mathbf{B}}$. The [***bubble address of***]{} $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ is defined to be $$\text{adr}(\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}) := (\text{adr}(b_1), \text{ adr}(b_2), \text{ }\ldots{}, \text{ adr}(b_n)),$$ where the tuple is interpreted to be infinite if $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ is an infinite bubble ray.
If $B \subset \mathbf{B}$ is a bubble, then there exists a unique finite bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B} \sim \{B_i\}_{i=0}^n$ such that $B = B_n$. The [***bubble address of $B$***]{} is defined to be $$\text{adr}(B) := \text{ adr}(\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}).$$
![The infinite bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_t$, $t \approx -0.143$, for the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}$.[]{data-label="fig:basilicaextray"}](basilicaextray.eps)
For the Siegel polynomial {#siegel bubble}
-------------------------
Suppose $\nu \in \mathbb{R} \setminus \mathbb{Q}$ is of bounded type, and let $f_\mathbf{S}$ be the unique member of the quadratic family that has a fixed Siegel disc $\mathbf{S}_0$ with rotation number $\nu$. Denote the Julia set and the filled Julia set for $f_\mathbf{S}$ by $J_\mathbf{S}$ and $K_\mathbf{S}$ respectively. By proposition \[bounded type lc\], $J_\mathbf{S}$ is locally connected. A quasiconformal surgery procedure due to Douady, Ghys, Herman, and Shishikura (see e.g. [@P]) implies the following:
The Siegel disc $\mathbf{S}_0$ is a quasidisc whose boundary contains the critical point $0$.
A connected component of $\mathbf{S} := \mathring{K_\mathbf{S}}$ is called a [***bubble***]{}. Note that $$\mathbf{S} = \bigcup_{n=0}^\infty f_\mathcal{S}^{-n}(\mathbf{S}_0).$$ Let $S \subset \mathbf{S}$ be a bubble. The [***generation of***]{} $S$, denoted by gen$(S)$, is defined to be the smallest number $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $f_\mathbf{S}^n(S) = \mathbf{S}_0$. Similarly, let $s \in J_\mathbf{S}$ be an iterated preimage of $0$. The [***generation of***]{} $s$, denoted by gen$(s)$, is defined to be the smallest number $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $f_\mathbf{S}^n(s) = 0$.
\[siegel preimage 0\] Let $s \in J_\mathbf{S}$ be an iterated preimage of the critical point $0$. Then there are exactly two bubbles $S_1$ and $S_2$ in $\mathbf{S}$ which contain $s$ in their closure.
The construction of a [***bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}$***]{} for $f_\mathbf{S}$ is completely analogous to the construction of a bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$. The following proposition is a consequence of complex a priori bounds due to Yampolsky (see [@Y1]). It is proved in the same way as proposition \[everylanding\].
\[siegel landing\] Every infinite bubble ray for $f_\mathbf{B}$ lands.
Denote the attracting basin of infinity for $f_\mathbf{S}$ by $\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{S}^\infty$. Let $$\phi_{\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{S}^\infty} : \mathbf{A}_\mathbf{S}^\infty \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}$$ be the Böttcher uniformization of $f_\mathbf{S}$ on $\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{S}^\infty$.
Suppose $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}$ is an infinite bubble ray, and let $z \in J_\mathbf{S}$ be its landing point. Then there exists a unique external ray $$\mathcal{R}^\infty_t := \{\text{arg}(\phi_{\mathbf{A}_\mathbf{S}^\infty}) = t\}$$ which lands on $z$. The [***external angle of $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}$***]{} is defined to be $t$. Henceforth, the infinite bubble ray with external angle $t$ will be denoted $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_t$.
Let $s \in \partial\mathbf{S}_0$ be an iterated preimage of $0$. Define $$\text{adr}(s) := \text{ gen}(s).$$ The [***bubble address of a bubble $S \subset \mathbf{S}$***]{} for $f_\mathbf{S}$ can now be defined in the same way as its counterpart for $f_\mathbf{B}$.
![The infinite bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_{\frac{1}{7}}$ for the Siegel polynomial $f_\mathbf{S}$.[]{data-label="fig:siegelextray"}](siegelextray.eps)
For the candidate mating {#candidate bubble}
------------------------
Consider the quadratic rational function $R_\nu$ constructed in theorem \[mod blaschke\]. Denote the Fatou set and the Julia set for $R_\nu$ by $F(R_\nu)$ and $J(R_\nu)$ respectively. A connected component of $F(R_\nu)$ is called a [***bubble***]{}.
The critical points for $R_\nu$ are $\infty$ and $1$. $\{\infty, R_\nu(\infty)\}$ is a superattracting 2-periodic orbit, and thus is contained in $F(R_\nu)$. Let $\mathcal{B}_\infty$ be the bubble containing $\infty$. The set $$\mathcal{B} := \bigcup_{n=0}^\infty R_\nu^{-n}(\mathcal{B}_\infty)$$ is the basin of attraction for $\{\infty, R_\nu(\infty)\}$.
The critical point $1$ is contained in the boundary of the Siegel disc $\mathcal{S}_0$. Consider the set of iterated preimages of $\mathcal{S}_0$ $$\mathcal{S} := \bigcup_{n=0}^\infty R_\nu^{-n}(\mathcal{S}_0),$$ It is easy to see that $F(R_\nu) = \mathcal{B} \cup \mathcal{S}$.
\[loc con bubb\] Suppose $U \subset F(R_\nu)$ is a bubble. Then $\partial U$ is locally connected.
The result follows immediately from proposition \[basilica unif\] and theorem A.
There exists a unique repelling fixed point $\beta$ contained in $\partial \mathcal{B}_\infty$.
\[candidate attach\] Let $u$ be an iterated preimage of $\beta$ (resp. of $1$). Then there are exactly two bubbles $U_1$ and $U_2$ in $\mathcal{B}$ (resp. $\mathcal{S}$) which contain $u$ in their closure.
A [***bubble ray***]{} for $R_\nu$ can be constructed using bubbles in either $\mathcal{B}$ or $\mathcal{S}$. In the former case, the bubble ray is denoted $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}$, and in the latter case, it is denoted $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}$. The details of the construction will be omitted as it is very similar to the construction of a bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$ or $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}$ for $f_\mathbf{S}$.
The [***bubble address of a bubble $U \subset F(R_\nu)$***]{} for $R_\nu$ is defined in the same way as its counterpart for $f_\mathbf{B}$ or $f_\mathbf{S}$. However, since $R_\nu$ is not a polynomial, the external angle of a bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}$ or $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}$ cannot be defined using external rays. To circumvent this problem, we need the following theorem.
\[interior maps\] There exists a unique conformal map $\Phi_\mathbf{B} : \mathbf{B} \to \mathcal{B}$ such that the bubble addresses are preserved, and the following diagram commutes: [ $$\begin{CD}
\mathbf{B} @> f_{\mathbf{B}} >> \mathbf{B}\\
@VV \Phi_{\mathbf{B}} V @VV \Phi_{\mathbf{B}} V\\
\mathcal{B} @> R_\nu >> \mathcal{B}
\end{CD}$$ ]{} Likewise, there exists a unique conformal map $\Phi_{\mathbf{S}} : \mathbf{S} \to \mathcal{S}$ such that the bubble addresses are preserved, and the following diagram commutes: [ $$\begin{CD}
\mathbf{S} @> f_{\mathbf{S}} >> \mathbf{S}\\
@VV \Phi_{\mathcal{S}} V @VV \Phi_{\mathcal{S}} V\\
\mathcal{S} @> R_\nu >> \mathcal{S}
\end{CD}$$ ]{} Furthermore, if $B \subset \mathbf{B}$ (resp. $S \subset \mathbf{S}$) is a bubble, then $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ (resp. $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$) extends to a homeomorphism between $\overline{B}$ and $\overline{\Phi_\mathbf{B}(B)}$ (resp. $\overline{S}$ and $\overline{\Phi_\mathbf{S}(S)}$).
For each bubble $B \subset \mathbf{B}$, there exists a unique bubble $B' \subset \mathcal{B}$ such that $$\text{adr}(B) = \text{ adr}(B').$$ Define $\Phi_\mathbf{B}|_B$ to be the unique conformal map between $B$ and $B'$ which sends the root of $B$ to the root of $B'$. Then by construction, $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ conjugates the dynamics of $f_\mathbf{B}$ and $R_\nu$ restricted to $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ respectively. Moreover, $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ extends continuously to boundary of bubbles by proposition \[loc con bubb\].
The map $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ is similarly defined.
Let $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B} \sim \{B_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ (resp. $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S} \sim \{S_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$) be an infinite bubble ray for $R_\nu$. The [***external angle of $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}$***]{} (resp. [***of $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}$***]{}) is defined to be the external angle of the infinite bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B} \sim \{\Phi_\mathbf{B}^{-1}(B_i)\}_{i=0}^\infty$ (resp. $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S} \sim \{\Phi_\mathbf{S}^{-1}(S_i)\}_{i=0}^\infty$) for $f_\mathbf{B}$ (resp. $f_\mathbf{S}$). Henceforth, the infinite bubble rays for $R_\nu$ with external angle $t$ will be denoted $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_t$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_t$.
![The infinite bubble rays $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_t$, $t \approx -0.143$, and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_{\frac{1}{7}}$ for $R_\nu$.[]{data-label="fig:matedextray"}](matedextray.eps)
The Construction of Puzzle Partitions {#puzzle part}
=====================================
For the basilica polynomial {#basilica puzzle}
---------------------------
Consider the basilica polynomial $f_\mathbf{B}$ discussed in section \[basilica bubble\]. By definition, the bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_0$ and the external ray $\mathcal{R}^\infty_0$ both land at the same repelling fixed point $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B} \in \mathbb{C}$. The [***puzzle partition of level $n$***]{} for $f_\mathbf{B}$ is defined as $$\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n := \overline{f_\mathbf{B}^{-n}(\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_0 \cup \mathcal{R}^\infty_0)}.$$ Note that the puzzle partitions form a nested sequence: $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_0 \subsetneq \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_1 \subsetneq \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_2 \ldots{}$. A [***puzzle piece of level $n$***]{} for $f_\mathbf{B}$ is the closure of a connected component of $\mathbb{C} \setminus \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$. By construction, a puzzle piece of level $n$ is mapped homeomorphically onto a puzzle piece of level $n-1$ by $f_\mathbf{B}$.
Let $P^\mathbf{B}$ be a puzzle piece of level $n$. Then $P^\mathbf{B}$ is bounded by two bubble rays $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{t_1}$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{t_2}$, and two external rays $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t_1}$ and $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t_2}$, where $t_1 = \frac{i}{2^n}$ and $t_2 = \frac{i+1}{2^n}$ for some $i \in \{0, 1, \ldots{}, 2^n-1\}$. The closed interval $[\frac{i}{2^n}, \frac{i+1}{2^n}] \subset \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z}$ is referred to as the [***angular span of $P^\mathbf{B}$***]{}. Henceforth, the puzzle piece for $f_\mathbf{B}$ with angular span $[t_1, t_2]$ will be denoted $P^\mathbf{B}_{[t_1, t_2]}$.
![The puzzle partition of level $2$ and $3$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$.[]{data-label="fig:basilicapuzzle"}](basilicapuzzle.eps)
\[ext ray puzzle seq\] Let $P^\mathbf{B}_{[t_1, t_2]}$ be a puzzle piece. If $t \in [t_1, t_2]$, then $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t} \subset P^\mathbf{B}_{[t_1, t_2]}$.
A [***nested puzzle sequence at $x$***]{} is a collection of puzzle pieces $$\Pi^\mathbf{B} = \{P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$$ such that for all $k \geq 0$, $P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_{k+1}, t_{k+1}]} \subset P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}$. Note that this is equivalent to the condition that $[s_{k+1}, t_{k+1}] \subset [s_k, t_k]$. The set $$L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}) := \bigcap_{k=0}^\infty P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}$$ is called the [***limit of $\Pi^\mathbf{B}$***]{}.
The [***external angle $t \in \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z}$ of $\Pi^\mathbf{B}$***]{} is defined by $$\{t\} = \bigcap_{k=0}^\infty [s_k, t_k].$$ Henceforth, a nested puzzle sequence for $f_\mathbf{B}$ with external angle $t \in \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z}$ will be denoted by $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t$.
A nested puzzle sequence $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t$ is said to be [***maximal***]{} if there is no nested puzzle sequence which contains $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t$ as a proper subset. If two nested puzzle sequences are contained in the same maximal nested puzzle sequence, they are said to be [***equivalent***]{}.
Suppose $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s$ and $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t$ are two equivalent nested puzzle sequences. Then $s=t$, and $L(\Pi^\mathbf{E}_s) = L(\Pi^\mathbf{E}_t)$.
Let $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s = \{P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$, and let $\hat{\Pi}^\mathbf{B}_u = \{P^\mathbf{B}_{[r_k, u_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be the maximal nested puzzle sequence containing $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s$. Since $P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]} \subseteq P^\mathbf{B}_{[r_k, u_k]}$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$, we have $$L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s) \subset L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}_u).$$ On the other hand, since $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s \subset \hat{\Pi}^\mathbf{B}_u$, we have $$L(\hat{\Pi}^\mathbf{B}_u) \subset L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}_s).$$ The proof that $s=t$ is similar.
\[shrink to ray\] Let $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t := \{P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a nested puzzle sequence. Then $$L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t) = \mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t} \cup \{x\},$$ where $x \in J_\mathbf{B}$ is the landing point of $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-t}$.
Observe that for each $k$, we have $$\mathbf{A}^\infty_\mathbf{B} \cap P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]} = \bigcup_{s \in [s_k, t_k]} \mathcal{R}^\infty_{-s}.$$ Since $$J_\mathbf{B} \cap P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]} = K_\mathbf{B} \cap \partial (P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]} \cap \mathbf{A}^\infty_\mathbf{B}),$$ we see that $J_\mathbf{B} \cap P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}$ consists of landing points of $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-s}$, $s \in [s_k, t_k]$.
If $s \neq t$, then for $k$ sufficiently large, $s \not\in [s_k, t_k]$, which means the landing point of $\mathcal{R}^\infty_{-s}$ is not included in $L(\Pi^\mathbf{B}_t)$. The result follows.
\[proof puzzle count\] Let $x \in J_\mathbf{B}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$ or $\mathbf{b}$, then for all sufficiently large $n$, $x$ is contained in exactly two puzzle pieces of level $n$. Otherwise, $x$ is contained in a unique puzzle piece of level $n$.
We consider the following four cases:
1. $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$.
2. There exists a unique bubble $B \subset \mathbf{B}$ such that $x \in \partial B$.
3. $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$.
4. Otherwise.
*Case i)* Suppose that $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$. By proposition \[parentchild\], there exist exactly two bubbles $B_1$ and $B_2$ which contain $x$ in their boundary. Moreover, we have $\{x\} = \overline{B_1} \cap \overline{B_2}$. Note that $B_1$ and $B_2$ are eventually mapped to $\mathbf{B}_0 \subset \mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_0$ under $f_\mathbf{B}$. Hence, there exists $m \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for all $n > m$, $B_1 \cup B_2 \subset \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$.
Let $n > m$. $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$ contains finitely many bubble rays whose landing points are all distinct from $x$. Thus, we can choose a sufficiently small disc $D$ centered at $x$ such that $D \cap \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n \subset (\overline{B_1} \cup \overline{B_2})$. This implies that $D \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n)$ has two connected components. Observe that every puzzle piece of level $n$ that contains $x$ must contain exactly one of the components of $D \cap (\mathbb{C} \setminus \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n)$. The result follows.
*Case ii)* The proof is completely analogous to Case i).
*Case iii)* Suppose $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$. Note that $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_0$ is the only bubble ray which lands on $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$. Hence, $x$ is the landing point of a single bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_t$ where $t = \frac{i}{2^m}$ for some $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and $i \in \{0, 1, \ldots{}, 2^m-1\}$.
Observe that for all $n \geq m$, $x$ is contained in the puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$ of level $n$. This implies that if $x$ is contained in some puzzle piece $P^\mathbf{B}_{[t_1, t_2]}$ of level $n$, then $x$ is contained in its boundary. The boundary of $P^\mathbf{B}_{[t_1, t_2]}$ is a subset of $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{t_1} \cup \mathcal{R}^\infty_{t_1} \cup \mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{t_2} \cup \mathcal{R}^\infty_{t_2}$. It follows from our previous remark that $t_1 = \frac{i}{2^m}$ or $t_2 = \frac{i}{2^m}$. Therefore, $P^\mathbf{B}_{[\frac{2^{n-m}i-1}{2^n}, \frac{i}{2^m}]}$ and $P^\mathbf{B}_{[\frac{i}{2^m}, \frac{2^{n-m}i+1}{2^n}]}$ are the only two puzzle pieces of level $n$ which contain $x$.
*Case iv)* If $x$ is not contained in the boundary of any bubble, and $x$ is not an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$, then $x$ is disjoint from every puzzle partition. Hence, $x$ must be contained in a unique component of its complement.
\[proof seq count\] Let $x \in J_\mathbf{B}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{B}$ or $\mathbf{b}$, then there are exactly two maximal nested puzzle sequences whose limit is equal to $\{x\}$. Otherwise, there is a unique maximal nested puzzle sequence whose limit is equal to $\{x\}$.
\[B access\] Let $x \in J_\mathbf{B}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{b}$, then $x$ is biaccessible. Otherwise, $x$ is uniaccessible.
This follows immediately from proposition \[shrink to ray\] and corollary \[proof seq count\].
For the Siegel polynomial {#siegel puzzle}
-------------------------
Consider the Siegel polynomial $f_\mathbf{S}$ discussed in section \[siegel bubble\]. By definition, the bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_0$ and the external ray $\mathcal{R}^\infty_0$ both land at the same point $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S} \in \mathbb{C}$. A [***puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{S}_n$***]{}, a [***puzzle piece $P^\mathbf{S}_{[t_1, t_2]}$***]{}, and a [***nested puzzle sequence $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t$***]{} for $f_\mathbf{S}$ are defined in the same way as their counterparts for $f_\mathbf{B}$.
![The puzzle partition of level $2$ and $3$ for $f_\mathbf{S}$.[]{data-label="fig:siegelpuzzle"}](siegelpuzzle.eps)
The following two results are analogs of proposition \[shrink to ray\] and \[proof puzzle count\]. The proofs are identical, and hence, they will be omitted here.
\[shrink to ray 2\] Let $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t := \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a nested puzzle sequence. Then $$L(\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t) = \mathcal{R}^\infty_t \cup \{x\},$$ where $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$ is the landing point of $\mathcal{R}^\infty_t$.
Let $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$ or $0$, then for all sufficiently large $n$, $x$ is contained in exactly two puzzle pieces of level $n$. Otherwise, $x$ is contained in a unique puzzle piece of level $n$.
\[num seq siegel\] Let $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$ or $0$, then there are exactly two maximal nested puzzle sequences whose limit is equal to $\{x\}$. Otherwise, there exists a unique maximal nested puzzle sequence whose limit is equal to $\{x\}$.
\[S access\] Let $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $0$, then $x$ is biaccessible. Otherwise, $x$ is uniaccessible.
This follows immediately from proposition \[shrink to ray 2\] and corollary \[num seq siegel\].
For the candidate mating {#candidate puzzle}
------------------------
Consider the quadratic rational function $R_\nu$ constructed in theorem \[mod blaschke\].
\[periodic landing\] Let $\mathcal{R}_t = \mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_t$ or $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_t$ be an infinite bubble ray. If $t$ is rational, then $\mathcal{R}_t$ lands. If $t$ is $p$-periodic, then $\mathcal{R}_t$ lands at a repelling $p$-periodic point.
Let $\Lambda$ be the post critical set for $R_\nu$, and let $\Omega$ be the set of cluster points for $\mathcal{R}_t$. Observe that $$R_\nu^p : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus R_\nu^{-p}(\Lambda \cup \Omega) \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\Lambda \cup \Omega)$$ is a covering of hyperbolic spaces. Moreover, since $\Omega \cup \Lambda \subsetneq R_\nu^{-p}(\Omega \cup \Lambda)$, the inclusion map $$\iota : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus R_\nu^{-p}(\Lambda \cup \Omega) \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\Lambda \cup \Omega)$$ is a strict contraction in the hyperbolic metric. Hence, the map $\iota \circ R_\nu^{-p}$ lifts to the universal cover $\mathbb{D}$ of $\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\Lambda \cup \Omega)$ to a map $$\hat{R}_\nu^{-p} : \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{D}$$ which is also a strict contraction in the hyperbolic metric.
Now, choose a bubble $U \subset \mathcal{R}_t$ such that $\text{gen}(U) > 1$, and let $x_0$ be a point contained in $U$. For every $k \geq 1$, there exists a unique point $x_k \in \mathcal{R}_t$ such that $R_\nu^{kp}(x_k) = x_0$. Let $\gamma_0 \subset \mathcal{R}_t$ be a curve from $x_0$ to $x_1$, and let $\gamma_k$ be the unique component of $R_\nu^{-kp}(\gamma_0)$ whose end points are $x_k$ and $x_{k+1}$.
By the strict contraction property of $\hat{R}_\nu^{p}$, the hyperbolic lengths of $\gamma_n$ must go to zero as $n$ goes to infinity. Hence, if $z \in \Omega$, then for any neighbourhood $N$ of $z$, there exists a smaller neighbourhood $N' \subset N$ such that if $\gamma_n \cap N' \neq \varnothing$, then $\gamma_n \subset N$. In other words, $R_\nu^p(N) \cap N \neq \varnothing$. Since this is true for all neighbourhood of $z$, $z$ must be a fixed point for $R_\nu^p$.
The set of fixed points for $R_\nu^p$ is discrete. Since $\Omega$ is connected, this implies that $\Omega$ must be equal to the single point set $\{z\}$. By Snail lemma (see e.g. \[M1\]), we conclude that $z$ is a repelling fixed point.
If $t$ is strictly preperiodic, then $\mathcal{R}_t$ is the preimage of some periodic infinite bubble ray. The result follows.
\[base\] The bubble rays $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_0$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_0$ for $R_\nu$ both land at the same repelling fixed point $\kappa \in \mathbb{C}$.
The quadratic rational map $R_\nu$ has exactly three fixed points, two of which must be the Siegel fixed point $0$ and the repelling fixed point $\beta$. Clearly, a bubble ray cannot land on $0$, so it suffices to prove that a fixed bubble ray cannot land on $\beta$.
Let $D$ be a sufficiently small disc centered at $\beta$ such that $R_\nu$ is conformal on $D$. The set $D \cap (\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \overline{\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty)})$ has two connected components $D_1$ and $D_2$ such that $D_1 \subset R_\nu(D_2)$ and $D_2 \subset R_\nu(D_1)$. Suppose $\mathcal{R}$ is a bubble ray that lands on $\beta$. Then $\mathcal{R}$ must be disjoint from either $D_1$ or $D_2$. Hence, $\mathcal{R}$ cannot be fixed.
Define the [***puzzle partition of level $n$***]{} for $R_\nu$ by $$\mathcal{P}_n := \overline{R_\nu^{-n}(\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_0 \cup \mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_0)}.$$ Note that the puzzle partitions form a nested sequence: $\mathcal{P}_0 \subsetneq \mathcal{P}_1 \subsetneq \mathcal{P}_2 \ldots{}$. A [***puzzle piece of level $n$***]{} is the closure of a connected component of $\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{P}_n$. By construction, a puzzle piece of level $n$ is mapped homeomorphically onto a puzzle piece of level $n-1$ by $R_\nu$.
Let $P$ be a puzzle piece of level $n$. Then $P$ is bounded by two pairs of bubble rays: $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{s_1}$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_{s_2}$, and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_{t_1}$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_{t_2}$, where $s_1 = \frac{i}{2^n}$, $s_2 = \frac{i+1}{2^n}$, $t_1 = \frac{j}{2^n}$ and $t_2 = \frac{j+1}{2^n}$ for some $i, j \in \{0, 1, \ldots{}, 2^n-1\}$. The closed intervals $[\frac{i}{2^n}, \frac{i+1}{2^n}]$ and $[\frac{j}{2^n}, \frac{j+1}{2^n}]$ are referred to as the [***angular span of $P$ with respect to $\mathcal{B}$***]{} and $\mathcal{S}$ respectively.
\[puzzle cor\] Consider the maps $\Phi_\mathbf{B} : \mathbf{B} \to \mathcal{B}$ and $\Phi_\mathbf{S} : \mathbf{S} \to \mathcal{S}$ defined in proposition \[interior maps\]. Let $P$ be a puzzle piece of level $n$ for $R_\nu$ whose angular span with respect to $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ are equal to $[s_1, s_2]$ and $[t_1, t_2]$ respectively. Then $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ restricts to a map between $\mathbf{B} \cap P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_1, s_2]}$ and $\mathcal{B} \cap P$. Likewise, $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ restricts to a map between $\mathbf{S} \cap P^\mathbf{S}_{[t_1, t_2]}$ and $\mathcal{S} \cap P$.
Let $B \not\subset \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$ be a bubble in $\mathbf{B}$ and let $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B} \sim \{B_i\}_{i=0}^m$ be the unique finite bubble ray for $f_\mathbf{B}$ such that $B_m = B$. The corresponding finite bubble ray for $R_\nu$ is $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B} \sim \{\Phi_\mathbf{B}(B_i)\}_{i=0}^m$. Suppose $k$ is the largest value of $i$ such that $B_i \subset \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_n$. Since $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ extends to a homeomorphism between $\overline{B_k}$ and $\overline{\Phi_\mathbf{B}(B_k)}$, it must preserve the cyclic order of the roots of bubbles contained in $\partial B$. Thus, we see that $\Phi_\mathbf{B}(B_{k+1}) \subset P_{[s_1, s_2]}$ if and only if $B_{k+1} \subset P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_1, s_2]}$. This readily implies that $\bigcup_{i=k+1}^m \Phi_\mathbf{B}(B_i) \subset P_{[s_1, s_2]}$ if and only if $\bigcup_{i=k+1}^m B_i \subset P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_1,s_2]}$.
The proof is completely analogous for bubbles in $\mathbf{S}$.
\[ray in puzzle\] Let $P$ be a puzzle piece of level $n$, whose angular span with respect to $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ is equal to $[s_1, s_2]$ and $[t_1, t_2]$ respectively. If $s \in [s_1, s_2]$, then the accumulation set of $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_s$ is contained in $P$. Likewise, if $t \in [t_1, t_2]$, then the accumulation set of $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_t$ is contained in $P$.
\[angular span\] Let $P$ be a puzzle piece of level $n$ for $R_\nu$ whose angular span with respect to $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ are equal to $[s_1, s_2]$ and $[t_1, t_2]$ respectively. Then $[s_1, s_2] = [t_1, t_2]$.
We proceed by induction on $n$. The case $n=0$ follows from proposition \[base\]. Assume that the statement is true for $n$. We need to check that it is also true for $n+1$.
We have $s_1 = \frac{i}{2^n}$ and $s_2 = \frac{i+1}{2^n}$ for some $i \in \{0, 1, \ldots{}, 2^n-1\}$. Let $s = \frac{2i+1}{2^{n+1}}$. Consider the puzzle pieces $P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_1, s_2]}$ and $P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_1, s_2]}$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$ and $f_\mathbf{S}$ respectively. Among all the bubble rays contained in the puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{B}_{n+1}$ for $f_\mathbf{B}$, only $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_s$ lands in the interior of $P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_1, s_2]}$. Similarly, among all the bubble rays contained in the puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{S}_{n+1}$ for $f_\mathbf{S}$, only $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_s$ lands in the interior of $P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_1, s_2]}$. It follows from lemma \[puzzle cor\] that $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_s = \Phi_\mathbf{B}^{-1}(\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{B}_s)$ and $\mathcal{R}^{\mathcal{S}}_s = \Phi_\mathbf{S}^{-1}(\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_s)$ are the only two bubble rays contained in the puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}_{n+1}$ for $R_\nu$ that land in the interior of $P$. This implies that $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{B}_s$ and $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_s$ must land at the same point. It is not difficult to see from this that the claim must be true for puzzle pieces of level $n+1$.
By virtue of proposition \[angular span\], the angular span of a puzzle piece $P$ with respect to $\mathcal{B}$ or $\mathcal{S}$ will henceforth be referred to as simply the [***angular span of $P$***]{}. Furthermore, a puzzle piece for $R_\nu$ with angular span $[t_1, t_2]$ will be denoted $P_{[t_1, t_2]}$.
![The puzzle partition of level $2$ and $3$ for $R_\nu$.[]{data-label="fig:matedpuzzles"}](matedpuzzles.eps)
A [***nested puzzle sequence $\Pi_t$***]{} for $R_\nu$ is defined in the same way as its counterpart for $f_\mathbf{B}$. We say that [***$\Pi_t$ shrinks to $x$***]{} if its limit $L(\Pi_t)$ is equal to $\{x\}$.
\[maximal shrink\] Let $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a nested puzzle sequence, and let $\hat{\Pi}_t = \{P_{[r_k, u_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be the unique maximal nested puzzle sequence containing $\Pi_t$. Then $\Pi_t$ shrinks to a point $x \in J(R_\nu)$ if and only if $\hat{\Pi}_t$ does.
The following result can be proved the same way as proposition \[proof puzzle count\].
\[num puzzle\] Let $x \in J(R_\nu)$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\kappa$, $\beta$ or $1$, then for all sufficiently large $n$, $x$ is contained in exactly two puzzle pieces of level $n$. Otherwise, $x$ is contained in a unique puzzle piece of level $n$.
\[num sequence\] Let $x \in J(R_\nu)$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\kappa$, $\beta$ or $1$, then there are exactly two maximal nested puzzle sequences whose limit contains $x$. Otherwise, there is exactly one maximal nested puzzle sequence whose limit contains $x$.
\[no connection\] Suppose $X \subset \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty) \cup \mathcal{S}_0)$ is a non-recurring closed set (that is, for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $R_\nu^n(X) \cap X = \varnothing$). Then the set $\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty) \cup \mathcal{S}_0 \cup X$ is disconnected.
Suppose towards a contradiction that $\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty) \cup \mathcal{S}_0 \cup X$ is connected. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup \mathcal{S}_0 \cup X$ is connected.
Observe that $\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup \mathcal{S}_0 \cup X \cup R_\nu^2(X))$ is disconnected, and that at least one of its components intersects $\partial \mathcal{S}_0$ but does not intersect $\partial R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty)$. Denote this component by $P$.
Since $X$ is non-recurring, observe that $R_\nu^{2n+1}(X) \cap P = \varnothing$ for all $n \geq 0$. Choose a point $x_1 \in \overline{\mathcal{S}_0} \cap R_\nu(X)$. Since the orbit of $x_1$ under $R_\nu^2$ is dense in $\partial \mathcal{S}_0$, there exists $N \geq 0$ such that $R_\nu^{2N+1}(x_1) \in \partial \mathcal{S}_0 \cap P$. This is a contradiction.
\[disjointness for rnu\] Let $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a nested puzzle sequence for $R_\nu$. Its limit $L(\Pi_t)$ cannot intersect the boundary of bubbles from both $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{S}$.
Suppose that $L(\Pi_t)$ intersects the boundary of bubbles from both $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{S}$. By considering its image under a large enough iterate of $R_\nu$, we may assume that $L(\Pi_t)$ intersects the boundary of $\mathcal{B}_\infty$ and $\mathcal{S}_0$.
Observe that the limit set of any nested puzzle sequence is either pre-periodic or non-recurrent. Since $L(\Pi_t)$ contains a point in $\partial \mathcal{S}_0$, it must be non-recurrent. It is also easy to see that $L(\Pi_t)$ must be closed, connected and contained in $\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus (\mathcal{B}_\infty \cup R_\nu(\mathcal{B}_\infty) \cup \mathcal{S}_0)$. This contradicts proposition \[no connection\].
The following result is proved in the next two sections.
\[total shrinkage\] Every nested puzzle sequence for $R_\nu$ shrinks to a point.
A Priori Bounds for Critical Circle Maps {#secapriori}
========================================
A $C^2$ homeomorphism $f : S^1 \to S^1$ is called a [***critical circle map***]{} if it has a unique critical point $c \in S^1$ of cubic type. Let $\rho = \rho(f)$ be the rotation number of $f$. In this section, $f$ will be analytic, and $\rho$ will be irrational.
The rotation number $\rho$ can be represented as an infinite continued fraction: $$\rho = [a_1 : a_2 : a_3 : \ldots{}] = \frac{1}{a_1+\frac{1}{a_2+\frac{1}{a_3 + \ldots{}}}}.$$ The [***$n$th partial convergent of $\rho$***]{} is the rational number $$\frac{p_n}{q_n} = [a_1: \ldots : a_n].$$ The sequence of denominators $\{q_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ represent the [***closest return times***]{} of the orbit of any point to itself. It satisfies the following inductive relation: $$q_{n+1} = a_n q_n + q_{n-1}.$$
Let $\Delta_n \subset S^1$ be the closed arc containing $c$ with end points at $f^{q_n}(c)$ and $f^{q_{n+1}}(c)$. $\Delta_n$ can be expressed as the union of two closed arcs $A_n$ and $A_{n+1}$, where $A_n$ is the closed arc with end points at $c$ and $f^{q_n}(c)$. $A_n$ is called the [***$n$th critical arc***]{}. The $q_n$th iterated preimage of $A_n$ under $f$ is denoted by $A_{-n}$. The set of closed arcs $$\mathcal{P}^{S^1}_n = \{A_n, f(A_n), \ldots, f^{q_{n+1}-1}(A_n)\} \cup \{A_{n+1}, f(A_{n+1}), \ldots, f^{q_n-1}(A_{n+1})\},$$ which are disjoint except at the end points, is a partition of $S^1$. $\mathcal{P}^{S^1}_n$ is called the [***dynamical partition of level $n$***]{}. The following is an important estimate regarding dynamical partitions due to Swiatek and Herman (see [@Sw]):
\[Real *a priori* bounds\]\[real bound\] Let $f : S^1 \to S^1$ be a critical circle map with an irrational rotation number $\rho$. Then for all $n$ sufficiently large, every pair of adjacent atoms in $\mathcal{P}^{S^1}_n$ have $K$-commensurate diameters for some universal constant $K > 1$.
Below, we present an adaptation of complex a priori bounds of [@Y1] (see also [@YZ]) to our setting.
Consider the quadratic rational function $R_\nu$ discussed in section \[candidate bubble\] and \[puzzle part\]. Denote the Siegel disc for $R_\nu$ by $\mathcal{S}_0$. By theorem \[mod blaschke\], there exist a Blaschke product $F_\nu$ and a quasiconformal map $\phi : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathbb{D} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{S}_0$ such that $$R_\nu(z) = \phi \circ F_\nu \circ \phi^{-1}(z)$$ for all $z \in \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{S}_0$.
Since $\{\infty, R_\nu(\infty)\}$ is a superattracting 2-periodic orbit for $R_\nu$, $\{\infty, F_\nu(\infty)\}$ and $\{0, F_\nu(0)\}$ are superattracting 2-periodic orbits for $F_\nu$. Denote the bubble (connected component of the Fatou set) for $F_\nu$ containing $0$ and $\infty$ by $\mathcal{A}_0$ and $\mathcal{A}_\infty$ respectively. Note that by theorem \[fnu\], the restriction of $F_\nu$ to $S^1$ is a critical circle map.
A [***puzzle piece of level $n$ for $F_\nu$***]{} is the image of a puzzle piece of level $n$ for $R_\nu$ under $\phi^{-1}$. The [***$n$th critical puzzle piece***]{}, denoted $P^{crit}_n$, is defined inductively as follows:
1. $P^{crit}_0$ is the puzzle piece of level $1$ which contains the first critical arc $A_1$.
2. $P^{crit}_n$ is the puzzle piece which contains the preimage arc $A_{-n}$, and is mapped homeomorphically onto $P^{crit}_{n-1}$ by $F_\nu^{q_n}$.
Observe that $\Pi_{\text{even}} := \{P^{crit}_{2n}\}_{n=0}^\infty$ and $\Pi_{\text{odd}}:=\{P^{crit}_{2n+1}\}_{n=0}^\infty$ form two disjoint nested puzzle sequences for $F_\nu$ at the critical point $1$.
![The $0$th and $1$st critical puzzle piece for $F_\nu$.[]{data-label="fig:critpuzzles"}](critpuzzles.eps)
\[disjointness\] Let $\mathcal{A}_\infty \cup F_\nu(\mathcal{A}_\infty)$ be the immediate attracting basin of the superattracting 2-periodic orbit $\{\infty, F_\nu(\infty)\}$ for $F_\nu$. Then there exists $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for all $n \geq N$, the $n$th critical puzzle piece $P^{crit}_n$ is disjoint from the closure of $\mathcal{A}_\infty \cup F_\nu(\mathcal{A}_\infty)$.
The result follows immediately from proposition \[disjointness for rnu\].
\[yampolthm\] For all $n$ sufficiently larger than the constant $N$ in lemma \[disjointness\], we have the following inequality: $$\frac{\emph{diam}(P^{crit}_n)}{\emph{diam}(A_{-n})} \leq C_1 \sqrt[3]{\frac{\emph{diam}(P^{crit}_{n-1})}{\emph{diam}(A_{-(n-1)})}} + C_2,$$ where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are universal constants.
Similarly to \[YZ\], we first lift a suitable inverse branch of $F_\nu$ to the universal covering space.
Define the exponential map $\text{Exp}: \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ by $$\text{Exp}(z) := e^{2\pi i z}.$$ Let $I = (\tau - 1, \tau) \subset \mathbb{R}$ be an open interval such that $0 \in I$, and $$\text{Exp}(\tau) = \text{Exp}(\tau - 1) = F_\nu(1).$$ Let $$\text{Log} : S^1 \setminus \{F_\nu(1)\} \to I$$ be the inverse of Exp restricted to $I$. The $n$th critical interval is defined as $$I_n := \text{Log}(A_n).$$ Denote the component of $\text{Exp}^{-1}(P^{crit}_n)$ intersecting $I$ by $\hat{P}^{crit}_n$.
Define $$\mathcal{A} := \overline{\mathcal{A}_0 \cup F_\nu(\mathcal{A}_0) \cup \mathcal{A}_\infty \cup F_\nu(\mathcal{A}_\infty)},$$ and let $S \subset \mathbb{C}$ be the universal covering space of $\hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{A}$ with the covering map $\text{Exp}|_S : S \to \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{A}$. For any given interval $J \subset \mathbb{R}$, we denote $$S_J := (S \setminus \mathbb{R}) \cup J.$$
The restriction of the map $F_\nu$ to $S^1$ is a homeomorphism, and hence, has an inverse. We define a lift $\phi : I \to I$ of $(F_\nu|_{\partial{\mathbb{D}}})^{-1}$ by $$\phi(x) := \text{Log} \circ F_\nu^{-1} \circ \text{Exp}(x).$$ Note that $\phi$ is discontinuous at $\text{Log}(F_\nu^2(1))$, which is mapped to $\tau-1$ and $\tau$ by $\phi$. Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$. By the combinatorics of critical circle maps, the $k$th iterate of $\phi$ on $I_n$ is continuous for all $1 \leq k \leq q_n$. By monodromy theorem, $\phi^k$ extends to a conformal map on $S_{I_n}$.
For $z \in S_J$, let $l_z$ and $r_z$ be the line segment connecting $z$ to $\tau-1$ and $z$ to $\tau$ respectively. The smaller of the outer angles formed between $l_z$ and $(-\infty, \tau-1)$, and $r_z$ and $(\tau, +\infty)$ is denoted $\widehat{(z, J)}$.
![Illustration of $\widehat{(z, J)} = \text{min}(\theta_1, \theta_2)$.[]{data-label="fig:Sangle"}](Sangle.eps)
Denote the hyperbolic distance in $S_J$ by $\text{dist}_{S_J}$. A hyperbolic neighbourhood $\{z \in S_J \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} \text{dist}_{S_J}(z, J)\}$ of $J$ forms an angle $\theta \in (0, \pi)$ with $\mathbb{R}$. Denote this neighbourhood by $G_\theta(J)$. Observe that $G_\theta(J) \subset \{z \in S_J \hspace{2mm} | \hspace{2mm} \widehat{(z, J)} > \theta\}$.
For $n \in \mathbb{N}$, define $E_n \subset S^1$ as the open arc containing $1$ with end points at $F_\nu^{q_{n+1}}(1)$, and $F_\nu^{q_n - q_{n+1}}(1)$. Observe that $E_n$ contains the critical arcs $A_n$ and $A_{n+1}$. Define $$G^n_\theta := G_\theta(\text{Log}(E_n)).$$
![Illustration of the hyperbolic neighbourhood $G_\theta(J)$.[]{data-label="fig:Sneighbourhood"}](Sneighbourhood.eps)
Consider the constant $N$ in lemma \[disjointness\]. Since $P^{crit}_N \cup P^{crit}_{N+1}$ is disjoint from the closure of $\mathcal{A}$, it is contained in some annulus $E \Subset \hat{\mathbb{C}} \setminus \mathcal{A}$. Let $\breve{S} \Subset S$ be the universal cover of $E$ with the covering map $\text{Exp}|_{\breve{S}}$. Choose $\theta$ such that $\hat{P}^{crit}_{N+2} \cup \hat{P}^{crit}_{N+3} \subset G^{N+1}_\theta$. Then we have $\hat{P}^{crit}_n \subset G^{N+1}_\theta$ for all $n \geq N+3$.
Now, suppose we are given $n \geq N+3$. Let $$\label{intorbit}
J_0 := I_n, J_{-1} := \phi(J_0), \ldots, J_{-q_n} := \phi^{q_n}(I_n),$$ be the orbit of $I_n$ under $\phi$. Given any point $z_0 \in S_{J_0}$, let $$\label{ptorbit}
z_0, z_{-1} := \phi(z_0), \ldots, z_{-q_n} := \phi^{q_n}(z_0),$$ be the orbit of $z_0$ under $\phi$.
The following three lemmas are adaptations of lemma 2.1, 4.2 and 4.4 in [@Y1] and lemma 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 in [@YZ]:
\[lem6.1\] Consider the orbit . Let $k \leq q_n-1$. Assume that for some $i$ between $0$ and $k$, $z_i \in \breve{S}$, and $\widehat{(z_{-i}, J_{-i})} > \epsilon$. Then we have $$\frac{\text{dist}(z_{-k}, J_{-k})}{|J_{-k}|} \leq C \frac{\text{dist}(z_{-i}, J_{-i})}{|J_{-i}|}$$ for some constant $C = C(\epsilon, \breve{S})>0$.
\[lem6.2\] Let $J$ and $J'$ be two consecutive returns of the orbit of $J_0$ to $I_m$ for $1 < m < n$, and let $\zeta$ and $\zeta'$ be the corresponding points of the inverse orbit . If $\zeta \in G^m_\theta$, then either $\zeta' \in G^m_\theta$ or $\widehat{(\zeta', J')}>\epsilon$ and $\text{dist}(\zeta', J')< C|I_m|$, where the constants $\epsilon$ and $C$ are independent of $m$.
\[lem6.3\] Let $J$ be the last return of the orbit to the interval $I_m$ preceding the first return to $I_{m+1}$ for $1 \leq m \leq n-1$, and let $J'$ and $J''$ be the first two returns to $I_{m+1}$. Let $\zeta$, $\zeta'$ and $\zeta''$ be the corresponding points in the inverse orbit , so that $\zeta' = \phi^{q_m}(\zeta)$ and $\zeta'' = \phi^{q_{m+2}}(\zeta')$. Suppose that $\zeta \in G^m_\theta$. Then either $\widehat{(\zeta'', I_{m+1})}>\epsilon$ and $\text{dist}(\zeta'', J'') < C |I_{m+1}|$, or $\zeta'' \in G^{m+1}_\theta$, where the constants $\epsilon$ and $C$ are independent of $m$.
The interested reader can follow the proofs of lemma \[lem6.1\], \[lem6.2\] and \[lem6.3\], and the rest of the proof of theorem \[yampolthm\] in [@YZ] *mutatis mutandis*.
\[crit shrink\] For all $n$ sufficiently larger than the constant $N$ in lemma \[disjointness\], $\emph{diam}(P^{crit}_n)$ is $K$-commensurate to $\emph{diam}(A_{-n})$ for some universal constant $K>1$. Consequently, $\emph{diam}(P^{crit}_n) \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$.
It suffices to show that any sequence of positive numbers $\{a_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ satisfying the relation $$a_n \leq C_1 \sqrt[3]{a_{n-1}} + C_2$$ for all $n$ is bounded.
Consider the sequence $\{b_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ defined inductively by
1. $b_0 =$ max$(1, a_0)$,
2. $b_n = C \sqrt[3]{b_{n-1}}$,
where $C$ is chosen so that $$C \sqrt[3]{k} \geq C_1 \sqrt[3]{k} + C_2$$ for all $k \geq 1$. It is easy to see that $b_n \geq a_n$ for all $n$.
A straightforward computation shows that $$b_n = C^{1 + \frac{1}{3} + \ldots + \frac{1}{3^{n-1}}} \sqrt[3^{n-1}]{b_0} \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} C^{\frac{3}{2}}.$$ Hence, $\{b_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ and therefore, $\{a_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ are bounded.
The following result we record for later use:
\[comm disc\] For all $n$ sufficiently large, the $n$th critical puzzle piece $P^{crit}_n$ contains a Euclidean disc $D_n$ such that *diam*$(D_n)$ is $K$-commensurate to *diam*$(P^{crit}_n)$ for some universal constant $K>1$.
Let $D_1$ be a disc centered at $1$ such that $F_\nu^{q_n}(1) \in \partial D_1$. The map $F_\nu^{q_n}|_{A_n}$ has a well defined inverse branch which extends to $D_1$. Denote this inverse branch by $\psi_n$. As a consequence of real a priori bounds, we have the following estimate: $$\frac{1}{|K_1|} \leq |\psi_n'(1)| \leq |K_1|,$$ where $K_1$ is some universal constant independent of $n$.
Observe that the preimage of $\mathbb{D}$ under $F_\nu$ consists of two connected components $U_{\text{in}} \subset \mathbb{D}$ and $U_{\text{out}} \subset \mathbb{C} \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}$. Moreover, $\overline{U_{\text{in}}} \cap \overline{U_{\text{out}}} = \{1\}$. It is not difficult to see that $\psi_n$ extends to $U_{\text{out}}$, and that $\psi_n(U_{\text{out}}) \subset P^{crit}_n$.
Now, choose a subdisc $D_2 \subset D_1 \cap U_{\text{out}}$ such that the annulus $A = D_1 \setminus \overline{D_2}$ satisfies the following estimate $$\frac{1}{|K_2|} \leq \text{mod}(A) \leq |K_2|,$$ for some universal constant $K_2$ independent of $n$. By Koebe distortion theorem, $\psi_n$ has uniformly bounded distortion on $D_2$. Since $\psi_n(D_2) \subset \psi_N(U_\text{out}) \subset P^{crit}_n$, the result follows.
The Proof of the Shrinking Theorem {#shrink proofs}
==================================
We are ready to prove the shrinking theorem stated at the end of section \[puzzle part\]. The proof will be split into three propositions.
\[alpha shrinkage\] If $\Pi_t$ is a nested puzzle sequence such that $L(\Pi_t)$ contains $\beta$ or $\kappa$, then $\Pi_t$ shrink to a point.
We prove the result in the case where $L(\Pi_t)$ contains $\kappa$. The proof of the other case is similar.
Since $L(\Pi_t)$ contains $\kappa$, it follows that $t = 0$. Observe that $L(\Pi_0)$ is invariant under $R_\nu$. Hence, $L(\Pi_0) \cap \partial \mathcal{S}_0 = \varnothing$.
Let $D_r$ be a disc of radius $r>0$ centered at $\kappa$. Since $\kappa$ is a repelling fixed point, if $r$ is sufficiently small, then $D_r$ is mapped into itself by an appropriate inverse branch of $R_\nu$. This inverse branch extends to a map $g : N \to N$, where $N$ is a neighbourhood of $L(\Pi_0)$ which is disjoint from $\partial \mathcal{S}_0$, and therefore the closure of the post critical set for $R_\nu$.
Any set compactly contained within $N$ converges to $\kappa$ under iteration of $R_\nu$. It follows that $L(\Pi_0) = \{\kappa\}$.
For the proof of the remaining two propositions, it will be more convenient for us to work with the Blaschke product $F_\nu$ rather than $R_\nu$ itself. It is clear from the definition that a nested puzzle sequence for $R_\nu$ shrinks if and only if the corresponding nested puzzle sequence for $F_\nu$ shrinks.
\[siegel shrinkage\] If $\Pi_t$ is a nested puzzle sequence such that $1 \in L(\Pi_t)$, then $\Pi_t$ shrink to $1$
Recall the definition of critical puzzle pieces $\{P^{crit}_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ for $F_\nu$ in section \[secapriori\]. Let $\hat{\Pi}_{\text{even}}$ and $\hat{\Pi}_{\text{odd}}$ be the maximal nested puzzle sequence containing $\{P^{crit}_{2n}\}_{n=0}^\infty$ and $\{P^{crit}_{2n+1}\}_{n=0}^\infty$ respectively. Corollary \[crit shrink\] and proposition \[maximal shrink\] imply that $\hat{\Pi}_{\text{even}}$ and $\hat{\Pi}_{\text{odd}}$ both shrink to $1$. By proposition \[num sequence\], there is no other maximal nested puzzle sequence at $1$.
For the proof of the final proposition, we need the following lemma.
\[shrinking lemma\] Let $f : \hat{\mathbb{C}} \to \mathbb{C}$ be a rational map of degree $d > 1$. Let $\{(f|_{U})^{-n}\}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a family of univalent inverse branches of $f$ restricted to a domain $U$. Suppose $U \cap J(f) \neq \varnothing$. If $V \Subset U$, then $$\emph{diam}((f|_U)^{-n}(V)) \to 0$$ as $n \to \infty$.
\[candidate shrinkage\] Let $z_0$ be a point in the Julia set $J(R_\nu)$ which is not an iterated preimage of $\kappa$, $\beta$ or $1$. If $\Pi_t$ is a nested puzzle sequence such that $z_0 \in L(\Pi_t)$, then $\Pi_t$ shrinks to $z_0$.
Let $$\mathcal{O} = \{z_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$$ be the forward orbit of $z_0$ under $F_\nu$. The proof splits into two cases.
*Case 1.* Suppose there exists some critical puzzle piece $P^{crit}_M$ such that $$\mathcal{O} \cap P^{crit}_M = \varnothing.$$ Let $z_\infty$ be an accumulation point of $\mathcal{O}$, and let $P^\infty$ be the puzzle piece of level $M$ containing $z_\infty$. Observe that the orbit of the critical point $1$ is dense in $\partial \mathbb{D}$. Hence, $P^\infty$ must be disjoint from $\partial \mathbb{D}$, since otherwise, $P^\infty$ would map into $P^{crit}_M$ by some appropriate inverse branch of $F_\nu$.
Let $U \subset \mathbb{C} \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}$ be a neighbourhood of $P^\infty$, and choose a subsequence of orbit points $\{z_{n_k}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ from $\mathcal{O}$ such that $z_{n_k} \in P^\infty$. For each $k$, let $$g_k : U \to \mathbb{C}$$ be the inverse branch of $F_\nu^{n_k}$ that maps $z_{n_k}$ to $z_0$. Since $P^\infty$ intersects the Julia set for $F_\nu$, the nested puzzle sequence $$\Pi := \{g_k(P^\infty)\}_{k=0}^\infty$$ must shrink to $z_0$ by lemma \[shrinking lemma\].
*Case 2.* Suppose the critical point $1$ is an accumulation point of $\mathcal{O}$. Then there exists an increasing sequence of numbers $\{n_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ such that $$\mathcal{O} \cap P^{crit}_{n_k} \neq \varnothing.$$ Fix $k$, and let $z_{m_k}$ be the first orbit point that enters the critical puzzle piece $P^{crit}_{n_k}$. Let $$P^{-n} \subset F_\nu^{-n}(P^{crit}_{n_k})$$ be the $n$th pull back of $P^{crit}_{n_k}$ along the orbit $$\label{orbit}
z_0 \mapsto z_1 \mapsto \ldots \mapsto z_{m_k}.$$
Suppose that $P^{-n}$ intersects $1$ for some $n>0$. Then for all $m \leq n$, $P^{-m}$ must intersect $\partial \mathbb{D}$. Recall that $P^{crit}_{n_k}$ contains the the preimage arc $A_{-n_k}$. Hence, for every $m \leq n$, $P^{-m}$ contains the $m$th preimage of $A_{-n_k}$ under $F_\nu|_{\partial \mathbb{D}}$. By the combinatorics of critical circle maps, it follows that $P^{-q_{n_k}}$ must be the first puzzle piece in the backward orbit $\{P^{-1}, P^{-2}, \ldots, P^{-m_k}\}$ to intersect $1$.
Since there are exactly two maximal nested puzzle sequences whose limit contains $1$, all puzzle pieces of level $n > n_k + q_{n_k}$ which intersect $1$ must be contained in either $P^{crit}_{n_k}$ or $P^{-q_{n_k}}$. Either case would contradict the fact that $z_{m_k}$ is the first orbit point to enter $P^{crit}_{n_k}$. Therefore, $P^{-n}$ does not intersect $1$ for all $n \geq q_{n_k}$.
Let $m \leq m_k$ be the last moment when the backward orbit of $P^0 = P^{crit}_{n_k}$ intersect $\partial \mathbb{D}$. By theorem \[real bound\], corollary \[crit shrink\] and combinatorics of critical circle maps, the distance between $P^{-m}$ and $F_\nu(1)$ is commensurate to diam$(P^{-m})$. Hence, the distance between $P^{-m-1}$ and $1$ is commensurate to diam$(P^{-m-1})$. Therefore, by theorem \[real bound\] and Koebe distortion theorem, the inverse branch of $F_\nu^{m_k}$ along the orbit can be expressed as either $$F_\nu^{-m_k}|_{P^{crit}_{n_k}} = \eta$$ if $1 \notin P_n$ for all $n > 0$, or $$F_\nu^{-m_k}|_{P^{crit}_{n_k}} = \zeta_1 \circ Q \circ \zeta_2$$ if $1 \in P^{-q_{n_k}}$, where $\eta$, $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_2$ are conformal maps with bounded distortion, and $Q$ is a branch of the cubic root.
Now, by lemma \[comm disc\], $P^{crit}_{n_k}$ contains a Euclidean disc $D_{n_k}$ such that diam$(D_{n_k})$ is commensurate to diam$(P^{crit}_{n_k})$. The above argument implies that the puzzle piece $P^{-m_k}$ must also contain a Euclidean disc $D$ such that diam$(D)$ is commensurate to diam$(P^{-m_k})$. Hence, $\text{diam}(P^{-m_k}) \to 0$ as $k \to \infty$, and the nested puzzle sequence $$\Pi := \{P^{-m_k}\}_{k=0}^\infty$$ must shrink to $z_0$.
As an application of the shrinking theorem, we prove that every infinite bubble ray for $R_\nu$ lands.
\[everylanding\] Every infinite bubble ray for $R_\nu$ lands.
Let $\mathcal{R}_t$ be an infinite bubble ray, and let $\Omega$ be its accumulation set. If $t$ is a dyadic rational, then $\mathcal{R}_t$ lands on an iterated preimage of $\kappa$. Otherwise, there exists a unique nested maximal puzzle sequence $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ with external angle equal to $t$. By corollary \[ray in puzzle\], $\Omega$ must be contained in $P_{[s_k, t_k]}$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$. The result now follows from the shrinking theorem.
The Proof of Conformal Mateability (Theorem B) {#final sec}
==============================================
We are ready to prove that $R_\nu$ is a conformal mating of $f_\mathbf{B}$ and $f_\mathbf{S}$. Recall the maps $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ and $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ in theorem \[interior maps\] defined on the union of the closure of every bubble in $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{S}$ respectively. Our first task is to continuously extend $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ and $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ to the filled Julia sets $K_\mathbf{B} = \overline{\mathbf{B}}$ and $K_\mathbf{S} = \overline{\mathbf{S}}$. For brevity, we will limit our discussion to $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$. The map $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ can be extended in a completely analogous way.
Let $\tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S} : J_\mathbf{S} \to J(R_\nu)$ be the map defined as follows. For $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$, let $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t = \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a maximal nested puzzle sequence whose limit contains $x$. By the shrinking theorem, the corresponding maximal nested puzzle sequence $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ for $R_\nu$ must shrink to a single point, say $y \in J(R_\nu)$. Define $\tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S}(x) := y$. We claim that $\tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S}$ is a continuous extension of $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ on $J_\mathbf{S}$.
\[cont ext\] Let $S \subset \mathbf{S}$ be a bubble. If $x \in \partial S$, then $\tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S}(x) = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x)$.
Let $z := \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x)$. By the definition of puzzle partitions, $z \in P_{[s_k, t_k]}$ for all $k \geq 0$. The result follows.
\[well defined\] The map $\tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S} : J_\mathbf{S} \to J(R_\nu)$ is well defined.
Suppose there are two maximal nested puzzle sequences at $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$. By proposition \[num seq siegel\], $x$ is either an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$ or $0$. The first case follows from corollary \[ray in puzzle\]. The second case follows from proposition \[cont ext\].
Define $\Phi_\mathbf{S}(x) := \tilde{\Phi}_\mathbf{S}(x)$ for all $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$. The extended map $\Phi_\mathbf{S} : K_\mathbf{S} \to \hat{\mathbb{C}}$ is continuous.
It suffices to show that if $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty \subset K_\mathbf{S}$ is a sequence converging to $x \in J_\mathbf{S}$, then the sequence of image points $\{y_i = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x_i)\}_{i=0}^\infty$ converges to $y = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x)$. The proof splits into four cases:
1. $x$ is an iterated preimage of $0$.
2. There exists a unique bubble $S \subset \mathbf{S}$ such that $x \in \partial S$.
3. $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$.
4. Otherwise.
*Case i)* By proposition \[siegel preimage 0\], there exist exactly two bubbles $S_1$ and $S_2$ which contain $x$ in their boundary. Moreover, we have $\{x\} = \overline{S_1} \cap \overline{S_2}$. By proposition \[cont ext\], any subsequence of $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ contained in $\overline{S_1} \cup \overline{S_2}$ is mapped under $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ to a sequence which converges to $y$. Hence, we may assume that $x_i$ is not contained $\overline{S_1} \cup \overline{S_2}$ for all $i \geq 0$.
By proposition \[num seq siegel\], there are exactly two maximal nested puzzle sequences $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t = \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ and $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_v = \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[u_k, v_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ whose limit contains $x$. Let $D_r(x)$ be a disc of radius $r > 0$ centered at $x$. For every $k$, we can choose $r_k >0$ sufficiently small such that $D_{r_k}(x) \cap \mathcal{P}^\mathbf{S}_k = D_{r_k}(x) \cap (\overline{S_1} \cup \overline{S_2})$. Let $N_k \geq 0$ be large enough such that $\{x_i\}_{i=N_k}^\infty$ is contained in $D_{r_k}(x)$. This implies that $\{x_i\}_{i=N_k}^\infty \subset P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]} \cup P^\mathbf{S}_{[u_k, v_k]}$. It is easy to see that the sequence of image points $\{y_i = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x_i)\}_{i=N_k}^\infty$ must be contained $P_{[s_k, t_k]} \cup P_{[u_k, v_k]}$. By proposition \[well defined\], $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ and $\Pi_v = \{P_{[u_k, v_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ both converge to $y$, and the result follows.
*Case ii)* The proof is very similar to Case i), and hence, it will be omitted.
*Case iii)* Since $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$, it must be the landing point of some bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_t$, where $t \in \mathbb{R} /\mathbb{Z}$ is a dyadic rational. By corollary \[ray in puzzle\], $y$ is the landing point of the corresponding bubble ray $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_t$. Any subsequence of $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ contained in $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_t$ is mapped under $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ to a sequence in $\mathcal{R}^\mathcal{S}_t$ which converges to $y$. Hence, we may assume that $x_i$ is not contained $\mathcal{R}^\mathbf{S}_t$ for all $i \geq 0$.
The remainder of the proof is very similar to Case i), and hence, it will be omitted.
*Case iv)* By proposition \[num seq siegel\], there exists a unique maximal nested puzzle sequences $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t = \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ whose limit contains $x$. Let $D_r(x)$ be a disc of radius $r > 0$ centered at $x$. Since $x$ is not contained the puzzle partition $\mathcal{P}^\mathbf{S}_n$ of any level $n \geq 0$, it follows that for every $k \geq 0$, there exists $r_k >0$ sufficiently small such that $D_r(x) \subset P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}$. Thus, there exists $N_k \geq 0$ such that $\{x_i\}_{i=N_k}^\infty$ is contained in $P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}$. It is easy to see that the sequence of image points $\{y_i = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(x_i)\}_{i=N_k}^\infty$ must be contained in the corresponding puzzle piece $P_{[s_k, t_k]}$ for $R_\nu$. Since the nested puzzle sequence $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ must shrink to $y$, the result follows.
\[ext angle match\] Let $t \in \mathbb{R} /\mathbb{Z}$, and let $x \in J_\mathbf{B}$ and $y \in J_\mathbf{S}$ be the landing point of the external ray for $f_\mathbf{B}$ and $f_\mathbf{S}$ with external angle $-t$ and $t$ respectively. Then $\Phi_\mathbf{B}(x) = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(y)$.
Consider the nested puzzle sequences $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_{t} = \{P^\mathbf{B}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$, $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t = \{P^\mathbf{S}_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$ and $\Pi_t = \{P_{[s_k, t_k]}\}_{k=0}^\infty$. By proposition \[shrink to ray\] and \[shrink to ray 2\], $\Pi^\mathbf{B}_{t}$ and $\Pi^\mathbf{S}_t$ shrink to $x$ and $y$ respectively. Let $z$ be the point that $\Pi_t$ shrinks to. By definition, $\Phi_\mathbf{B}(x) = z = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(y)$.
\[Proof of theorem B\]
We verify the conditions in proposition \[mating def\]. Let $f_{c_1} = f_\mathbf{B}$, $f_{c_2} = f_\mathbf{S}$, $\Lambda_1 = \Phi_\mathbf{B}$, $\Lambda_2 = \Phi_\mathbf{S}$, and $R = R_\nu$. Clearly, conditions (ii) and (iii) are satisfied. It remains to check condition (i).
Let $\tau_\mathbf{B} : \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z} \to J_\mathbf{B}$ and $\tau_\mathbf{S} : \mathbb{R} / \mathbb{Z} \to J_\mathbf{S}$ be the Carathéodory loop for $f_\mathbf{B}$ and $f_\mathbf{S}$ respectively (refer to section \[defnmating\] for the definition of Carathéodory loop). Define $\sigma_\mathbf{B}(t) := \tau_\mathbf{B}(-t)$. By proposition \[ext angle match\], the following diagram commutes: [ $$\begin{CD}
\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z} @> \sigma_\mathbf{B} >> J_\mathbf{B}\\
@VV \tau_\mathbf{S} V @VV \Phi_\mathbf{B} V\\
J_\mathbf{S} @> \Phi_\mathbf{S} >> J(R_\nu)
\end{CD}$$ ]{} It follows that if $z \sim_{ray} w$, then $z$ and $w$ are mapped to the same point under $\Phi_\mathbf{B}$ or $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$.
To check the converse, it suffices to prove that for $z, w \in J_\mathbf{S}$, if $\Phi_\mathbf{S}(z) = \Phi_\mathbf{S}(w) = x \in J(R_\nu)$, then $z \sim_{ray} w$. First, observe that $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ maps iterated preimages of $0$ homeomorphically onto the iterated preimages of $1$. Similarly, $\Phi_\mathbf{S}$ maps iterated preimages of $\mathbf{k}_\mathbf{S}$ homeomorphically onto the iterated preimages of $\kappa$. Now, by proposition \[num sequence\], two distinct maximal nested sequences for $R_\nu$ shrink to $x$ if and only if $x$ is an iterated preimage of $1$, $\kappa$ or $\beta$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $1$ or $\kappa$, then $z$ must be equal to $w$. If $x$ is an iterated preimage of $\beta$, then $z \sim_{ray} w$.
[9]{}
M. Aspenberg, M. Yampolsky, *Mating non-renormalizable quadratic polynomials*, Comm. Math. Phys. 287 (2009).
B. Branner, N. Fagella, *Quasiconformal Surgery in Holomorphic Dynamics*, Cam. Stud. in Adv. Math. (2014).
A. Douady, *Systéms dynamiques holomorphes*, Seminar Bourbaki, Astérisque, 105-106 (1983) 39-64.
A. Douady and J. H. Hubbard, *Étude dynamique des polynômes complexes I and II*, Pub. math. d’Orsay 84-02 et 85-05, (1984/1985).
D. Dudko, *Mating with Laminations*, arXiv:1112.4780.
P. Haõssinsky, *Chirurgie parabolique*, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math. 327 (1998), 195Ð198.
J. Milnor, *Dynamics in One Complex Variable: Introductory Lectures 3rd edition*, Princeton University Press, (2006).
J. Milnor, *Periodic orbits, external rays, and the Mandelbrot set: An expository account*, Asterisque **261**, (1999).
C. McMullen, *Complex Dynamics and Renormalization*, Annals of Math Studies, vol. 135, (1994).
C. Petersen, *Local connectivity of some Julia sets containing a circle with an irrational rotation*, Preprint I.H.R.S., (1994).
M. Rees, *Realization of matings of polynomials as rational maps of degree two*, Manuscript, (1986).
Tan, L. *Matings of quadratic polynomials*, Erg. Th. and Dyn. Sys. V 12, (1992), 589-620.
C. L. Siegel, *Iteration of analytic functions*, Ann. of Math. **43**, 607-612, (1942).
M. Shishikura, *On a theorem of M. Rees for matings of polynomials, The Mandelbrot set, Theme and variations*, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 274, (2000).
G. Swiatek, *Rational rotation numbers for maps of the circle*, Comm. Math. Phys., 119, (1988) 109-128.
M. Yampolsky, *Complex bounds for renormalization of critical circle maps*, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 18(1998), 1-31.
M. Yampolsky, *Siegel disks and renormalization fixed points*, Fields Institute Communications, 53(2008).
M. Yampolsky, S. Zakeri, *Mating Siegel quadratic polynomials*, Journ. Amer. Math. Soc., 14(2000), 25-78.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'In this paper the small-amplitude motion of multiple superposed viscous fluids is studied as a linearized initial-value problem. The analysis results in a closed set of equations for the Laplace transformed amplitudes of the interfaces that can be inverted numerically. The derived equations also contain the general normal mode equations, which can be used to determine the asymptotic growth-rates of the systems directly. After derivation, the equations are used to study two different problems involving three fluid layer. The first problem is the effect of initial phase difference on the development of a Rayleigh-Taylor instability and the second is the damping effect of a thin, highly viscous, surface layer.'
author:
- Magnus Vartdal
- 'Andreas N. Osnes'
title: Linear motion of multiple superposed viscous fluids
---
Introduction
============
The evolution of small-amplitude disturbances on interfaces between viscous fluids is a class of problems that includes the Rayleigh-Taylor (RT) [@Taylor1950; @Sharp1984; @Kull1991] and Richtmyer-Meshkov type instabilities [@Richtmyer1960; @Meshkov1969], as well as damped oscillatory waves [@Harrison1908; @Lamb1932]. This study investigates the motion of interface perturbations in the presence of multiple interfaces. The systems considered are subject to continuous acceleration, and thus, depending on the configuration, each interface can be RT unstable or stable and damped.
The RT instability occurs when a dense fluid is accelerated into a lighter fluid. It plays a dynamically important role in a vast number of natural phenomena ranging in size from cellular level bioconvection [@Plesset1974] to nebula formation [@Ribeyre2004]. It also occurs as a limiting factor in inertial confinement fusion [@Freeman1977; @Wouchuk1995; @Atzeni2004]. In spherical detonations, the RT instability occurs together with the Richtmyer-Meshkov instability, which is its impulsive analogue. These two instabilities are the driving mechanisms by which the detonation products are mixed with ambient air [@Frost2005]. Explosives with poor oxygen balance release more energy as a result of this mixing. Further examples of RT applications can be found in the extensive review of @Zhou2017c [@Zhou2017d].
The opposite case, where a light fluid is accelerated into a denser fluid, is stable and typically results in damped oscillatory wave motion [@Harrison1908; @Lamb1932; @Prosperetti1981]. These waves display a remarkable range of scales, from large tidal waves and tsunamis down to capillary waves driven by surface tension. The damping rate in some of these systems is known to be significantly affected by the presence of surface films and thin surface layers of another fluid [@Miles1967; @Buckmaster1973; @Jenkins1997; @Jenkins1997a]. The enhanced damping of such surface layers reduces radar backscatter, which makes it possible to detect oil spills remotely [@Alpers1988; @Alpers2017]. Furthermore, viscous fluid surface layers have been successfully used to model the damping of ocean waves caused by the presence of ice [@Weber1987].
Traditionally, the evolution of interface perturbations in the linear regime has been investigated by means of normal-mode analysis [@Harrison1908; @Lamb1932; @Chandrasekhar2013], which is well suited for studying the asymptotic behavior of such systems. Normal-mode analysis can, however, be impractical to use for capturing initial transients. Laplace transform based techniques are better suited for this purpose, since they naturally account for the growth of all modes. This is particularly true for stable configurations where such transients are known to persist for a significant amount of time. For the single interface case, such initial-value problems have been investigated using Laplace transform based techniques [@Carrier1959; @Prosperetti1976; @Menikoff1978; @Prosperetti1980; @Prosperetti1981; @Berger1988; @Denner2016]. These problems are commonly used as verification cases for multiphase flow codes [@Herrmann2008].
The presence of nearby interfaces, or a finite fluid layer thickness, can have a substantial effect on the evolution of disturbances, and such multilayer configurations have received considerable theoretical attention [@Mikaelian1982; @Mikaelian1982a; @Mikaelian1990a; @Mikaelian1990b; @Yang1993; @Mikaelian1996; @Jenkins1997; @Goncharov2000; @Mikaelian2005; @Piriz2018]. These studies cover both inviscid and viscous cases, but no exact linear theory for an arbitrary number of viscous fluids is available.
Experimental investigations of unstable multi-layer configurations are challenging due to the difficulty of setting up such systems. To the authors knowledge the only two studies that have done this are the study of [@Jacobs2005] and the recent study of [@Adkins2017]. Only the latter study could control the initial perturbations, enabling a comparison with the inviscid multi-layer theory of @Mikaelian1990b. The experimental results were later compared to a viscous three layer solution (limited to two viscous fluids and one free boundary) [@Piriz2018]. It was demonstrated that the growth-rate in the experiments were significantly lower than predicted by viscous theory. A possible explanation for the discrepancy is the limited depth of the cell used to conduct the experiments (around $1/4$th the wave length for the shortest wave length considered). A rough estimate of the importance of the viscous effects associated with the cell thickness reveals that they are, at best, of the same order as those included in the theory. Due to the lack of experimental data, and the approximations made by previous theoretical studies, the knowledge about the properties of unstable viscous multi-layer systems is currently limited.
In this paper, we consider the small-amplitude motion of an arbitrary number of superposed viscous fluids as a linearized initial-value problem. To our knowledge, this is the first study to approach the multi-layer problem in this fashion. The present work is an extension of the single interface analysis of @Prosperetti1981. The procedure results in a closed set of equations, involving only the Laplace transformed amplitudes of the interfaces, which can be inverted numerically. As in [@Prosperetti1981], we assume, for simplicity, that no vorticity is present initially. The derived equations also contain the general normal mode equations for an arbitrary number of viscous fluids. As far as the authors know this relation is also novel.
After deriving the equations we use them to study two different three-layer problems. The first problem is the effect of initial phase difference on the development of an RT instability, and the second is the damping effect of a thin highly-viscous surface layer.
Problem formulation and decomposition
=====================================
Consider a configuration of N+1 superposed incompressible viscous fluids separated by N interfaces, where interface $i$ separates fluid $i-1$ and $i$, as depicted in Figure \[Fig:Config\]. Fluid layer $i$ has constant thickness, density, and dynamic viscosity denoted by $H_i$, $\rho_i$, and $\mu_i$, respectively. The coordinate system is oriented such that the equilibrium position of each interface is given by $y_i=constant$, and gravity, denoted by $g$, acts opposite the $y$-axis. Initially, each interface is perturbed around its equilibrium position in an arbitrary manner, but since we restrict our analysis to the linear regime, these perturbations can be decomposed into separate modes by means of a Fourier transform. With this transformation, the equations describing the interfaces can be expressed as $$\label{surface-form}
\eta_i(x,z,t)=a_i(t)f(x,z)+y_i,$$ where $a_i$ is the amplitude of the disturbance, and $f$ satisfies the Helmholtz equation $$\label{Helmholtz}
\left({\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}}+{\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}}+k^2\right)f=0,$$ where $k=(k_x^2+k_z^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}$ is the wavenumber of the disturbance. In the remainder of the paper, subscripts are dropped for convenience when no confusion can arise.
The motion of each fluid is governed by the linearized Navier-Stokes equations, $$\label{Lin-N-S}
{\frac{\partial{{\mathbf{u}}}}{\partial t}}=-{\frac{1}{\rho}}\nabla p +\nu\nabla^2{\mathbf{u}}+{\mathbf{g}}.$$ Here, ${\mathbf{u}}$ is the velocity, $p$ is the pressure, and $\nu=\mu / \rho$ is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid. At the interfaces, the linearized kinematic and dynamic boundary conditions, including the effects of surface tension, are enforced. In the general case, the linearization requires that the amplitude at each interface is small compared to both the wavelength $\lambda=2 \pi/k$ and the thickness of the surrounding layers, i.e, $a_i<<\lambda, H_i,H_{i-1}$.[^1]
=0 ![Schematic illustration of the multi-layered initial-value problem. $a_i$ is the amplitude of the disturbance on interface $i$. $H_i$, $\rho_i$, and $\mu_i$, are the thickness, density, and dynamic viscosity of fluid $i$, respectively.[]{data-label="Fig:Config"}](figure1.eps "fig:") ![Schematic illustration of the multi-layered initial-value problem. $a_i$ is the amplitude of the disturbance on interface $i$. $H_i$, $\rho_i$, and $\mu_i$, are the thickness, density, and dynamic viscosity of fluid $i$, respectively.[]{data-label="Fig:Config"}](figure1.eps "fig:")
To solve eqns , , and , the decomposition procedure found in [@Prosperetti1981] is used. Some of the details of the procedure is repeated here for the readers convenience. First, the pressure and volume force terms are eliminated by applying the curl operator to the linearized Navier-Stokes equation. This results in $$\label{Lin-vort}
{\frac{\partial{{\mathbf{\omega}}}}{\partial t}}=\nu\nabla^2{\mathbf{\omega}},$$ where ${\mathbf{\omega}}$ is the vorticity of the fluid. Since the vorticity is divergence free by definition, it can be represented by a vector potential of the form ${\mathbf{\omega}}=\nabla \times({\mathbf{A}}+\nabla\times {\mathbf{B}})$. This decomposition is well suited for the present problem, since it has been demonstrated that ${\mathbf{A}}$ and ${\mathbf{B}}$ can be reduced to single component form by means of a gauge transformation [@Cortelezzi1981]. The resulting vectors can be expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathbf{A}}=[0,\,\, \Omega(y,t)f(x,z),\,\,0],\\
{\mathbf{B}}=[0,\,\, G(y,t)f(x,z),\,\,0]. {\addtocounter{equation}{1}\tag{\theequation}}\label{AandB-comp}\end{aligned}$$ Introducing into , and employing the Helmholtz equation , we find the evolution equation for $\Omega$ $$\label{Omega_eq}
\left[{\frac{\partial{}}{\partial{t}}}-\nu({\frac{\partial{^2}}{\partial{y^2}}}-k^2)\right] \Omega=0.$$ The evolution equation for $G$ is on the same form.
While ${\mathbf{A}}$ and ${\mathbf{B}}$ are sufficient for a complete description of the vorticity, an additional scalar potential, $\phi$, is required to represent the velocity. With this addition, the velocity can be expressed as $$\label{vel-decomp}
{\mathbf{u}}={\mathbf{A}}+\nabla \times {\mathbf{B}}-\nabla \phi.$$ Introducing into the vertical component of the linearized Navier-Stokes equation , and employing and , results in a Bernoulli type equation for the pressure $$\label{Bernoulli}
p=-\rho g y +\rho{\frac{\partial{\phi}}{\partial{t}}}-\mu{\frac{\partial{\Omega}}{\partial{y}}}f+C,$$ where $C$ is a constant. Further specification of the pressure requires knowledge about the scalar potential. The required equation for $\phi$ is obtained from the incompressibility constraint $$\label{Poisson}
\nabla^2 \phi=\nabla \cdot {\mathbf{A}}={\frac{\partial{\Omega}}{\partial{y}}}f.$$ Introducing the decomposition $\phi=\Phi(y,t)f(x,z)$ one finds $$\label{Phi_eq}
\left({\frac{\partial{^2}}{\partial{y^2}}}-k^2\right) \Phi={\frac{\partial{\Omega}}{\partial{y}}}.$$ The general solution to can be found using Lagrange’s method of variation of parameters.
Up until this point, the analysis is identical to that presented by Prosperetti [@Prosperetti1981] for the single interface case. The introduction of more interfaces does, however, alter the form of the scalar potential, as the kinematic boundary condition $${\frac{\partial{\Phi}}{\partial{y}}}=\Omega -\dot{a},$$ must be enforced on each interface. Here, $\dot{a}$ denotes the time derivative of the amplitude. The complete expression for the scalar potential is rather complicated, but for the remaining analysis only the expression for the potential at the interface locations are needed. At the interface locations the expression simplifies to $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_i (y_i)=\coth(kH_i) k^{-1}\dot{a}_i - {\text{csch}}(kH_i) k^{-1}\dot{a}_{i+1}\nonumber\\
-\int_{y_i}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_i \frac{\sinh (k(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh (kH_i)}dy \nonumber \\
\Phi_i (y_{i+1})={\text{csch}}(kH_i) k^{-1}\dot{a}_i - \coth (kH_i) k^{-1}\dot{a}_{i+1}\nonumber\\
+\int_{y_i}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_i \frac{\sinh(k(y-y_i))}{\sinh (kH_i)}dy \label{phiy1},\end{aligned}$$ where the subscript on $\Phi$ denotes which fluid layer the potential is defined in. From the requirement of continuity of tangential velocity at the interfaces it follows that $$\label{Phiy}
\Phi_{i}(y_i,t)=\Phi_{i-1}(y_i,t),$$ with an identical relation for $G_i$. Substituting into yields the condition =0 $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\coth(kH_{i-1})+\coth(kH_i)\Big)\dot{a}_i
- {\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})\dot{a}_{i-1}-{\text{csch}}(kH_i)\dot{a}_{i+1} \\
= k\left(\int_{y_{i-1}}^{y_{i}}\Omega_{i-1} \frac{\sinh (k(y-y_{i-1}))}{\sinh (kH_{i-1})}dy+\int_{y_i}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_i \frac{\sinh (k(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh (kH_i)}dy\right) \label{stress_omega_eq},\end{gathered}$$ $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\coth(kH_{i-1})+\coth(kH_i)\Big)\dot{a}_i- {\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})\dot{a}_{i-1} \\
-{\text{csch}}(kH_i)\dot{a}_{i+1}= k\Big(\int_{y_{i-1}}^{y_{i}}\Omega_{i-1} \frac{\sinh (k(y-y_{i-1}))}{\sinh (kH_{i-1})}dy \\
+\int_{y_i}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_i \frac{\sinh (k(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh (kH_i)}dy\Big) \label{stress_omega_eq},\end{gathered}$$ which couples the velocities of adjacent interfaces. The continuity of tangential stresses yield the same equations as those reported in [@Prosperetti1981], i.e, $$\label{Omega_tan_eq}
\mu_{i}\Omega_i(y_i,t)-\mu_{i-1}\Omega_{i-1}(y_{i},t)=2(\mu_{i}-\mu_{i-1})\dot{a}_{i},$$ $${\frac{\partial{}}{\partial{y}}}\Big(\mu_i G_i(y_i,t)-\mu_{i-1} G_{i-1}(y_i,t)\Big)=0.$$ The continuity of normal stress can be simplified to $$-p_{i}+p_{i-1}-2k^2(\mu_{i}\Phi_i+\mu_{i-1}\Phi_{i-1})=ak^2\zeta,$$ where $\zeta$ is the surface tension coefficient. Next, the pressure is eliminated using followed by the elimination of the scalar potential using . This yields evolution equations for the amplitudes which only depend on the $\Omega_i$-fields and the amplitudes themselves, =0 $$\begin{gathered}
m_i\ddot{a}_i+c_i\dot{a}_i+d_i a_i={\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})(\rho_{i-1}\ddot{a}_{i-1}+2 \mu_{i-1}k^2 \dot{a}_{i-1})+{\text{csch}}(kH_{i})(\rho_{i}\ddot{a}_{i+1}+2 \mu_{i}k^2 \dot{a}_{i+1})\\
-k^2 \mu_{i-1}\Big(\Omega_{i-1}(y_i,t)\coth(kH_{i-1})-2k\int_{y_{i-1}}^{y_{i}}\Omega_{i-1} \frac{\sinh (k(y-y_{i-1}))}{\sinh (kH_{i-1})}dy-\Omega_{i-1}(y_{i-1},t){\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})\Big)\\
-k^2 \mu_{i}\Big(\Omega_{i}(y_i,t)\coth(kH_{i})-2k\int_{y_{i}}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_{i}\frac{\sinh (k(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh (kH_{i})}dy-\Omega_i(y_{i+1},t){\text{csch}}(kH_{i})\Big).\\
\label{normeq}\end{gathered}$$
$$\begin{gathered}
m_i\ddot{a}_i+c_i\dot{a}_i+d_i a_i={\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})(\rho_{i-1}\ddot{a}_{i-1}+2 \mu_{i-1}k^2 \dot{a}_{i-1})+{\text{csch}}(kH_{i})(\rho_{i}\ddot{a}_{i+1}+2 \mu_{i}k^2 \dot{a}_{i+1})\\
-k^2 \mu_{i-1}\Big(\Omega_{i-1}(y_i,t)\coth(kH_{i-1})-2k\int_{y_{i-1}}^{y_{i}}\Omega_{i-1} \frac{\sinh (k(y-y_{i-1}))}{\sinh (kH_{i-1})}dy-\Omega_{i-1}(y_{i-1},t){\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})\Big)\\
-k^2 \mu_{i}\Big(\Omega_{i}(y_i,t)\coth(kH_{i})-2k\int_{y_{i}}^{y_{i+1}}\Omega_{i}\frac{\sinh (k(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh (kH_{i})}dy-\Omega_i(y_{i+1},t){\text{csch}}(kH_{i})\Big).\\
\label{normeq}\end{gathered}$$
Here, $m_i=\rho_{i-1}\coth(kH_{i-1})+\rho_i\coth(kH_i)$, $c_i=2k^2(\mu_{i-1}\coth(kH_{i-1})+\mu_i\coth(kH_i))$, $d_i=(\rho_{i-1}+\rho_i)\omega_i^2$, and $\omega_i$ can be recognized as the inviscid natural frequency for an interface separating two infinite fluid layers $$\label{invicidOmega}
\omega_i^2={\frac{\rho_{i-1}-\rho_{i}}{\rho_{i-1}+\rho_{i}}}gk+{\frac{\zeta}{\rho_{i-1}+\rho_{i}}}k^3.$$ It is readily seen that, in the limit of infinite layer thickness ($kH\rightarrow\infty$) equations and simplify to the corresponding equations for the single interface case, and we obtain the same set of equations as Prosperetti [@Prosperetti1981].
It should be noted that, just like the single interface case, the evolution of the $G$-component of the vorticity is decoupled from that of the amplitudes and $\Omega$. Since we have limited our study to the vanishing initial vorticity case, $G$ does not enter in the evolution equations in any way. Therefore, it is not considered further.
Laplace transformed equations of motion
=======================================
Unlike the single interface case, no closed form solution of the above time domain equations have been found. It is, however, possible to obtain a closed set of equations involving only the amplitudes after Laplace transformation of equations , , , and .
Let an overbar indicate a Laplace transformed quantity, $s$ denote the frequency parameter and define $$\label{lambda_def}
\lambda_{i}=(k^2+s/\nu_{i})^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$ Using this variable, the general Laplace transformed solution of equation can be expressed $$\label{Omega_lap}
{\overline{\Omega}}_i=A_i\frac{\sinh(\lambda_i(y-y_i))}{\sinh(\lambda_i H_i)}+B_i\frac{\sinh(\lambda_i(y_{i+1}-y))}{\sinh(\lambda_i H_i)}.$$ The tangential conditions on the interface, and , yield a set of equations for determining the coefficients $A_i$ and $B_i$ in terms of ${\overline{\dot{a}}}$: =0 $$\begin{gathered}
\gamma_{i-1}A_{i-1}+\delta_{i-1}B_{i-1}+\delta_{i}A_{i}+\gamma_{i}B_{i}=\\
k^{-1}\Big[\Big(\coth(kH_{i-1})+\coth(kH_i)\Big){\overline{\dot{a}}}_i-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1}){\overline{\dot{a}}}_{i-1}-{\text{csch}}(kH_i){\overline{\dot{a}}}_{i+1}\Big],\\ \label{lap_omega_stress}\end{gathered}$$ $$\begin{gathered}
\gamma_{i-1}A_{i-1}+\delta_{i-1}B_{i-1}+\delta_{i}A_{i}+\gamma_{i}B_{i}=k^{-1}\Big[\Big(\coth(kH_{i-1})\\
+\coth(kH_i)\Big){\overline{\dot{a}}}_i-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1}){\overline{\dot{a}}}_{i-1}-{\text{csch}}(kH_i){\overline{\dot{a}}}_{i+1}\Big],\\\label{lap_omega_stress}\end{gathered}$$ $$\label{lap_omega_tan}
\mu_i B_i-\mu_{i-1}A_{i-1}=2(\mu_i-\mu_{i-1}){\overline{\dot{a}}}_i,$$ where $\gamma$ and $\delta$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_i=\frac{1}{\lambda_i^2-k^2}(\lambda_i \coth(\lambda_iH_i)-k\coth(k H_i)),\nonumber\\
\delta_i=\frac{1}{\lambda_i^2-k^2}(k {\text{csch}}(kH_i)-\lambda_i{\text{csch}}(\lambda_i H_i)).\label{gamma-delta}\end{aligned}$$ The solution to the above set of equations can be substituted into the Laplace transformed normal stress equation , resulting in =0 $$\begin{gathered}
(m_is^2+c_is+d_i){\overline{a}}_i-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})(\rho_{i-1}s^2+2\mu_{i-1}k^2s){\overline{a}}_{i-1}-{\text{csch}}(kH_i)(\rho_is^2+2\mu_{i}k^2s){\overline{a}}_{i+1}\\
+\mu_{i-1}k^2(\beta_{i-1}A_{i-1}+\alpha_{i-1}B_{i-1})+\mu_{i}k^2(\alpha_{i}A_{i}+\beta_{i}B_{i})=\frac{1}{s}(m_is^2+c_is+d)a_i^0-\frac{d}{s}a_i^0+m_iu_i^0\\
-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})((\rho_{i-1}s+2\mu_{i-1}k^2)a_{i-1}^0+\rho_{i-1}u_{i-1}^0)-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i})((\rho_{i}s+2\mu_{i}k^2)a_{i+1}^0+\rho_{i}u_{i+1}^0),\label{governing}\end{gathered}$$
$$\begin{gathered}
(m_is^2+c_is+d_i){\overline{a}}_i-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})(\rho_{i-1}s^2+2\mu_{i-1}k^2s){\overline{a}}_{i-1}-{\text{csch}}(kH_i)(\rho_is^2+2\mu_{i}k^2s){\overline{a}}_{i+1}\\
+\mu_{i-1}k^2(\beta_{i-1}A_{i-1}+\alpha_{i-1}B_{i-1})+\mu_{i}k^2(\alpha_{i}A_{i}+\beta_{i}B_{i})=\frac{1}{s}(m_is^2+c_is+d)a_i^0-\frac{d}{s}a_i^0+m_iu_i^0\\
-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i-1})((\rho_{i-1}s+2\mu_{i-1}k^2)a_{i-1}^0+\rho_{i-1}u_{i-1}^0)-{\text{csch}}(kH_{i})((\rho_{i}s+2\mu_{i}k^2)a_{i+1}^0+\rho_{i}u_{i+1}^0),\label{governing}\end{gathered}$$
where $a_i^0$ and $u_i^0$ are the initial amplitude and velocity of interface $i$, respectively and $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{alpha-beta}
\alpha_i=\frac{1}{\lambda_i^2-k^2}(2k\lambda_i {\text{csch}}(\lambda_iH_i)-(\lambda_i^2+k^2){\text{csch}}(k H_i)),\nonumber\\
\beta_i=\frac{1}{\lambda_i^2-k^2}((\lambda_i^2+k^2)\coth(kH_i)-2k\lambda_i\coth(\lambda_i H_i)). \end{aligned}$$ Equations , and form a closed set of equations for the Laplace transform of the amplitudes, which can be inverted to find the evolution of the interfaces in time. The final step cannot be handled analytically, and a numerical inverse Laplace transform algorithm is required. For long time integration this algorithm can be very sensitive to numerical precision issues. In these cases we have employed arbitrary precision versions of the Euler and Talbot algorithms. For a description of the algorithms the reader can consult [@Abate2006].
In the limit of infinite layer thickness ($kH\rightarrow \infty $), the above equations simplify considerably. Take, for instance, the case of a bottom layer of infinite depth and let $a_1$ represent the lowest interface amplitude. The equations for $a_1$ can be simplified using the following relations: $\coth(kH_0)\rightarrow 1$, ${\text{csch}}(kH_0)\rightarrow 0$, $ B_0\rightarrow0$, $\alpha_0\rightarrow 0$, $\beta_0\rightarrow (\lambda_0-k)/(\lambda_0+k)$, $\delta_0\rightarrow 0$ and $\gamma_0\rightarrow 1/(\lambda_0+k)$. With these simplifications all references to $a_0$ disappear and the system is closed. For a top layer of infinite extent similar relations apply, with the exception that it is the $A$ coefficient and not the $B$ that disappears in the top layer.
For the case of finite depth above a fixed wall, the tangential stress condition at the wall can no longer be used. The tangential velocity conditions reduces to $$\delta_0 A_0 + \gamma_0 B_0=-k^{-1}{\text{csch}}(kH_0) {\overline{\dot{a}}}_1,$$ as a consequence of $\Phi (y_0)=0$ at the wall.
Another interesting limit is the interaction of a highly viscous fluid with other fluids of very low viscosity. In the limit of zero viscosity, the above equations become ill-defined because $\lambda \rightarrow \infty$. However, if the initial vorticity is zero, Kelvin’s circulation theorem ensures that vorticity remains identically zero. This implies that $A$ and $B$ remain 0 for the inviscid fluid. The continuity of tangential velocity, , should not be applied at these interfaces.
It should also be pointed out that if all terms involving initial-values are removed from , and . The remaining equation system represents the normal-mode equations for the given initial-value problem. Within this interpretation $s$ represents the growth rate of the normal mode, and ${\overline{a}}_i$ is the associated eigenvector. The above equation is thus also useful for evaluating the asymptotic behavior of the system directly. In the limiting case of infinite fluid thickness the expression for the growth-rate reduces to that of the normal-modes found in [@Bellman1954]. Furthermore, we note that the initial behavior of the system, also known as the irrotational approximation, is found by setting A and B equal to zero in all fluid layers.
Results
=======
Initial phase effects
---------------------
One of the topics that motivated this work was the effect of nearby interfaces on the evolution of a Rayleigh-Taylor instability and in particular what a difference in initial phase between the interfaces could result in.
For multi-layer cases, the number of parameters needed to describe a given configuration quickly becomes exceedingly large. We have thus chosen to restrict our study to the case of a single finite layer trapped between two semi-infinite fluids, but even for this very limited case 12 non-dimensional parameters are needed to classify the problem. We therefore further restrict our cases by neglecting surface tension effects, assuming zero initial velocity, equal Atwood numbers for the two interfaces, and equal kinematic viscosities for all fluids. These assumptions reduce the number of non-dimensional parameters to $4$. We chose the following parameters: the amplitude ratio, $a_r=a^0_2/a_1^0$, non-dimensional layer thickness $h=kH$, Atwood number $A=(\rho_2-\rho_1)/(\rho_2+\rho_1)$, and the viscosity parameter $\epsilon=\nu k^2/|\omega_1^2|^{\frac{1}{2}}$ used in [@Prosperetti1981]. Of these parameters the last two characterize the material properties, and for these we have used a fixed set of three values each. The chosen values, $A \in (0.1, 0.5, 0.9)$ and $\epsilon \in (1, 0.1, 10^{-3})$, represent the low, medium, and high end of each parameter space. For all cases the viscous time scale from [@Menikoff1977] ($T=(\nu/A^2g^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}$) is used to construct a non-dimensionalized time, $\tau=t/T$.
First, we consider the case when $a_r=1$, i.e. when the interfaces are initially in phase. At first glance, one might think that the resulting time histories, for both interfaces, would be bounded by the solutions for the asymptotic cases of infinite layer height and negligible layer height, which have analytic solutions [@Prosperetti1981]. This is indeed the case for the upper interface between the two densest fluids. However, as seen in Figure \[Fig:unstable1\], for the case $A=0.9$ and $\epsilon=10^{-3}$, the amplitude of the lower interface initially grows faster than the asymptotic case of negligible fluid height when $h<3$, with a maximum at $h=0.8$ (for the range of $h$ shown in the figure). We observe the same non-monotonic behavior for all the cases with $A=0.9$ regardless of which viscosity parameter is used (results not shown).
=0 ![The amplitudes of the disturbances on the lower interface for the case $A=0.9$, $\epsilon=10^{-3}$, and $a_r=1$, normalized by the infinite layer thickness solution $a_p$. The legend denotes the non-dimensional layer thickness $h$.[]{data-label="Fig:unstable1"}](figure2.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![The amplitudes of the disturbances on the lower interface for the case $A=0.9$, $\epsilon=10^{-3}$, and $a_r=1$, normalized by the infinite layer thickness solution $a_p$. The legend denotes the non-dimensional layer thickness $h$.[]{data-label="Fig:unstable1"}](figure2.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
For the case $a_r=-1$, the resulting motion is first for the interfaces to move in opposite directions. Eventually, however, the motion becomes dominated by the interface between the heavier fluids and both move together at the same asymptotic growth-rate. The change in direction for the lower interface, which does not happen when $a_r=1$, indicates that there should exist a minimal amplitude ratio for which a reversal of motion of the lower interface does not occur. This ratio is where a minimal growth-rate of the disturbances is realized, for a given set of $A$, $\epsilon$ and $h$, since the interfaces are moving apart and slowing each other down. We have identified these critical amplitude ratios as a function of $h$ for all combinations of $A$ and $\epsilon$. The results were obtained by iteratively searching for a solution where the growth-rates of the two interfaces were identical after $50$ non-dimensionalized time units. This is sufficient for establishing normal-mode behavior in most cases, and little variation in the results are obtained by increasing the simulation time to $75$ time units. The results are found in Figure \[Fig:ArPlot01\], \[Fig:ArPlot05\] and \[Fig:ArPlot09\]. The wave number is constant for all plots.
=0 ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.1$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot01"}](figure3.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.1$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot01"}](figure3.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
=0 ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.5$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot05"}](figure4.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.5$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot05"}](figure4.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
=0 ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.9$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot09"}](figure5.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Critical amplitude ratio as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness for $A=0.9$. Initial amplitude ratio (black) and normal mode ratio (gray). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:ArPlot09"}](figure5.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
The results show that the critical amplitude ratio varies greatly with Atwood number. The ratio varies relatively little with $h$ for small Atwood numbers. At $A=0.1$, see Figure \[Fig:ArPlot01\], the difference is less than 10% between $h=0.1$ and $h=5$. The difference is larger for the higher Atwood numbers, where an approximate difference of $0.2$ between $h=0.1$ and $h=5$ is observed. Interestingly, the adjustments due to viscosity are significant for all layer thicknesses, and for the most affected cases the difference due to viscosity is almost 50 percent of the effect of layer thickness.
The observed growth-rate coincides with that of the smallest unstable normal mode of the configuration. However, the amplitude ratio (eigenvector) of the normal mode does not, in general, coincide with the amplitude ratio of the initial condition. In Figure \[Fig:ArPlot01\], \[Fig:ArPlot05\] and \[Fig:ArPlot09\] we have thus also plotted the corresponding amplitude ratios of the normal modes. As a general trend, we observe that the difference between the two ratios is quite small. It increases with increasing viscosity and decreases with increasing Atwood number. For $\epsilon=0.001$ the ratios are indistinguishable in the plots. Furthermore, the effect is largest for small layer thickness. This indicates that the role of transients may become important for thin highly viscous layers.
In Figure \[Fig:GammaPlot09\], the growth-rates ($\gamma$), corresponding to the critical amplitude ratios, normalized by the viscous time scale ($T$), is plotted as a function of $h$. The results for the different Atwood numbers are almost identical in this scaling, with only a slight steepening of the curves for higher Atwood numbers. In contrast to the critical amplitude ratios, the dependence of the normalized growth-rate on the viscosity parameter is not monotonic, as $\epsilon=0.1$ has the largest values of the set tested here. One reason why a non-monotonic dependence on viscosity may be expected will be discussed at the end of the next section.
=0 ![Normalized minimal growth-rate as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness ($h$) for $A=0.1$ (black), $A=0.5$ (red) and $A=0.9$ (blue). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:GammaPlot09"}](figure6.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Normalized minimal growth-rate as a function of non-dimensional layer thickness ($h$) for $A=0.1$ (black), $A=0.5$ (red) and $A=0.9$ (blue). The legend denotes the value of the viscosity parameter $\epsilon$.[]{data-label="Fig:GammaPlot09"}](figure6.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
Highly viscous surface layer
----------------------------
An interesting limit for the above equations is what happens when a fluid layer becomes very thin. It is well known that, in the absence of surface tension the effect of such a layer becomes negligible when the layer thickness is sufficiently small [@Mikaelian1990b]. However, if the viscosity is very high such that $\mu H$ is appreciable one expects the effect of the layer to persist, and for sufficiently high viscosities the surface layer is expected to behave like an inextensible film [@Lamb1932].
The effect of such highly viscous surface films has also been studied in [@Jenkins1997], where a dispersion relation for the stable case was derived. Here, we study a similar configuration of fluids, but for clarity the effects of surface tension is ignored. The system under consideration consists of three fluids with material properties similar to that of air, heavy oil, and water. The top (air) and bottom (water) layers have infinite extents while the middle layer has a finite thickness $H$. We consider a wave with wavelength $0.02$ m and assume that the two interfaces start with identical initial amplitudes. The various material parameters are found in Table \[ThinTable\]. The acceleration due to gravity is set to $g=9.81$ and we non-dimensionalize time based on the inviscid natural frequency of the water-air system ($\tau=\omega t$).
Layer 1 (water) 2 (oil) 3 (air)
------------------------------------ ----------- --------------------------- -----------
$H\, (\mathrm{m})$ $\infty$ $\pi^{-1} \times 10^{-4}$ $\infty$
$\rho \, (\mathrm{kg/m}^3)$ $1000$ $900$ $1$
$\nu \, (\mathrm{m}^2/\mathrm{s})$ $10^{-6}$ $10^{-4}$ $10^{-5}$
: Baseline fluid layer parameters for the highly viscous surface film case.[]{data-label="ThinTable"}
As a baseline case we choose an oil layer thickness of $\pi^{-1} \times 10^{-1}$ mm, which yields $kH = 0.01$. We then vary the viscosity of the oil over several orders of magnitude. The resulting surface elevations for the oil-air interface are found in Figure \[Fig:Stable01\]. As the viscosity is increased, the damping rate increases monotonically towards the theoretical predictions for inextensible surface films [@Jenkins1997], as expected.
=0 ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.01$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$). The dashed lines are the damping rates corresponding to a pure air-water interface and an inextensible film over water.[]{data-label="Fig:Stable01"}](figure7.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.01$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$). The dashed lines are the damping rates corresponding to a pure air-water interface and an inextensible film over water.[]{data-label="Fig:Stable01"}](figure7.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
Next, we consider the effect of increasing the oil layer thickness. This immediately results in a loss of the monotonic increase in damping rate with increasing viscosity (seen as early as $kH=0.03$). This can be observed in Figure \[Fig:Stable1\], where the time histories for layer thickness $kH=0.1$ is found. In this case, the most viscous oil layers still approach the inextensible film limit, but both the curve representing viscosity ratio of $100$ and $1000$ are damped faster than this limit. This indicates that, for these viscosities, sufficient shear is generated in the middle layer to significantly contribute to the damping. As the viscosity is increased further, however, the viscous layer becomes too rigid and its damping contribution decreases.
If we further increase the layer thickness, the results no longer converge towards the inextensible film limit when the viscosity is increased. The damping rate of the perturbation on the oil-air interface for this thicker layer is significantly higher than the damping rate for the inextensible film. In the low and high viscosity limits the damping increases with viscosity. Between these two regimes there is, however, an intermediate region where the damping decreases with increasing viscosity, and thus there exists a local minimum in the damping rate. This is seen in Figure \[Fig:Stable6\], which displays the time histories for $kH=0.6$, where we observe that the curve corresponding to a viscosity ratio of $1000$ has a lower damping rate than the curves corresponding to ratios of $100$ and $5000$.
The reason for the non-monotonicity is that the vorticity diffusion terms (terms containing $\Omega$) contribute to both the stiffness and damping of the system. That this must be the case is realized by considering the behavior of the irrotational approximation for $kH=0.6$. The resulting system is over-damped ($c_i>\sqrt{m_id_i}$) above a viscosity ratio of approximately 400, and yet the interface oscillates even at a ratio of 5000. This means that the vorticity diffusion must contribute an excess stiffness great enough to alter the properties of the system.
While the general functional dependence of the vorticity diffusion terms is complex, we can illustrate the root of the non-monotonicity by considering the following decomposition of the $\beta_i$-coefficients
$$\label{b-decomp}
\beta_i=\frac{2\nu_i k^2}{s} \coth(kH)+\coth(kH)-\frac{2\nu_i k \lambda_i}{s}\coth(\lambda_i H_i).$$
These coefficients are multiplied by the expressions for $A_i$ and $B_i$, which have the form $A_i=c_{ij}(s){\overline{\dot{a}}}_j$. Here, $c_{ij}(s)$ is a matrix which depends on $s$. However, the continuity of tangential stress ensures that $c_{ij}$ always contains a non-zero constant component. (Note that, in the case of a viscous fluid supported between two inviscid fluids, the continuity of tangential velocity is no longer applicable, and $c_{ij}$ is a constant matrix.) The constant component of $c_{ij}$ contributes to the stiffness of the system when multiplied by the first term on the right hand side of , while the second term acts as a pure damping term. The behavior of the third term depends on $\lambda_i$. In the limit of high viscosity $\lambda_i\rightarrow k$ and the third term cancels the added stiffness of the first. However, as $kH$ becomes small the viscosity needed to obtain this cancellation increases exponentially, as $\coth(x)$ becomes singular at 0. We thus have two competing effects where the combination of layer thickness and viscosity can cause a non-monotonic dependence on viscosity.
As stated above, the general behavior of the vorticity diffusion terms is complex. This is a result of tangential velocity continuity , which introduces a non-trivial dependence of $c_{ij}(s)$ on $s$. Further investigation into this dependence is a topic for future work.
=0 ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.1$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$).[]{data-label="Fig:Stable1"}](figure8.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.1$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$).[]{data-label="Fig:Stable1"}](figure8.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
=0 ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.6$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$).[]{data-label="Fig:Stable6"}](figure9.pdf "fig:"){width="0.75\linewidth"} ![Amplitudes of the disturbances of the oil-air interface for the highly viscous surface layer case with $kH=0.6$. The legend denotes the viscosity ratio of oil to water ($\overline{\nu}=\nu_2/\nu_1$).[]{data-label="Fig:Stable6"}](figure9.pdf "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
Summary and conclusion
======================
In this paper, the motion of multiple superposed viscous fluids has been studied as a linearized initial-value problem. The main contribution is the development of a general closed set of equations for the Laplace transformed amplitudes of the interfaces. These equations can be inverted numerically. This formula is an extension of the single interface analysis of [@Prosperetti1981] to the multiple interface case. The analysis also contains the corresponding normal mode equations, which to the authors’ knowledge has not been previously published. After presenting the equations we summarized the simplifications needed for including inviscid fluids, for the irrotational approximation, as well as for considering bottom and top layers of finite and infinite depth.
The equations were used to study the effect of initial phase differences between interface perturbations on the evolution of a Rayleigh-Taylor instability and the damping effects of a highly viscous surface layer. For the Rayleigh-Taylor case we characterized the initial amplitude ratio for which the minimal possible growth-rate of the perturbations was attained as a function of viscosity, Atwood number and layer thickness. This ratio was compared to the amplitude ratio of the corresponding normal mode. The results showed that the difference in ratios increased as the fluid layers became thinner and the viscosity increased. This indicates that transients can be important for such configurations.
For the damping of a highly viscous fluid layer case, we demonstrated that for very thin surface layers an increase in viscosity results in the system approaching the inextensible film limit. However, as the layer thickness is increased the system quickly loses the monotonic dependence on viscosity, displaying a maximum in damping before approaching the limit. For even thicker layers the non-monotonicity persists, but the system no longer approaches the inextensible film limit.
Both test cases revealed that the combination of finite fluid layer thickness and a highly viscous fluid can lead to non-monotonic behavior of the interface perturbations as a function of viscosity. Analysis of the equations revealed that this non-monotonicity is a result of the vorticity diffusion contributing to both the stiffness and damping of the system. Since these contributions scale differently, both with layer thickness and viscosity, non-monotonic behavior is possible. A more comprehensive study of this non-monotonicity is a topic for future work.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Karnig O. Mikaelian for his helpful comments regarding the relationship between the normal-mode analysis and the initial-value problem. The authors would also like to thank Dr. Espen Åkervik for VOF simulation results used to confirm the validity of the derived equations.
[46]{} 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 in @noop [**]{}, Vol. (, ) pp. @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [**]{} (, ) @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [**]{}, Vol. (, ) in @noop [**]{} () [****, ()](\doibase https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.005) [****, ()](\doibase https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.008) @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [**]{} (, ) @noop [ ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [ ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}@noop [****, ()]{}
[^1]: There are exceptions where the conditions of linearity are less strict. For instance, a thin film on top of a thick fluid layer with wave amplitudes larger than the film thickness ($a>>H$) can be treated linearly if the waves are long [@Jenkins1997].
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We study equicontinuous actions of semisimple groups and some generalizations. We prove that any such action is universally closed, and in particular proper. We derive various applications, both old and new, including closedness of continuous homomorphisms, nonexistence of weaker topologies, metric ergodicity of transitive actions and vanishing of matrix coefficients for reflexive (more generally: WAP) representations.'
author:
- Uri Bader and Tsachik Gelander
date: 'July 26, 2015'
title: Equicontinuous actions of semisimple groups
---
[^1]
Historical prelude and introduction
===================================
We begin by presenting some of the history of the ideas around the so called “Mautner phenomenon", Moore ergodicity theorem, the Howe–Moore theorem and related topics. This mixture of ideas and techniques fascinatingly relates ergodic theory, representation theory, topological group theory and metric geometry.
The term “Mautner phenomenon" is used to describe the idea behind the following easy lemma and its various generalizations.
\[lem:maut\] Let $G$ be a topological group acting isometrically on a metric space $(X,d)$ such that the homomorphism $G\to {\text{Iso}}(X)$ is continuous. Assume that $(a_n)$ is a sequence in $G$, and $u\in G$ is an element such that $\lim_n u^{a_n}=e$ in $G$. If $x\in X$ satisfies $\lim_{n} a_nx=x$ then $ux=x$.
The beautiful one line proof is given by $$d(ux,x)=\lim_n d(ua_n^{-1}x,a_n^{-1}x)=\lim_n d(u^{a_n}x,x)=d(\lim_n u^{a_n}x,x)=d(ex,x)=0.$$
It seems to us that the first documented use of this idea is from 1950 by Segal and von-Neumann, see [@SVN Lemma 1]. Mautner used the “Mautner phenomenon" in his 1957 paper [@Mautner] to establish the ergodicity of the geodesic flow on finite volume locally symmetric spaces, applying it to the dynamics of the associated semi-simple Lie group on a corresponding unitary representation. Mautner’s result dramatically generalizes Hopf’s result [@Hopf] which treats the rank one case, by a beautiful geometric argument. The powerful idea of using unitary representation for the study of ergodicity of the geodesic flow is due to Gelfand and Fomin [@GF] who used it for the special case of manifolds of dimension 2 and 3, using the explicit classification of the irreducible representation of $SL_2({{\mathbb R}})$ and ${\text{SL}}_2({{\mathbb C}})$.
Mautner’s work was shortly after generalized by Moore who showed in [@Moore] that for every ergodic probability measure preserving action of a simple Lie group, every one parameter subgroup is mixing. Moore’s work, in turn, was generalized by Zimmer and Howe who obtained independently the following well known theorem.
In a unitary representation of a simple Lie group which has no non-zero invariant vectors, the matrix coefficients tend to 0 at infinity.
Zimmer’s proof relies on a theorem proved independently in [@Sherman Theorem 1] and [@Moore70 Theorem 8], describing the restriction of a unitary representation of a simple Lie group to a maximal split torus. The approach of Howe–Moore is based on the Mautner phenomenon and works for uniformly bounded Hilbert representations and over any local field. A main extra technical ingredient there is the reduction of the statement to a statement about $SL_2$, via the Jacobson-Marozov theorem.
It is interesting to note that the tone in [@HM] is apologetic. Before stating their Theorem 5.1 they write: “Our only excuse for including this in view of the fact that more precise results are known (but involving some effort and machinery) is that it is simple and direct and already contains useful information." The “more precise results" they refer to are results of Cowling and Wallach regarding the asymptotic behavior of matrix coefficients of irreducible uniformly bounded representations, e.g that the matrix coefficients are in $L^p$ for some $p$, see [@Cowling] for the archimedean case and [@BW] for the general case.
The Howe–Moore theorem was soon generalized by Veech who obtained in [@veech] a similar theorem applicable for any uniformly bounded representation on any reflexive Banach space. Veech’s result is again an elaboration on the Mautner phenomenon, now applied in the context of the WAP compactification of a semi-simple group. The WAP compactification of a group is a universal semi-topological, semi-group compactification which was studied by de-Leeuw and Glicksberg, following a fundamental work of Eberlein, Grothendik and others on Weakly Almost Periodic functions on groups. Matrix coefficients of uniformly bounded reflexive representations are WAP functions, thus the WAP compactificqation gathers information on all reflexive representations. It is interesting to note that by the main theorem of [@DFJP], the converse is also true: every WAP function is a matrix coefficient of a reflexive representation, see [@kaijser]. In [@Cowling79] Cowling proves a similar, though slightly weaker theorem: he considers the Fourier–Stieltjes compactification of a semi-simple Lie group and proves a parallel result to Veech’s. His proof is representation theoretic. Veech’s result was reproduced and put in a conceptual context by Ellis and Nerurkar in [@EN]. We find the papers [@veech] and [@EN] very appealing and we are surprised how little attention they got. For example, when we wrote [@Bader-Furman-Gelander-Monod], together with Furman and Monod, we included an appendix, based on an observation of Shalom, which reproduced the so called Howe–Moore Theorem in the restrictive context of super-reflexive Banach spaces, see [@Bader-Furman-Gelander-Monod Theorem 9.1]. No one ever, till this day, had brought to our attention that this result is subsumed in [@veech]. After the publication of [@Bader-Furman-Gelander-Monod] we realized that Theorem 9.1, with the same proof essentially, could be easily generalized to all reflexive representations, with the aid of one extra ingredient: the Ryll-Nardzewski Theorem. This already brought us to consider the WAP compactification. Considering the latter, we soon came across [@veech].
From the late 70’s to this day the Howe-Moore theorem stands as a corner stone in the analytic theory of semi-simple groups. For example, it is a key ingredient in Margulis’ proof of his celebrated super-rigidity theorem. It has numerous other applications. Let us mention here only two very easy ones. The first one is the easy proof of an older result due to Tits and Prasad [@Prasad]: every proper open subgroup of a simple group over a local field is compact. Indeed, this follows at once by considering the matrix coefficients of the corresponding quasi-regular representation. The second application, given in [@Zimmer Theorem 7.3], could be seen as a strengthening of simplicity: for a simple group over a local field, every non-trivial continuous homomorphism with dense image into a locally compact group is an open bijection. This follows by considering the regular representation of the target group. Let us elaborate on this last application.
Already in 1966, Omori had proved that every continuous homomorphism from a semi-simple Lie group (with finite center) into any first countable topological group has a closed image, [@omori]. This generalizes previous results of van-Est (proving a similar theorem with Lie group targets, [@vE]) and Goto (same with locally compact targets, [@Goto48] and [@GY]). See [@Goto73] for a general discussion. Groups satisfying the property that every injective image in a topological group is closed are called “absolutely closed". Their group topology is called “minimal". For a recent extensive survey on the subject, see [@DM]. As mentioned above, Zimmer reproved Goto’s result, as a corollary of the Howe–Moore theorem. In [@HM Theorem 2.1] it is also shown that the image of a homeomorphism of a simple Lie group in the unitary group of a Hilbert space is closed. It seems that the three authors were unaware of Omori’s result from 1966, [@omori]. A more systematic attempt to relate the notion of coarse group topologies and the study of matrix coefficients is given in [@Mayer] for connected Lie groups. It seems that for general locally compact groups there is still unexplored ground in this direction. Here we observe that Omori’s theorem is an immediate application of the following theorem.
\[demo\] Let $G$ be a simple group over a local field. Assume $G$ acts equicontinuously and with no fixed points on a uniform space. Then every orbit is closed and all the point stabilizers are compact.
Indeed, given a continuous homomorphism into a topological group, $G\to H$, endowing $H$ with its left uniform structure and consider the left action of $G$ on $H$ we get that the orbit of $e\in H$, that it the image of $G$, is closed. We get the following extension of Omori’s theorem.
A simple group over a local field is absolutely closed.
Our main contribution in this paper is the formulation of Theorem \[mainthm\], which is a simultaneous generalization of Veech’s theorem and Theorem \[demo\] above. Theorem \[mainthm\] discusses an action of a group on a space with two compatible structures: a uniform structure and a compatible (typically weaker) topology. The reader familiar with the classical Howe–Moore theorem should have in mind the two compatible structures on the unit ball of a Banach space: the norm and the weak topologies. We will not formulate Theorem \[mainthm\] in this introduction, due to its technical nature. Instead we choose to demonstrate it by proving a toy case, which already contains most of the ideas of the proof. For a generalization of the next theorem, see Theorem \[thm:iso\].
\[thm:baby\] Assume the group $G={\text{SL}}_2({{\mathbb R}})$ is acting continuously by isometries on a metric space $X$. Let $x_0\in X$ be a point. Then either $x_0$ is a global fixed point or its stabilizer group is compact.
Note that every metric space has a canonical uniform structure, and every isometric action is equicontinuous, thus Theorem \[thm:baby\] is an immediate corollary of Theorem \[demo\]. To the best of our knowledge, even this very specific result has not been formulated in the past literature. Here is a complete proof:
Suppose that the stabilizer group $G_{x_0}$ is not compact and let $g_n\in G_{x_0}$ be a sequence tending to infinity. Write $g_n=k_n a_n k'_n$ with $k_n,k_n'\in {\text{SO}}(2)$ and $$a_n=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
{\alpha}_n & 0 \\
0 & {\alpha}_n^{-1}
\end{array} \right)$$ with ${\alpha}_n\to \infty$. Up to replacing $g_n$ by a sub-sequance we may suppose that $k_n\to k$ and $k_n'\to k'$. Set $x_1=k'\cdot x_0$ and $x_2=k^{-1}\cdot x_0$.
Let $m:{{\mathbb{N}}}\to{{\mathbb{N}}}$ be a function tending sufficiently fast to $\infty$ so that ${\beta}_n:=\frac{{\alpha}_{m(n)}}{{\alpha}_n}\to\infty$, and set $b_n=a_{m(n)}a_n^{-1}$, that is $$b_n=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
{\beta}_n & 0 \\
0 & {\beta}_n^{-1}
\end{array} \right).$$ Since the action $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is continuous by isometries, and since $a_n\cdot x_1\to x_2$ and $a_n^{-1}\cdot x_2\to x_1$, we see that $b_n\cdot x_2\to x_2$, as well as $b_n^{-1}\cdot x_2\to x_2$. Note that for $$u_+(t)=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
1 & t \\
0 & 1
\end{array} \right)~ \text{and}~
u_-(t)=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
t & 1
\end{array} \right)$$ we have $\lim_{n\to\infty} b_n^{-1}u_+(t)b_n=\lim_{n\to\infty} u_+({t\over {\beta}_n^2})=e$, thus by Lemma \[lem:maut\], $u_+(t)x_2=x_2$. Similarly, we have that $\lim_{n\to\infty} b_nu_-(t)b_n^{-1}=e$, hence $u_-(t)x_2=x_2$. Since $G$ is generated by $u_+(t)$ and $u_-(t)$ we deduce that $G=G_{x_2}$. Finally, it follows that $x_2=x_0$, hence $x_0$ is a global fixed point.
In the above proof, note the role of the sequence $(b_n)$ which zig-zags between the accumulation points $x_1$ and $x_2$. This is the only novel ingredient in the following short list which summarizes the main ingredients appearing in the above proof:
- the $KAK$ decomposition,
- the Mautner phenomenon,
- a zig-zaging argument, and
- the generation of $G$ by opposite unipotents.
In the proof of Theorem \[mainthm\], the zig-zaging argument will come about by the use of Lemma \[difference\].
Finally note that for the proof we don’t need the precise structure of the group $G$, only the properties allowing us to use the ingredients above. This observation was used before by several authors, generalizing the Howe–Moore theorem to various non-algebraic groups, notably groups acting on trees, see [@LM]. We will prove our main theorems for groups having these appropriate properties, which we call “quasi-semi-simple" (or qss) groups, or. A similar axiomatic approach is taken in the recent preprint [@ciob].
The structure of the paper
--------------------------
The first half of the paper is devoted to the formulation and proof of the main Theorem \[mainthm\] about equicontinuous actions of semi-simple (and, more generally, qss) groups, including a presentation of the basic notions and necessary background. The second half (§\[sec:closed-image\] and further) is dedicated to various applications of Theorem \[mainthm\]. §\[preli\] summarizes some well-known background material. In §\[qss\] we present the class of quasi-semi-simple groups, the class to which we apply our main theorems proven in §\[sec:main\]. In §\[sec:topologies\] we prove the inexistent of weak topologies on qss groups improving old results of Omori and Goto. In §\[sec:ME\] we establish new results concerning metric ergodicity of analytic semi-simple groups and their lattices. In §\[sec:monoid\] we review the theory of monoid compactifications of a group and reprove (and slightly extend) Veech’s theorem. We apply these results in §\[sec:mixing\] in order to gain information about Banach representations. In §\[sec:Banach\] we reprove the results of §\[sec:mixing\] directly from Theorem \[mainthm\], for the benefit of the reader who wishes to avoid the abstract setting of §\[sec:monoid\].
Acknowledgment
--------------
We thank Amos Nevo for an enlightening conversation regarding the history and Gil Goffer for finding (hopefully) all the mistakes and typos in earlier versions.
Preliminaries {#preli}
=============
On nets convergence
-------------------
Recall that a net in a topological space is a map to the space from a directed set, where a directed set is a pre-ordered set in which every two elements have an upper bound. Typically we denote a directed set by the symbol $(\alpha)$ where $\alpha$ denotes a generic element in the directed set, and for a net in the topological space $X$ we use symbols as $(x_\alpha)$, representing the map $\alpha \mapsto x_\alpha$.
The net $x_\alpha$ converges to $x$, to be denoted $x_\alpha \to x$, if for every neighbourhood $U$ of $x$ there exists $\alpha_0\in (\alpha)$ such that for every $\alpha \geq \alpha_0$, $x_\alpha \in U$.
A net $(x_\beta)$ is said to be a subnet of the net $(x_\alpha)$ if it is obtained as the composition of an order preserving cofinal map $(\beta)\to (\alpha)$ with the map $\alpha \mapsto x_\alpha$. It is well known and easy to check that a net converges if and only if all of its subnets converge and to the same point. Less well known is the fact that every net which majorizes a subnet of a converging net converges as well.
\[subnetmajoration\] Let $n:(\alpha)\to X$ be a net converging to $x$. Let $f:(\beta)\to (\alpha)$ be an order preserving cofinal map. Let $f':(\beta)\to (\alpha)$ be another map, satisfying for every ${\beta}$, $f'({\beta})\geq f({\beta})$. Then the net $n\circ f'$ converges to $x$.
Fixing a neighborhood $U$ of $x$ we need to show that there exists $\beta_0 \in (\beta)$ such that for every $\beta \geq \beta_0$, $x_{f'(\beta)} \in U$. Indeed, by the convergence of the net $x_\alpha$ there exists $\alpha_0\in (\alpha)$ such that for every $\alpha \geq \alpha_0$, $x_\alpha \in U$, and by the cofinality of $f$, there exists $\beta_0\in (\beta)$ such that $f(\beta_0)\geq \alpha_0$. Then for every $\beta \geq \beta_0$, $f'(\beta)\geq f(\beta) \geq \alpha_0$ implies $x_{f'(\beta)}\in U$.
In a locally compact space $X$, a net is said to converge to infinity if for every compact subset $K$ there exists $\alpha_0$ such that for every $\alpha \geq \alpha_0$, $x_\alpha \notin K$. The following technical lemma will be of use.
\[difference\] Let $G$ be a locally compact group acting on a topological space $X$. Let $g_\alpha$ be a net in $G$ converging to infinity and assume that for some $x,y\in X$, the net $(g_\alpha x)$ converges to $y$ in $X$. Then there exists a directed set $(\beta)$ and two nets $n,n':(\beta)\to G$ satisfying $n(\beta)x\to y$ and $n'(\beta)x \to y$ in $X$ and $n(\beta)^{-1}n'(\beta) \to \infty$ in $G$.
We let $\mathcal{C}$ be the directed set of compact subsets of $G$, ordered by inclusion, and set $(\beta)=(\alpha)\times \mathcal{C}$ endowed with the product order. We let $f:(\beta)\to (\alpha)$ be the projection on the first variable. This is obviously an order preserving cofinal map. For every $(\alpha_0,K)\in (\beta)$ we use the fact that the subnet $(g_\alpha)_{\alpha\geq \alpha_0}$ converges to infinity in $G$ to find an element $\alpha_1\geq \alpha_0$ satisfying $g_{\alpha_1} \notin g_{\alpha_0}K$. We denote $\alpha_1=f'(\alpha_0,K)$. The lemma now follows from Lemma \[subnetmajoration\], setting $n(\beta)=g_{f(\beta)}$ and $n'(\beta)=g_{f'(\beta)}$.
Uniform structures and compatible topologies
--------------------------------------------
Recall that a uniform structure on a set $X$ is a symmetric filter $S$ of relations on $X$ containing the diagonal $$D=\{(x,x):x\in X\}$$ such that for every $U\in S$ there is $U'\in S$ with $U'U'\subset U$. Here $$U_1U_2=\{(u_1,u_2):\exists u_3, (u_1,u_3)\in U_1,(u_3,u_2)\in U_2\}.$$
Let $(X,S)$ be a uniform space.
We will say that a topology $T$ on $X$ is [*$S$-compatible*]{} if for every $V\in T$ and a point $y\in V$, there exists $y\in V'\in T$ and $U\in S$ such that $UV'\subset V$, where $$UV'=\{v~|~\exists v' \in V',~(v,v')\in U \}.$$
We shall denote by $T_S$ the [*$S$-topology*]{} on $X$, i.e. the topology generated by the sets $$U(x):= U\{x\},~x\in X,U\in S.$$ Obviously, we have:
The $S$-topology $T_S$ is $S$-compatible.
A topological group action on a topological space $G{\curvearrowright}(X,T)$ is said to be [*jointly continuous*]{} or simply [*continuous*]{} if the action map $G\times X\to X$ is continuous as a function of two variables.
\[action-structure\] Given an action of a topological group $G$ on a set $X$ we define the [*action uniform structure*]{} $S_G$ on $X$ to be the uniform structure generated by the images of the sets $U\times X$ under the map $$G\times X \to X\times X,~(g,x)\mapsto (x,gx),$$ where $U$ runs over the identity neighbourhoods in $G$. A topology $T$ on $X$ is $S_G$-compatible if and only if the action of $G$ on $(X,T)$ is continuous.
A group action on a uniform space $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is said to be [*equicontinuous*]{} (or sometimes [*uniformly continuous*]{}) if for every $U \in S$, also the set $\{(u,v)~|~\forall g\in G,~(gu,gv)\in U\}$ is in $S$. This means that $S$ has a basis consisting of $G$ invariant uniformities.
\[uniform-group\] For a topological group $G$, setting $X=G$, the right regular action defines a uniform structure on $G$, as in Example \[action-structure\]. This structure is called the [*left*]{} uniform structure. Note that the [*left*]{} regular action is equicontinuous with respect to that structure.
\[uniformquotient\] Assume $G$ acts on $(X,S)$ uniformly. Denote by $X/G$ the space of orbits and denote by $\pi:X \to X/G$ the natural quotient map. Then the collection $\{(\pi\times\pi)(U)~|~U\in S\}$ defines a uniform structure on $X/G$, to be denoted $\pi_*S$, and the associated topology on $X/G$, $T_{\pi_*S}$ coincides with the quotient topology $\pi_*T_S$.
Left to the reader.
\[Joint\] An equicontinuous action of a topological group is (jointly) continuous with respect to the $S$-topology if (and only if) the orbit maps are continuous.
For any $y\in X$ and a neighborhood of the form $U(y)$ associated with a uniformity $U\in S$, there exists a $G$-invariant uniformity $U'$ such that $U'U'\subset U$. For any $(g,x)$ with $gx=y$, let ${\Omega}\subset G$ be the pre-image of $U'(y)$ under the $x$-orbit map. Then ${\Omega}\times U'(x)$ is a neighborhood of $(g,x)$ in $G\times X$ whose image under the action map is contained in $U(y)$. Indeed, for $(g',x')\in {\Omega}\times U'(x)$, $(x',x)\in U'$ implies that $(g'x',g'x)\in U'$ which together with $(g'x,y)\in U'$ gives $(g'x',y)\in U$.
\[CI\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}(X,S)$ be an equicontinuous action. Let $T$ be an $S$-compatible topology on $X$. Let $(\alpha)$ be a directed set. Assume that $x_\alpha$ is a $T_S$-converging net in $X$ with $T_S\text{-}\lim x_\alpha=x$, and that $g_\alpha$ is a net in $G$. Then $T\text{-}\lim g_\alpha x_\alpha$ exists if and only if $T\text{-}\lim g_\alpha x$ exists, in which case they are equal.
Let $x_{\alpha}'$ be an arbitrary net in $X$ which $T_S$-converges to $x$. Suppose that $T\text{-}\lim g_\alpha x_\alpha$ exists and denote it by $y$. Let $V\in T$ be a neighborhood of $y$. We will show that there exists $\alpha_0$ such that $\alpha\geq \alpha_0$ implies $g_\alpha x'_\alpha \in V$. Fix $V'\in T$ around $y$ and a $G$-invariant uniformity $U\in S$ so that $UV'\subset V$. Let $U'\in S$ be a symmetric uniformity with $U'U'\subset U$. By the assumptions there exists $\alpha_0$ such that for every $\alpha \geq \alpha_0$, $$g_\alpha x_\alpha\in V',~(x_\alpha,x) \in U'~\text{and}~(x'_\alpha,x)\in U'.$$ Thus $(x_\alpha,x'_\alpha)\in U$ and, by the $G$-invariance of $U$, also $(g_\alpha x'_\alpha,g_\alpha x_\alpha)\in U$. It follows that $g_\alpha x'_\alpha \in UV'\subset V$.
By switching the roles of $x_{\alpha}$ and $x_{\alpha}'$ we deduce that $\lim_T g_\alpha x_\alpha$ exists if and only if $\lim_T g_\alpha x'_\alpha$ exists, in which case they are equal. The lemma follows by specializing to the constant net $x'_\alpha \equiv x$.
\[mautner\] Let $G$ be a topological group. Let $X$ be a $G$-space equipped with a uniform structure $S$ and an $S$-compatible topology $T$. Assume that the action is continuous with respect to both topologies $T$ and $T_S$ and equicontinuous with respect to $S$. Let $g_\alpha$ be a net in $G$ and assume for some points $x,y\in X$, $y=T\text{-}{\lim} g_\alpha x$. Assume $g\in G$ satisfies $\lim g^{g_\alpha^{-1}} =e$. Then $gy=y$.
By continuity of the action $G{\curvearrowright}(X,T_S)$ we have $(S\text{-}\lim) g^{g_\alpha^{-1}} x=x$. Applying Lemma \[CI\] to the net $g_\alpha$ in $G$ and the net $g^{g_\alpha^{-1}} x$ in $X$, we deduce that indeed $$gy= g(T\text{-}{\lim}) g_\alpha x=(T\text{-}{\lim}) g g_\alpha x= (T\text{-}{\lim}) g_\alpha\cdot g^{g_\alpha^{-1}}x= (T\text{-}{\lim}) g_\alpha x= y.$$
\[inverseseq\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}(X,S)$ be an equicontinuous action. Assume that for some net $(g_\alpha)$ in $G$ and $x,y\in X$, $(T_S\text{-}{\lim})g_\alpha x= y$. Then $(T_S\text{-}{\lim})g_\alpha^{-1}y= x$.
For every neighborhood $V$ of $x$ there exists a $G$-invariant uniformity $U$ with $U(x)\subset V$. By $g_\alpha x\to y$ there exists $\alpha_0$ such that for every $\alpha\geq \alpha_0$, $g_\alpha x\in U(y)$, that is $(g_\alpha x,y)\in U$. By $G$-invariance we get $(x,g_\alpha^{-1}y)\in U$ and by symmetricity $(g_\alpha^{-1}y,x)\in U$. Therefore for every $\alpha\geq \alpha_0$, $g_\alpha^{-1}y\in U(x)\subset V$.
Universally closed maps and actions {#sec:UniClo}
-----------------------------------
Recall that a continuous map $\pi:X\to Y$ between topological spaces is called proper if the preimage of a compact set is compact, and closed if the image $\pi(A)$ of every closed set $A\subset X$ is closed in $Y$. Under mild assumptions on $Y$, it is automatic that a proper map is closed. This is the case if $Y$ is a k-space, e.g when $Y$ is either locally compact or satisfies the first axiom of countability, see [@Palais]. In general however, a proper map is not necessarily closed. The current section deals with the general case. Recall the following classical Theorem:
\[thm:cmpt\] A topological space $K$ is compact if and only if for every topological space $Z$, the projection map $K\times Z\to Z$ is closed.
Note that we do not assume any separation property of the topological spaces involved. Since we are not aware of a reference for \[thm:cmpt\] in this generality, we add a proof for the convenience of the reader.
The fact that if $K$ is compact then for every $Z$, $K\times Z\to Z$ is closed is standard and easy. Assume now $K$ is not compact and pick a directed set $(\alpha)$ and a net $(x_\alpha)$ in $K$ which has no converging subnet. For every $x\in K$ we can find a neighborhood $U_x$ and $\alpha_x$ such that for every $\alpha\geq \alpha_x$, $x_\alpha\notin U_x$. Consider the poset obtained by adding to $(\alpha)$ a maximal element, $\infty$. Observe that the collection consisting of all intervals in $({\alpha})$ of the form $[\alpha,\infty]$ forms a base for a topology. Let $Z$ be the topological space thus obtained. Check that $\infty\in Z$ is not isolated. Let $A\subset X\times Z$ be the complement of the open set $\cup_x (U_x\times [\alpha_x,\infty])$. Observe that $A\cap X\times \{\infty\}=\emptyset$ and for each $\alpha$, $(x_\alpha,\alpha)\in A$, thus the projection of $A$ to $Z$ consists of the subset $Z-\{\infty\}$, which is not closed.
Here is another basic result of point-set topology for which we couldn’t find a proper reference.
\[CU\] Let $\pi:X\to Y$ be a continuous map between topological spaces. The following are equivalent.
1. For every topological space $Z$, the map $\pi\times {id_{Z}}:X\times Z\to Y\times Z$ is a closed map.
2. $\pi$ is closed and proper.
3. For every net $(x_\alpha)$ in $X$ which has no converging subnet, the net $(\pi(x_\alpha))$ has no converging subnet in $Y$.
$(1)\Rightarrow (2):$ By taking $Z$ to be a point we see that $\pi$ is closed. In order to see that $\pi$ is proper, consider an arbitrary compact subset $K\subset Y$ and an arbitrary topological space $Z$. The projection map $\pi^{-1}(K)\times Z\to Z$ is closed, being the composition of the closed maps $\pi^{-1}(K)\times Z \to K\times Z \to Z$. Thus by Theorem \[thm:cmpt\] $\pi^{-1}(K)$ is compact.
$(2)\Rightarrow (3):$ Assume by contradiction that $(x_\alpha)$ is a net in $X$ which has no converging subnet and $\pi(x_\alpha) \to y \in Y$. Denote $X_y=\pi^{-1}(\{y\})$. Since $\pi$ is closed and proper, $X_y$ is non-empty and compact. For every $x\in X_y$ we can find an open neighborhood $U_x$ of $x$ and $\alpha_x$ such that $\alpha \geq \alpha_x \Rightarrow x_\alpha\notin U_x$. By compactness of $X_y$ we can find a finite set $F\subset X_y$ such that $X_y \subset \cup_{x\in F} U_x$. We let $$V=Y\setminus \pi(X\setminus \cup_{x\in F} U_x).$$ Since $\pi$ is closed $V$ is an open neighborhood of $y$ in $Y$. Note that $U=\pi^{-1}(V) \subset \cup_{x\in F} U_x$. Let $\alpha_0$ be an index satisfying $\alpha_0\geq \alpha_x$ for every $x\in F$. Then for every $\alpha\geq \alpha_0$, $x_\alpha\notin U$ and thus $\pi(x_\alpha)\notin V$, contradicting the assumption that $\pi(x_\alpha)\to y$.
$(3)\Rightarrow (1):$ Let $A\subset X\times Z$ be a closed set. Assume, by way of contradiction, that $(\pi\times {id_{Z}})(A)$ is not closed in $Y\times Z$ and pick a net $(y_\alpha, z_\alpha)\in (\pi\times{id_{Z}})(A)$ converging to a point $(y, z) \notin (\pi\times{id_{Z}})(A)$. Pick lifts $(x_\alpha)$ of $(y_\alpha)$ such that $(x_\alpha, z_\alpha) \in A$. By our assumption, since $(y_\alpha)$ converges, $(x_\alpha)$ has a converging subnet. Abusing the notation we assume that $(x_\alpha)\to x$. It follows that $(x_\alpha, z_\alpha) \to (x, z)$. Since $A$ is closed, $(x,z)\in A$ and thus $(y,z)=(\pi\times {id_{Z}})(x,z)\in (\pi\times{id_{Z}})(A)$. A contradiction.
A map satisfying the above properties is called “universally closed”.
Recall that a continuous action of $G$ on $X$ is called a [*proper action*]{} if the map $$\label{actionmap}
G\times X \to X\times X,~(g,x)\mapsto (x,gx)$$ is a proper map. Similarly, we say that the action is [*universally closed*]{} is the map (\[actionmap\]) is universally closed. Every universally closed action is proper.
\[UCaction\] If $G$ acts on $X$ and the action is universally closed then the point stabilizers are all compact and the quotient topology on the orbit space $X/G$ is Hausdorff. In particular, every orbit is closed.
The fact that stabilizers are compact follows from the properness of the action. To show that $X/G$ is Hausdorff, observe that the set $X\times X\setminus \mathrm{Im}(G\times X)$ is open in $X\times X$ and hence its image under the open map to $X/G\times X/G$ is open. Thus its complement, the diagonal of $X/G\times X/G$, is closed.
The following is a useful variant.
\[variant\] Suppose a topological group $G$ acts on $X$ and $T,T'$ are two topologies on $X$ such that that map $$G\times (X,T) \to (X,T) \times (X,T'), \quad (g,x)\mapsto (x,gx)$$ is universally closed. Assume that points in $X$ are $T$-closed. Then the stabilizers are compact and the $G$-orbits in $X$ are $T'$-closed.
Again, compactness of the stabilizers follows from properness. Given a point $x_0\in X$, the image of $G\times \{x_0\}$, that is $\{x_0\}\times Gx_0$, is a closed subset of $(X,T) \times (X,T')$ and its preimage in $X$ under the continuous map $(X,T')\to (X,T)\times (X,T')$, $x\mapsto (x_0,x)$ is the orbit $Gx_0$.
Quasi-semi-simple groups {#qss}
========================
The main objects of this paper are semisimple Lie groups over local fields. However, much of the things we prove are based on two specific properties, namely:
- the existence of a Cartan $KAK$ decomposition for $G$, and that
- for every $a\in A$, the group $G$ is generated by elements $g$ with the following property: $\lim_{n\to\infty}a^nga^{-n}=1$, $\lim_{n\to-\infty}a^nga^{-n}=1$ or $\sup_{n\in{{\mathbb{Z}}}}\| a^nga^{-n}\|<\infty$.[^2]
This observation encourages us to introduce an axiomatic approach. Indeed, formulating (variants of) the above as axioms will, on one hand, make our future arguments cleaner and more transparent, while on the other hand, our results will be more general, and apply for other classes of groups. Our axiomatic approach is influenced by [@ciob].
Given a topological group $G$ and a net $g_\alpha$ in $G$ we define the following three groups: $$U^{(g_\alpha)}_+=\{x\in G~|~g_\alpha^{-1} x g_\alpha \to e\}, \quad
U^{(g_\alpha)}_-=\{x\in G~|~g_\alpha x g_\alpha^{-1} \to e\} \quad \mbox{and}$$ $$U^{(g_\alpha)}_0=\{x\in G~|~\mbox{every subnet of both nets}~g_\alpha^{-1} x g_\alpha ~\mbox{and}~g_\alpha x g_\alpha^{-1}~\mbox{admits a converging subnet}\}.$$ The following lemma is obvious and left as an exercise to the reader.
\[U+-normal\] Let $G$ be a topological group and $g_\alpha$ a net in $G$. The $U^{(g_\alpha)}_+$, $U^{(g_\alpha)}_-$ and $U^{(g_\alpha)}_0$ defined above are indeed groups and the group $U^{(g_\alpha)}_0$ normalizes both groups $U^{(g_\alpha)}_+$ and $U^{(g_\alpha)}_-$.
\[def:qss\] A locally compact topological group $G$ is said to be quasi-semi-simple (qss, for short) if there exists a closed subgroup $A<G$ satisfying the following axioms:
- There exists a compact subset $C\subset G$ such that $G=CAC$.
- For every net $a_\alpha$ in $A$ with $a_\alpha \to \infty$, there exists a subnet $a_\beta$ such that the group $U^{(a_\beta)}_+$ is not pre-compact and the group generated by the three groups $U^{(a_\beta)}_+$, $U^{(a_\beta)}_-$ and $U^{(a_\beta)}_0$ is dense in $G$.
\[rem:qss\] The class QSS of quasi-semi-simple groups is closed under finite direct products. Every compact group is qss and in addition if $H=G/O$ where $O\lhd G$ is a compact normal subgroup, then $H$ is qss iff $G$ is qss.
It is well known that connected semi-simple groups over local fields are qss. This follows for example from [@Margulis Ch. I, Proposition (1.2.1)]. In particular every connected semi-simple Lie group with finite center is qss. It is not clear to us whether any factor group of a general qss group is qss as well. For a surjective map $\phi:G\to H$, where $G$ is qss relatively to a subgroup $A<G$, it is reasonable to expect that $H$ would be qss relatively to $\phi(A)$. The only problem that might occur is that for some net $\phi(a_\beta) \to \infty$, the group $U_+^{\phi(a_\beta)}$ would be precompact in $H$. This problem never occurs for semisimple groups.
\[thm:ss-qss\] Let $H$ be a topological group. Let $k$ be a local field and $\mathbf{G}$ a connected, semi-simple algebraic group defined over $k$. Assume there is a continuous surjection $\mathbf{G}(k)\twoheadrightarrow H$. Then $H$ is qss.
Since $\mathbf{G}(k)$ is locally compact, by a standard Baire category argument, $H$ is isomorphic as a topological group to $\mathbf{G}(k)/N$ for some closed normal subgroup $N\lhd \mathbf{G}(k)$. We denote by $\phi:\mathbf{G}(k) \to \mathbf{G}(k)/N$ the natural surjection. Recall that $\mathbf{G}$ contains closed normal subgroup $\mathbf{G}(k)^+$ such that $\mathbf{G}(k)/\mathbf{G}(k)^+$ is abelian and compact, and even finite when $\mathrm{char}(k)=0$. The group $\mathbf{G}(k)$ is the image of the natural isogeny $\tilde{\mathbf{G}}(k) \to \mathbf{G}(k)$ where $\tilde{\mathbf{G}}$ is the simply connected form of $\mathbf{G}$. By [@Margulis Ch. I, Proposition 1.5.4(vi)], $\mathbf{G}(k)=\mathbf{G}(k)^+\cdot Z_{\mathbf{G}}(\mathbf{S})(k)$ where $\mathbf{S}$ is a $k$-split torus. We let $A=\phi(\mathbf{S}(k))$. In view of the discussion above, our only task is to show that for a net $(s_\alpha)$ in $\mathbf{S}(k)$ which tends to $\infty$ mod $N$, one can pass to a subnet $(s_\beta)$ such that $U^{\phi(s_\beta)}$ is not precompact. We abuse notation and view $\mathbf{S}$ a subgroup of $\tilde{G}$. Consider the preimage of $N$ in $\tilde{\mathbf{G}}(k)$ and mod out the finite center. This is a normal subgroup in a product of simple non-abelian groups, thus consists of a product of factors. Moding out these factors, we still have that $s_\alpha\to\infty$. The non-pre-compactness of $U^{\phi(s_\beta)}$ follows by a standard root space decomposition argument.
Let ${{\mathbb{K}}}$ be a global field and $\mathbf{G}$ a connected, simply connected, semisimple ${{\mathbb{K}}}$ algebraic group. Assume that $\mathbf{G}$ has no anisotropic factor. Let ${{\mathbb{A}}}={{\mathbb{A}}}_{{\mathbb{K}}}$ be the associated ring of adels. Then $\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{A}}})$ is qss. To see this recall that $\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{A}}})$ is the restricted topological product of $\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{K}}}_v)$ relative to the open compact subgroups $\mathbf{G}({{\mathcal{O}}}_v)<\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{K}}}_v)$ where $v$ runs over the finite valuations, and ${{\mathcal{O}}}_v$ is the local ring of ${{\mathbb{K}}}_v$. The reason that $\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{A}}})$ is qss is that the same subgroups $\mathbf{G}({{\mathcal{O}}}_v)$ used in the construction of restricted topological product can be used in the associated $CAC$ (or rather $KAK$) decomposition of the corresponding factors $\mathbf{G}({{\mathbb{K}}}_v)$. It is easy to verify the details.
Another family of qss groups is given by the following (see [@ciob] and [@caprace-ciob Proposition 3.6]):
Let $G$ be a group acting strongly transitive on an affine building. Then $G$ is qss. In particular every group of automorphism of a simplicial tree whose action on the boundary of the tree is 2-transitive is qss.
We note that the first ones to implicitly use the qss axioms for a boundary 2-transitive tree group are Burger and Mozes, in their proof of the Howe-Moore property for such groups in [@BM].
The main theorem {#sec:main}
================
The main result of this paper is the following general statement:
\[HM\]\[mainthm\] Let $G$ be a quasi-semi-simple group. Let $X$ be a $G$-space equipped with a uniform structure $S$ and an $S$-compatible topology $T$. Assume that the action is continuous with respect to both topologies $T$ and $T_S$ and equicontinuous with respect to $S$. Suppose that no non-compact normal subgroup of $G$ admits a global fixed point in $X$. Then the map $$\phi:G\times (X,T_S) \to (X,T_S) \times (X,T), \quad (g,x)\mapsto (x,gx)$$ is universally closed. In particular, it is proper.
Applying Proposition \[variant\] we get the following.
\[orbits\] Under the conditions of Theorem \[mainthm\] we have
1. the stabiliser in $G$ of every point in $X$ is compact, and
2. the $G$-orbits in $X$ are $T$-closed.
In the special case where $T=T_S$ we obtain Theorem \[demo\] presented in the introduction. Moreover, we get:
\[ref:Hausdorff\] With respect to the quotient topology induced from $T_S$, the orbit space $X/G$ is Hausdorff and completely regular.
By Lemma \[uniformquotient\], $X/G$ admits a uniform structure, hence it is Hausdorff and completely regular given that it is $T_0$, but it is $T_1$ by the above discussion. To see directly the Hausdorff property of $X/G$, consider two points $x,y$ which do not belong to a single orbit. Since $Gy$ is closed, we have an open neighbourhood $V$ of $x$ which is disjoint from $Gy$. Consider a $G$ invariant uniformity $U$ such that $UU(x)\subset V$ and pick a symmetric uniformity $U'$ contained in $U$. It is easy to verify that the open sets $GU'(x)$ and $GU'(y)$ are disjoint.
By way of contradiction we assume that the map $\phi$ is not universally closed and show eventually the existence of a point fixed by some non-compact normal subgroup of $G$. The proof consists of four steps.
Throughout the proof we let $A<G$ be the subgroup guaranteed by the qss assumption, and let $C$ be a compact subset of $G$ such that $G=CAC$.
[*Step 1: There exist points $x,y \in X$ and a net $a_\alpha\in A$ satisfying $a_\alpha\to \infty$ and $(T\text{-}\lim) a_\alpha x=y$.*]{}
In view of Theorem \[CU\], the assumption that $\phi$ is not universally closed is equivalent to the existence of a directed set $(\alpha)$ and a net $(g_\alpha,x_\alpha)$ which has no converging subnet, such that the net $(x_\alpha,g_\alpha x_\alpha)$ converges in the $T_S\times T$-topology.
Let $g_\alpha=c_\alpha a_\alpha c'_\alpha$ be a corresponding $CAC$ expression of the elements $g_\alpha$. Upon passing to a subnet we may assume that both $c_\alpha$ and $c'_\alpha$ converge in $C$. Note that necessarily $a_\alpha$ has no converging subnet in $A$, that is $a_\alpha \to \infty$.
Denote $$c=\lim c_\alpha~\text{and}~c'=\lim c'_\alpha,$$ and set $$x=c' (S\text{-}\lim) x_\alpha~\text{and}~y=c^{-1} (T\text{-}\lim) g_\alpha x_\alpha.$$ Since $G$ acts continuously on $(X,T_S)$, we have $$(S\text{-}{\lim}) c'_\alpha x_\alpha = x.
$$ Since $G$ acts continuously on $(X,T)$, we have $$(T\text{-}{\lim}) a_\alpha c'_\alpha x_\alpha=(T\text{-}{\lim}) c^{-1}_\alpha \cdot g_\alpha x_\alpha=
\lim c_\alpha^{-1} \cdot (T\text{-}{\lim}) g_\alpha x_\alpha = c^{-1} (T\text{-}{\lim}) g_\alpha x_\alpha =y.$$ Applying Lemma \[CI\] to the net $a_\alpha$ in $G$ and the net $c'_\alpha x_\alpha$ which $T_S$-converges to $x$ in $X$, we deduce that $y= (T\text{-}\lim) a_\alpha x$.
[*Step 2 (reducing to the case $T=T_S$): The action of $G$ on $(X,T_S)$ is not universally closed.*]{}
By Step 1, and by the second property in Definition \[def:qss\], replacing the net $(a_{\alpha})$ by a subnet $(a_{\beta})$, we have in addition to
- $a_{\beta}\to \infty$ and
- $(T\text{-}\lim) a_{\beta}x=y$,
that
- $U^{(a_{\beta})}_+$ is not precompact.
For $g\in U^{(a_\beta)}_+$ we have $\lim g^{a_\beta^{-1}} =1$, hence by Lemma \[mautner\], $gy=y$. Thus the stabilizer of $y$ is non-compact. By Proposition \[UCaction\] it follows that the action of $G$ on $(X,T_S)$ is not universally closed.
[*Step 3: There exist a point $x \in X$ and a net $a_{\beta'}\in A$ satisfying $a_{\beta'}\to \infty$ and $(S\text{-}\lim) a_{\beta'} x=x$.*]{}
By Step 2 we know that the map $$G\times (X,T_S) \to (X,T_S) \times (X,T_S), \quad (g,x)\mapsto (x,gx)$$ is not universally closed. We thus may apply Step 1 in the special case $T=T_S$ and obtain points $x,y \in X$ and a net $a_\alpha\in A$ satisfying $a_\alpha\to \infty$ and $(S\text{-}\lim) a_\alpha x=y$. By Lemma \[difference\], there exists a directed set $(\beta')$ and two nets $n,n':(\beta')\to A$ satisfying $n(\beta')x\to y$ and $n'(\beta')x \to y$ in $X$ (all limits in $X$ here are with respect to $T_S$) and $n(\beta')^{-1}n'(\beta') \to \infty$ in $A$. By Lemma \[inverseseq\], $n(\beta')^{-1} y \to x$. Applying Lemma \[CI\] (in the special case $T=T_S$) with respect to the directed set $(\beta')$, the net $n'(\beta')x$ in $X$ and the net $n(\beta')^{-1}$ in $A$, we conclude that $n(\beta')^{-1}n'(\beta')x \to x$. We are done by setting $a_{\beta'}=n(\beta')^{-1}n'(\beta')$.
[*Step 4: There exists a point in $X$ which is fixed by a non-compact normal subgroup of $G$.*]{}
We let $x$ be a point as obtained in Step 3. We will show that its stabilizer $G_x$ contains a normal non-compact subgroup of $G$. By replacing the net obtained in Step 3 by a subnet, using the qss second axiom we get a net $(a_{{\alpha}'})$ in $A$ satisfying the following properties:
- $a_{{\alpha}'}\to \infty$.
- $(S\text{-}\lim) a_{{\alpha}'} x=x$.
- $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_+$ is not precompact.
- The group generated by the three groups $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_+$, $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_-$ and $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_0$ is dense in $G$.
In view of Lemma \[mautner\], $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_+<G_x$. Moreover, by Lemma \[inverseseq\] we also have $$(S\text{-}\lim) a_{{\alpha}'}^{-1} x=x,$$ which by Lemma \[mautner\] gives $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_-<G_x$. By Lemma \[U+-normal\], the closed group generated by the subgroups $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_+$ and $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_-$ is normal in $G$. It is non-compact as $U^{(a_{{\alpha}'})}_+$ is not precompact. We conclude that $G_x$ contains a normal non-compact subgroup of $G$, completing the argument by contradiction.
Weak topologies on groups {#sec:topologies}
=========================
\[sec:closed-image\]
Image of a homomorphism
-----------------------
\[thm:image\] Let $G$ be a qss group. Let $\phi:G\to H$ be a continuous injective homomorphism. Then $\phi(G)$ is closed in $H$ and $\phi:G\to \phi(G)$ is a homeomorphism.
Set $X=H$ and consider the left $G$ action on $X$. Endow $H$ with the left uniform structure described in Example \[uniform-group\]. This uniform structure is invariant for the left regular action of $H$, and in particular under the $G$ action, thus the assumptions of Theorem \[mainthm\] hold. By Corollary \[orbits\] the $G$-orbits are closed. Since the image of $\phi$ coincides with the orbit of the identity $1_H$, the theorem is proved.
We know by Theorem \[thm:ss-qss\] that every factor group of a semisimple group is qss. Applying the above theorem to $G/\ker(\phi)$ we obtain:
Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center (the $k$ points of a Zariski connected semisimple algebraic group $\mathbf{G}$, defined over a local field $k$). Let $H$ be a Hausdorff topological group. Let $\phi:G\to H$ be a continuous homomorphism. Then $\phi(G)$ is closed in $H$.
Note that a similar theorem was proven by Omori [@omori] for a class of connected Lie groups, including all connected semisimple Lie groups with finite center, under the assumption that the target group $H$ satisfies the first axiom of countability.
Minimality of the group topology
--------------------------------
Let $G$ be a group. A [*group-topology*]{} on $G$ is a Hausdorff topology $T$ on $G$ with respect to which $G$ is a topological group. We shall say that a topological group $(G,T)$ is [*topologically-minimal*]{} if there are no weaker group topologies on $G$.
\[weakest-top\] A qss group is topologically-minimal.
In other words, a qss group does not admit any weaker group topology.
[**The completion of a topological group:**]{} As in the metric case, one can complete uniform spaces by considering equivalence classes of Cauchy nets. That is, two Cauchy nets $(x_{\alpha})$ and $(y_{\beta})$ in a uniform space $(X,S)$ are declared equivalent if for any $U\in S$ there are ${\alpha}_U$ and ${\beta}_U$ such that $(x_{\alpha},y_{\beta})\in U$ whenever ${\alpha}\ge{\alpha}_U$ and ${\beta}\ge{\beta}_U$.
For a topological group, one considers the two-sided uniform structure, generated by sets of the form $\{(g,h):g^{-1}h,hg^{-1}\in {\Omega}\}$ where ${\Omega}$ runs over the identity neighborhoods in $G$. The group structure as well as the group topology extends to the completion with respect to which it is a Hausdorff topological group. A topological group is dense in its completion, hence it is complete iff it is closed there.
\[sec:metric-ergodicity\] Let $G$ be a qss group, and suppose by way of contradiction that it admits a weaker topology $T'$. Let $H$ be the completion of $G$ with respect to $T'$. In view of Theorem \[thm:image\] it follows that $H=G$ and the identity map from $G$ to $H$ is a homeomorphism.
Measurable metrics and metric ergodicity {#sec:ME}
========================================
Theorem \[mainthm\] and Corollary \[orbits\] (1) could be applied in the case where $X$ is a metric space, taking the metric uniform structure and $T=T_S$. We obtain:
\[thm:iso\] Let $G$ be a quasi-semi-simple group. Assume that $G$ acts isometrically and continuously on a metric space $X$ and suppose that no non-compact normal subgroup of $G$ admits a global fixed point in $X$. Then the $G$-orbits are closed in $X$ and the points stabilizers are compact in $G$.
The following theorem has many ergodic theoretical applications.
\[ME\] Let $G$ be a connected, semisimple analytic group with a finite center (the $k$ point of a Zariski connected semisimple algebraic group $\mathbf{G}$, defined over a local field $k$). Let $H<G$ be a closed subgroup. Suppose that $G/H$ admits a $G$-invariant, separable, measurable metric. Then $H$ contains a factor of $G$ as a cocompact subgroup.
In case $d$ is continuous, this theorem is an immediate application of Theorem \[thm:iso\]. Indeed, the $d$-uniform structure on $G/H$ is $G$-invariant and continuous. Replacing $G$ by $G/N$ where $N$ is the action kernel, using the fact that $G/N$ is qss (Theorem \[thm:ss-qss\]) we see that $H$, being the stabiliser of a point, must be compact. The fact that the theorem applies also for measurable metrics is a consequence of the following:
\[measd\] Let $G$ be a locally compact group and $H<G$ a closed subgroup. Denote by $T$ the standard topology on $G/H$. Let $d$ be a $G$-invariant, separable, measurable metric on $G/H$. Then $d$ is $T$-continuous. If further $G$ is $\sigma$-compact then $T_d=T$ where $T_d$ denotes the metric topology on $G/H$.
The fact that $$T_d\subset T \Rightarrow T_d=T$$ when $G$ is $\sigma$-compact is a standard application of the Baire category theorem. We will prove that $T_d\subset T$. Let $\pi:G\to G/H$ be the quotient map. By the definition of the topology $T$ on $G/H$, $\pi$ is $T$-open, so it is enough to show that $\pi$ is $T_d$-continuous. By $G$-invariance it is enough to show continuity at $e$. Denote by $B(\epsilon)$ the $d$-ball of radius $\epsilon$ centered at $\pi(e)$. We need to find for every $\epsilon>0$ an identity neighbourhood $U$ in $G$ whose image is in $B(\epsilon)$. For a given $\epsilon>0$ fix a countable cover of $G/H$ by balls of radius $\epsilon/2$. At least one of the preimages of the balls is not Haar null, hence also the set $A=\pi^{-1}(B(\epsilon/2))$ is not null. One easily checks that $A=A^{-1}$ and $\pi(AA)\subset B(\epsilon)$. Moreover, It is well known that $AA^{-1}$ contains an identity neighbourhood $U$, as desired.
Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center (the $k$ point of a Zariski connected semisimple algebraic group $\mathbf{G}$, defined over a local field $k$). Let $H<G$ be a closed subgroup. Assume there exists a metric $d$ on $G$ which is separable, measurable, left $G$-invariant and right $H$-invariant. Then $H$ is compact.
By Lemma \[measd\], $d$ is continuous. By the $G\times H$-invariance, the formula $\bar{d}(xH,yH)=d(x,yH)$ defines a continuous metric $\bar{d}$ on $G/H$. By Theorem \[ME\], $H$ contains cocompactly a factor $G_1$ of $G$. Thus we wish to show that $G_1$ must be compact. Note that as $d|_{G_1}$ is bi-invariant, it induces a metric on $Y=G_1\times G_1/\sim$, where the relation $\sim$ is defined by $$(y_1,y_2)\sim(y_1',y_2') \iff y_1y_2=y_1'y_2',$$ for $y_1,y_2,y_1'y_2'\in G_1$. Considering the $G_1\times G_1$ action on $Y$ given by $$(g_1,g_2)\cdot (y_1,y_2)=(g_1y_1,y_2g_2^{-1}),$$ we see that no factor group has a fixed point while the diagonal group $\{(g,g):g\in G_1\}$ fixes the point $(1,1)\in Y$. In view of Corollary \[orbits\] (1), this implies that $G_1$ is compact.
Let $G$ be a group. Let $X$ be a $G$-Lebesgue space, that is a standard Borel space endowed with a measure class, on which $G$ acts measurably, preserving the measure class. The action of $G$ on $X$ is said to be [*metrically ergodic*]{} if for every separable metric space $U$ on which $G$ acts isometrically, every $G$-equivariant measurable function from $X$ to $U$ is a.e a constant.
\[ME-struct\] Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center (the $k$ point of a Zariski connected semisimple algebraic group $\mathbf{G}$, defined over a local field $k$). Let $H<G$ be a closed subgroup. Endow $G/H$ with the unique $G$-invariant Radon measure class. Then $G/H$ is $G$-metrically ergodic if and only if the image of $H/G_1$ is not precompact in $G/G_1$ for every proper factor group $G_1\lhd G$.
An ergodic $G$-Lebesgue space $X$ is not metrically ergodic if and only if it is induced from an ergodic $H$-space, for some closed subgroup $H<G$ which contains cocompactly a factor group $G_1\lhd G$ with $G/G_1$ non-compact.
Let $G_1\lhd G$ be a proper normal subgroup and suppose that that $H'=\overline{HG_1}/G_1$ is compact in $G'=G/G_1$. Pick a positive function $f\in L^2(G')$ and average it over the right action by $H'$, using the Haar measure on $H'$. The function obtained is $H'$ invariant, but not $G'$ invariant (as $G'$ is non-compact), thus provides a non-constant $G'$-equivariant map $G'/H'\to L^2(G')$. Precomposing with the map $G/H\to G'/H'$ we disprove the metric ergodicity of $G/H$.
More generally, given a $G$-space $X$ of the form $X=\text{Ind}_H^G(X')$ where $X'$ is an $H$-space on which $H$ acts with co-compact kernel, one observes that $H$ must be unimodular and the procedure above produces a non-constant $G$-map from $X$ to $L_2(G/H)$.
Let now $X$ be an ergodic $G$-Lebesgue space which is not metrically ergodic, and let $\phi:X\to U$ be a $G$-equivariant map to a separable metric $G$-space. Let $G_1$ be the maximal factor of $G$ for which the image of $X$ is essentially contained in $U^{G_1}$ and let $G'=G/G_1$. By ergodicity of $X$ we assume as we may that $\phi(X)$ intersects nully the fixed points set of all proper factors of $G'$ in $U^{G_1}$. Replacing $U$ with $U^{G_1}$ minus the union of these fixed points sets, we may assume that the action of $G$ on $U$ factors through $G'$ and that proper factors of $G'$ have no fixed points. By Corollary \[ref:Hausdorff\] $U/G'$ is Hausdorff. Hence by the ergodicity of $X$, $\phi(X)$ is essentially supported on a unique orbit, which we identify with $G'/H'$ for some closed subgroup $H'<G'$. By Corollary \[orbits\], $H'$ is compact in $G'$. Letting $H$ be the preimage of $H'$ in $G$, we deduce that $X$ is induced from $H$.
In particular, it follows that if $X=G/H$ is $G$-metrically ergodic then the image of $H$ is not precompact in $G/G_1$ for every proper factor group $G_1\lhd G$.
The fact that metric ergodicity is preserved by a restriction to a lattice is general. We record it here for reference.
Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center, and $\Gamma$ a lattice in $G$. Then every metrically ergodic $G$-space $Y$ is also ${\Gamma}$-methically ergodic.
In particular ${\Gamma}$ acts metrically ergodic on $G/H$ whenever $H\le G$ is a closed subgroup whose image in every proper quotient of $G$ is not pre-compact.
Assume that $\phi:Y\to U$ is a $\Gamma$-equivariant measurable map into a separable metric space on which $\Gamma$ acts isometrically. Replacing if necessary the metric $d$ on $U$ by $\min\{d,1\}$ we assume that $d$ is bounded. Consider the space of $\Gamma$-equivariant measurable maps, defined up to null sets, $L(G,U)^\Gamma$, endowed with the metric $$D(\alpha,\beta)=\sqrt{\int_{\Gamma \backslash\! G} d(\alpha(x),\beta(x))^2dx}$$ where the integration is taken over a fundamental domain for $\Gamma$ in $G$. Define the map $\psi:Y\to L(G,U)^\Gamma$ by $\psi(y)(g)=\phi(gy)$. Note that indeed, $\psi(y)$ is $\Gamma$-invariant, and further $\psi$ intertwines the $G$ action on $Y$ and the $G$ action on $L(G,U)^\Gamma$ coming from the right regular action of $G$. By $G$-metric ergodicity of $Y$ we conclude that $\psi$ is essentially constant. The essential image is a $G$-invariant function on $G$, thus a constant function to $U$. This constant in turn is the essential image of $\phi$, thus $\phi$ is essentially constant as well.
Recall that for probability measure preserving actions, metric ergodicity is equivalent to the weak mixing property.
\[statME\] Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center and no compact factors. Let $\mu$ be an admissible probability measure on $G$. Let $(X,\nu)$ be a $G$-Lebesgue space endowed with a $\mu$-stationary ergodic probability measure. Then $X$ is metrically ergodic. In particular, if the action on $X$ is measure preserving then $X$ weakly mixing (and in fact it is mixing modulo the action kernel).
In fact, in the measure preserving case, $G'{\curvearrowright}X$ is even mixing, as we shall see in \[HM\]. Below we sketch the proof of the corollary. Since we do not want to dive into the details of the subject here, we address interested reader to [@stat-struct] for further details and clarifications. Assume that $X$ is not metrically ergodic. By Theorem \[ME-struct\], there exists a (non-compact) quotient group $G'$, a compact group $H'<G'$ and an equivarinat map $\phi:X\to G'/H'$. Denote $\nu'=\phi_*(\nu)$. Since $\nu'$ is recurrent with respect to a random sequence in $G$, while the action is dissipative, we get a contradiction. We further remark that by the theory Furstenberg-Poisson Boundaries, it is a general fact that the question of metric ergodicity of a stationary measure reduces to the invariant measure case. Indeed, the Furstenberg-Poisson Boundary of a group, with respect to an admissible measure, is always a metrically ergodic action. It follows that for a stationary space $X$ and an equivariant map into a metric space, $X\to U$, the pushed measure is invariant: the associated boundary map from the Furstenberg-Poisson boundary to ${\operatorname{Prob}}(U)$ must be constant, due to the existence of a natural invariant metric on ${\operatorname{Prob}}(U)$. Thus the corollary above is reduced to the classical theorem of Howe-Moore, Theorem \[HM\] which we will prove independently.
Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center. Let $Y$ be a metrically ergodic $G$-space. Let $X$ be an ergodic probability measure preserving $G$-Lebesgue space. Then the diagonal action of $G$ on $X\times Y$ is metrically ergodic.
Assume that $\phi:X\times Y\to U$ is a $G$-equivariant measurable map into a separable metric space on which $G$ acts isometrically. By replacing if necessary the metric $d$ on $U$ by $\min\{d,1\}$ we may assume that $d$ is bounded. Consider the space of measurable maps, defined up to null sets, $L(X,U)$, endowed with the metric $$D(\alpha,\beta)=\sqrt{\int_{X} d(\alpha(x),\beta(x))^2dx}.$$ Define the map $\psi:Y\to L(X,U)$ by $\psi(y)(x)=\phi(x,y)$. Note that $\psi$ is $G$-equivariant. By the $G$-metric ergodicity of $Y$ we conclude that $\psi$ is essentially constant. The essential image is a $G$-equivariant map from $X$ to $U$. By Corollary \[statME\], $X$ is metrically ergodic as well, thus the latter map is also essentially constant. It follows that $\phi$ was essentially constant to begin with.
Monoid compactifications {#sec:monoid}
========================
Ellis joint continuity
----------------------
Let $G$ be a topological group, $X$ a topological space and $G\times X\to X$ an action. We will say that the action is [*separately continuous*]{} if for every $x_0\in X$ and $g_0\in G$ both maps $$G\to X,~g\mapsto gx_0 \quad\mbox{and}\quad X\to X,~x\mapsto g_0x$$ are continuous. We will say that the action is [*jointly continuous*]{} if the map $$G\times X\to X,~(g,x)\mapsto gx$$ is continuous.
\[strong->join\] Let $G$ be a topological group, $X$ a locally compact topological space and $G\times X\to X$ a separately continuous action. Consider the left regular action of $G$ on $C_0(X)$ endowed with the sup-norm topology. Then the following are equivalent:
1. The action of $G$ on $X$ is jointly continuous.
2. For every $f\in C_0(X)$, the orbit map $G\to C_0(X)$ given by $g\mapsto f(g^{-1}\cdot)$ is continuous.
3. The action of $G$ on $C_0(X)$ is jointly continuous.
The fact that (1) implies (3) is standard. Clearly (3) implies (2) (in fact, the converse implication is given by Lemma \[Joint\]). We prove that (2) implies (1). By Urysohn’s lemma, the collection of subsets of $X$ of the form $f^{-1}(W)$ for $f\in C_0(X)$ and $W$ open in ${{\mathbb C}}$ is a sub-basis for the topology. Fixing $f$ and $W$, our aim is to show that for every $g\in G$ and $x\in X$ with $gx\in f^{-1}(W)$ there exists an open set $(g,x)\in U\times V\subset G\times X$ such that $U\cdot V\subset f^{-1}(W)$. Choose $\epsilon>0$ for which the disc $B(f(gx),\epsilon)\subset W$ and let $$V=(g^{-1}f)^{-1}(B(g^{-1}f(x),\epsilon/2)).$$ Let $U^{-1}\subset G$ be the preimage of $B(g^{-1}f,\epsilon/2)\subset C_0(X)$ under the $f$-orbit map $G\to C_0(X),~h\mapsto h^{-1}f$. Then $U$ is open by our continuity assumption, and for $h\in U, y\in V$, $$|f(hy)-f(gx)| \leq |(h^{-1}f-g^{-1}f)(y)|+|g^{-1}f(y)-g^{-1}f(x)| < \|h^{-1}f-g^{-1}f\|+\epsilon/2 < \epsilon,$$ i.e. $f(hy)\in W$. Thus, $U\cdot V\subset f^{-1}(W)$.
\[Ellis\] Let $G$ be a locally compact group and $X$ a locally compact space. Then every separately continuous action of $G$ on $X$ is jointly continuous.
This is a corollary of Ellis’ joint continuity theorem [@Ellis-joint]. We give below an independent short proof, assuming that $G$ is first countable. We will relay on the following well known fact.
\[weak->strong\] For a representation of a locally compact group on a Banach space by bounded operators, the following are equivalent:
- the orbit maps are weakly continuous
- the orbit maps are strongly continuous.
This is a standard approximate identity argument, see for example [@DLG Theorem 2.8].
In view of Proposition \[weak->strong\] and Lemma \[strong->join\], it is enough to show that for $f\in C_0(X)$, the orbit map $g\mapsto gf$ is weakly continuous. By Riesz’ representation theorem every functional on $C_0(X)$ is represented by a finite complex measure and by the Hahn-Jordan decomposition it is enough to consider a positive measure $\mu$. By the first countability of $G$ it is enough to prove that for a converging sequence in $G$, $g_n\to g$, we have the convergence $\int g_nfd\mu \to \int gfd\mu$. This indeed follows from Lebesgue’s bounded convergence theorem.
Monoids
-------
Let $(X,T)$ be a compact semi-topological monoid. By this we mean that $X$ is a monoid and $T$ is a compact topology on $X$ for which the product is separately continuous — for each $y\in X$ the functions $$X\to X,~x \mapsto xy \quad\mbox{and}\quad X\to X,~x\mapsto yx$$ are both continuous, but the map $X\times X \to X$ may not be. Note that $C(X)$ is invariant under left and right multiplication. For every $f\in C(X)$ we denote $xf(y)=f(yx)$ and let $S_f$ be the uniform structure obtained on $X$ by pulling back the sup-norm uniform structure from $C(X)$ via the orbit map $X\to C(X)$, $x\mapsto xf$. We let $S$ be the uniform structure on $X$ generated by all the structures $S_f$, that is $S=\bigvee_{f\in C(X)} S_f$.
The topology $T$ is $S$-compatible.
Note that by Urysohn’s lemma $T$ is the weakest topology on $X$ generated by the functions in $C(X)$. Thus it is enough to show that for a given $f\in C(X)$, the topology $T_f$, generated on $X$ by $f$, is $S$-compatible. We will show that it is in fact an $S_f$-compatible.
Fix $x\in X$ and $\epsilon>0$ and consider $V=f^{-1}(B(f(x),\epsilon))\in T_f$. Set $$V'=f^{-1}(B(f(x),\epsilon/2))\in T_f \quad \mbox{and} \quad U=\{(y,z)~|~\|yf-zf\|<\epsilon/2\} \in S_f.$$ For $y\in UV'$ there exists some $z\in V'$ such that $(y,z)\in U$. Therefore $$|f(y)-f(x)|\leq |yf(e)-zf(e)|+|f(z)-f(x)| < \|yf-zf\|+ \epsilon/2 < \epsilon,$$ and thus $z\in V$. It follows that $UV'\subset V$.
Let now $G$ be a locally compact group with a continuous monoid morphism $G\to (X,T)$. Note that by Theorem \[Ellis\] the product map $G\times X\to X$ is continuous.
The action of $G$ on $(X,S)$ is continuous and equicontinuous.
It is enough to show that for every $f\in C(X)$ the action of $G$ on $(X,S_f)$ is continuous and equicontinuous. Fix $f\in C(X)$. We first show that the action on $(X,S_f)$ is equicontinuous. For every $\epsilon>0$ consider the uniformity $$U=\{(x,y)~|~\|xf-yf\|<\epsilon\}.$$ Then $$gU=\{(gx,gy)~|~\|xf-yf\|<\epsilon\}=\{(x,y)~|~\|g^{-1}(xf-yf)\|<\epsilon\} =$$ $$\{(x,y)~|~\|xf-yf\|<\epsilon\}=U,$$ and uniform continuity follows. We now show that the action is continuous. By lemma \[Joint\] it is enough to show that for a given $x\in X$ the $x$-orbit map $G\to (X,T_{S_f})$ is continuous. This is equivalent to showing that the $xf$-orbit map $G\to C(X)$ is strongly continuous, which is given by Theorem \[weak->strong\].
Let us summaries the conclusions of this section:
\[conditions\] Let $G$ be a locally compact group and $(X,T)$ a compact semi-topological monoid. Suppose we are given a continuous monoid representation $G\to X$ and let $S$ be the associated uniform structure on $X$. Then
- $T$ is an $S$-topology,
- the left regular action $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is jointly continuous with respect to both topologies $T$ and $T_S$, and
- $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is equicontinuous with respect to $S$.
Weakly almost periodic rigidity {#sec:WAP}
-------------------------------
Let $G$ be a locally compact group. By a [*monoid representation*]{} of $G$ we mean a continuous monoid homomorphism from $G$ into a compact semi-topological monoid.
If $G$ is non-compact we denote by $G^*$ the one point compactification of $G$, $G\cup \{\infty\}$, with the multiplication extended from that of $G$ by $$g\infty=\infty g=\infty\infty=\infty$$ for every $g\in G$. We let $i^*:G\to G^*$ be the obvious embedding. If $G$ is compact we set $G^*=G$ and $i^*=$ the identity map. In both cases, $i^*:G\to G^*$ form a monoid representation of $G$.
We will say that a monoid representation with dense image $i:G\to X$ is a [*universal*]{} if for every monoid representation $j:G\to Y$ there exists a unique continuous monoid homomorphism $k:X\to Y$ such that $j=ki$. The pair $(i,X)$ will be referred as a [*universal system*]{}.
\[universal\] The locally compact group $G$ admits a universal monoid representation $i:G\to X$. Every two universal systems are uniquely isomorphic. Furthermore, $i$ is a homemorphism into its image and $i(G)$ is open and dense in $X$.
The collection of isomorphism classes of monoid representations of $G$ with dense images forms a set; it could be described for example as a subset of the set of all norm closed subalgebras of $C_b(G)$. Pick one representative for each class and consider the product space of those, let $i$ be the diagonal morphism from $G$ to this product space and let $X$ be the closure of $i(G)$. The existence of $k$ follows immediately. The uniqueness of $k$ follows by the fact that $i(G)$ is dense in $X$, and the uniqueness of the pair $(i,X)$ is obvious. That $i(G)$ is open follows from the fact that $G^*$ is a factor of $X$.
The representation alluded to in Theorem \[universal\] is called ${\text{WAP}}(G)$.
The representation ${\text{WAP}}(G)$ was defined and studied by de-Leeuw and Glicksberg. Our presentation here is slightly different from theirs.
By the Gelfand–Neumark theory, compactifications of $G$ corresponds to point separating $*$-subalgebras of $C_b(G)$, where general $*$-subalgebras of the latter correspond to compactifications of (topological) quotients of $G$, and the Stone–Ĉech (the largest) compactification correspond to the full algebra $C_b(G)$. Among these, the monoid representations of $G$ correspond sub-algebras carrying an additional structure, and ${\text{WAP}}(G)$ corresponds to the largest such algebra. It can be shown that it is the algebra of weakly almost periodic functions on $G$, hence the notation. We will not elaborate on the point of view of almost periodic functions on $G$.
A group $G$ will be said to be [*WAP-rigid*]{} if ${\text{WAP}}(G)\simeq G^*$.
If $G$ is compact then clearly ${\text{WAP}}(G)=G=G^*$ and $G$ is WAP-rigid.
The following theorem, which was proved first in [@veech] and [@EN] (for simple Lie groups), could be seen as a special case of Theorem \[structure\] below. For clarity we give a separate proof.
Let $G$ be an almost simple analytic group over a local field. Then $G$ is WAP-rigid.
We assume $G$ is non-compact. Let $j:G\to X$ be any monoid representation of $G$. We will construct a continuous monoid morphism $k:G^*\to X$. Such a morphism is clearly unique and satisfies $j=ki^*$. In view of Theorem \[conditions\] we are in the situation to apply Theorem \[mainthm\] to either the left or the right actions of $G$ on $X$. Upon replacing $X$ with $X\times G^*$ we may assume that $j(G)=Ge=eG$ is non-compact. We therefore get by Theorem \[mainthm\] the existence of a point $x\in \overline{j(G)}$ which is right $G$-invariant and a point $y\in \overline{j(G)}$ which is left $G$-invariant. By continuity of the product in $X$ we have $x=xy=y$. It follows that $x$ is the unique left $G$-invariant point in $\overline{j(G)}$. We then define $k:G^*\to X$ by setting $k(g)=ge$ for $g\in G$ and $k(\infty)=x$. Clearly $k$ is a continuous morphism.
We now discuss semisimple (rather than simple) groups. Let $G$ be a finite centred semisimple analytic group over a local field. Then $G=G_0G_1\cdots G_n$ where $G_0$ is compact and $G_1,\ldots, G_n$ are the non-compact almost simple factors. For each $I\subset \{1,\ldots,n\}$ we let $$G_I=\prod_{i\in I} G_i <G~\text{and}~G^I=G/G_I.$$ In particular, $G^{\{1,\ldots,n\}}$ is a quotient of $G_0$ hence a compact group. Note that for $I\subseteq J$ there is a natural homomorphisms $\phi^I_J:G^I\to G^J$. We denote $\phi_J=\phi^\emptyset_J:G\to G^J$.
We define $\check{G}=\coprod_{I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}} G^I$. The sets of the form $$U\bigcup_{J'\subset \{1,\ldots,n\}\setminus J}\Big( (\phi^{J}_{J\cup J'})^{-1}(U)\setminus (\phi^{J'}_{J\cup J'})^{-1}(K_{J'})\Big),$$ where $J$ is a subset of $\{1,\ldots,n\}$, $U\subset G^J$ is open, $J'$ runs over all stets disjoint from $J$ and $K\subset G^{J'}$ are compact, generate a compact Hausdorff topology on $\check G$. We always refer to this topology when regarding $\check{G}$ as a topological space. In order to understand this topology it might be helpful to note that for $I\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and a sequence $g_n \in G^I$, $\check{G}\text{-}\lim g_n=\lim \phi_J(g_n)$ if and only if the right hand side limit, which is the standard limit in the group $G^J$, exists, where $J$ is the minimal set satisfying $I\subseteq J\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ for which $\phi^I_J(g_n)$ is bounded. We introduce a natural monoid structure on $\check{G}$ as follows. For $I,J\subseteq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ and $g\in G^I$, $h\in G^J$ we set $gh=\phi_I^{I\cap J}(g)\phi_J^{I\cap J}(h)\in G^{I\cap J}$. This makes $\check{G}$ a compact semi-topological monoid.
\[structure\] ${\text{WAP}}(G)\simeq \check{G}$.
We prove the theorem by induction on $n$, the number of non-compact simple factors of $G$. The induction basis is the case $n=0$, that is $G$ is compact, for which the theorem is clear. We let $j:G\to X$ be a monoid representation. For any $I\subsetneq \{1,\ldots,n\}$ we have by our induction hypothesis ${\text{WAP}}(G_I)=\check{G}_I$. In particular ${\text{WAP}}(G_I)$ has a unique left $G_I$-fixed point which is also a unique right $G_I$-fixed point (as $G_I$ has no compact factor). It follows that there is a unique left $G_I$-fixed point which is also a unique right $G_I$-fixed point in $\overline{j(G_I)}$. We denote it by $e_I$. We define a map $\check{G}\to X$ by sending $g\in G^I$ to $ge_I$. One checks that this is a continuous morphism.
WAP representations and mixing {#sec:mixing}
==============================
Let $k$ be a topological field. Let $V,V'$ be $k$-vector spaces and ${{\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle}}:V\times V'\to k$ a bilinear form. For $v\in V$ and $\phi\in V'$ we denote $\phi(v)={{\langle v,\phi \rangle}}$. We assume that the elements of $V'$ separates points in $V$. We denote by ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ the algebra of endomorphisms $T\in{\text{End}}(V)$ satisfying for every $\phi\in V'$ that $\phi\circ T$ is represented by an element (necessarily unique) of $V'$, to be denoted $T\phi$.
We endow $V$ with the [*weak topology*]{}, namely the weakest topology for which every $\phi\in V'$ is a continuous function to $k$. Note that the elements of ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ are continuous functions from $V$ to $V$. Considering the Tychonoff topology on $(V,\mbox{weak})^V$, using the embedding ${\text{End}}(V) \to V^V$, $T\mapsto (Tv)_v$, we obtain the [*weak operator topology*]{} on ${\text{End}}(V)$, and in particular on ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$. Check that the composition operation on ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ is continuous (separately) in each variable, thus ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ becaomes a semi-topological monoid. Note that $A\subset {\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ is precompact if and only if $Av$ is precompact in $V$ for every $v$.
Let $G$ be a topological group. By a [*continuous representation*]{} of $G$ to $V$ we mean a continuous monoid homomorphism $\rho:G\to {\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$. The representation $\rho$ is said to be [*weakly almost periodic*]{}, or WAP, if $\rho(G)$ is precompact in ${\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$, or equivalently, if $\rho(G)v$ is precompact in $V$ for every $v\in V$. In that case, $\overline{\rho(G)}$ is a semi-topological compact monoid.
Let $U$ be a Banach space, and consider a strongly continuous homomorphism $G\to {\text{Iso}}(U)$. Let $V=U^*$ and $V'=U$, the pairing be the usual one, and the representation $\rho$ be the contragredient representation. By Banach-Alaoglu theorem $\rho$ is a WAP representation. A special case of this example is any isometric representation on a refelxive Banach space, and in particular any unitary representation on a Hilbert space.
The following is an immediate application of Theorem \[universal\].
Let $G$ be a locally compact topological group and let $i:G\to X$ be its universal monoid representation into a compact semi-topological monoid. Then every WAP-representation $\rho:G\to {\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ factors as a representation of $X$, that is there exists a continuous monoid homomorphism $\rho':X\to {\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ such that $\rho=\rho'\circ i$.
For a locally compact topological group $G$, $\rho:G\to {\text{End}}(V)^{V'}$ is said to be [*mixing*]{} if for every $v\in V$, $\phi\in V'$, $$\lim_{g\to\infty}{{\langle gv,\phi \rangle}}= 0.$$ Theorem \[structure\] gives a structure theorem of representation of semi-simple groups.
\[thm:GHM\] Let $G$ be a semi-simple group and let $\rho:G\to V$ be a WAP representation. Then $V$ decomposes as a direct sum of representations $V=\bigoplus_{I\subset\{1,\ldots,n\}} V_I$ such that on $V_I$ the $G$-representation factors through $G^I$ and proper factors of $G^I$ have no fixed points in $V_I$. Furthermore, for every $I$, the representation $V_I$ is $G^I$ mixing.
A special case of Theorem \[thm:GHM\] is the classical theorem of Howe-Moore [@HM].
\[HM\] Let $G$ be a semisimple analytic group with a finite center (the $F$ point of a Zariski connected semisimple algebraic group $\mathbb{G}$, defined over a local field $F$) and no compact factor. Then every ergodic probability preserving action is mixing modulo the action kernel.
Apply the last corollary to the Koopman representation.
Banach modules {#sec:Banach}
==============
We shall now concentrate on the special case of uniformly bounded representations on Banach spaces. The main result of this section, Theorem \[dual\], is a strait forward consequence of Theorem \[thm:GHM\], when $G$ is a semisimple group. However, because of the importance of this special case, and for the convenience of the users, we decided to give a self contained discussion that avoids the more general notion of WAP representations. In particular, we shall provide an alternative proof for Theorem \[dual\]. Since we shall rely in this section only on Theorem \[mainthm\], we can state the results for the classe of quasi-semi-simple rather than semi-simple groups.
Let $V$ be a Banach space and $S$ the norm uniform structure on $V$. We denote by $\mathcal{B}(V)$ the algebra of bounded linear operator on $V$ and by ${\text{GL}}(V)$ the group of invertibles in $\mathcal{B}(V)$. A group representation $\rho:G\to {\text{GL}}(V)$ is said to be uniformly bounded if $$\sup_{g\in G} \|\rho(g)\|_{op} < \infty,$$ i.e. if it induces a uniform action on $(V,S)$. We denote by $\rho^*:G\to{\text{GL}}(V^*)$ the dual (contragradient) representation. Since $\|\rho(g)^*\|_{op}=\|\rho(g)\|_{op}$, $\rho^*$ is uniformly bounded iff $\rho$ is. We will focus on the case where $G$ is a topological group and the representation $\rho$ is continuous with respect to the strong operator topology.
We will say that $(V,\rho)$ is a $G$-Banach module if $V$ is a Banach space, $G$ is a topological group and $\rho:G\to {\text{GL}}(V)$ is a uniformly bounded representation which is continuous in the sense that the map $G\times V\to V,~(g,v)\mapsto \rho(g)(v)$ is continuous. We will say that $(V,\rho)$ is a $G$-Banach $*$-module if also the dual representation $\rho^*:G\to {\text{GL}}(V^*)$ is continuous in the same sense.
By Lemma \[Joint\] $\rho$, is continuous iff its orbit maps are continuous.
Apart from the norm topology, $V$ and $V^*$ are equipped with the weak and the weak$^*$ (hereafter $w$ and $w^*$) topologies. It is obvious that these topologies are compatible with the norm uniform structure. If $G$ is locally compact, it follows by a standard argument of approximating identity in $L^1(G)$, that a uniformly bounded representation is strongly continuous iff it is weakly continuous, see for example [@DLG Theorem 2.8]. This is also the case when $V$ is super-reflexive and $G$ is arbitrary.
\[dual\] Let $G$ be a quasi-semi-simple group. Let $(V,\rho)$ be a $G$-Banach $*$-module. Assume that no point in $V^*\setminus\{0\}$ is fixed by a non-compact normal subgroup of $G$. Then for every $f\in V^*$, $$\overline{Gf}^{w^*}=Gf\cup\{0\},$$ and $\rho$ is mixing in the sense that all matrix coefficients tend to 0.
Given $f\in V^*\setminus\{0\}$, consider the space $X=\overline{{\operatorname{conv}}(Gf)}\setminus\{0\}$. Let $S$ be the norm uniform structure on $X$ and $T$ the weak\*-topology. By the Hahn–Banach and Alaoglu’s theorems $(X,T)$ is locally compact. By Corollary \[orbits\], $Gf$ is weak\*-closed in $X$ and homeomorphic to the coset space $G/G_f$, where the stabiliser $G_f$ is compact. Thus the orbit $Gf$ is non-compact. It follows that it is not weak\*-closed in the compact space $\overline{{\operatorname{conv}}(Gf)}$, and hence that $\overline{Gf}^{w^*}=Gf\cup\{0\}$. Since the later is compact while $Gf$ is a proper $G$ space, it follows that $gf\to 0$ (in the weak-$*$ sense) when $g\to\infty$ in $G$.
It follows, for instance, that for a non-compact QSS simple group $G$, the existence of a nonzero invariant vector (or more generally a vector with a non-compact stabiliser) in a Banach $*$-module $V$ implies the existence of a non-zero invariant vector in $V^*$. This property does not hold for general groups; for example consider the regular representation of a discrete non-amenable group ${\Gamma}$ on the space $L_\infty({\Gamma})$.
When $V$ is reflexive, the a priory weaker assumption that $G$ doesn’t fix a vector in $V$, is actually sufficient.
Let $L$ be a group and $\rho:L\to{\text{GL}}(V)$ a linear representation on a reflexive Banach space $V$. If $L$ has a non-zero invariant vector in $V^*$ then it has a non-zero invariant vector in $V$.
Suppose that $f\in V^*$ is an $L$-invariant norm one functional. The invariant set of supporting unit vectors $$S_f=\{v\in V:\langle f,v\rangle=\| v\|=1\}$$ is non-empty by the Hahn–Banach theorem and weakly compact by Alaoglu’s theorem. Hence the Ryll-Nardzewski fixed-point theorem implies that $L$ admits a fixed point in $S_f$
\[reflexive\] Let $G$ be a quasi-semi-simple group. Let $(V,\rho)$ be a reflexive $G$-Banach module. Assume that no point in $V\setminus\{0\}$ is fixed by a non-compact normal subgroup of $G$. Then for every $f\in V^*$, $\overline{Gf}^{w^*}=Gf\cup\{0\}$, and $\rho$ is mixing.
We conclude this paper by remarking that for every group $G$, every WAP function on $G$ appears as a matrix coefficient of some reflexive representation. This result is due to [@kaijser], following the important main theorem of [@DFJP]. In this regard, one reverse the logical order and use Corollary \[reflexive\] in order to prove results on WAP compactifications.
[999999999]{}
U. Bader, A. Furman, T. Gelander, and N. Monod. Property [$(T)$]{} and rigidity for actions on [B]{}anach spaces. , 198(1):57–105, 2007.
U. Bader, A. Furman, The structure of stationary actions, in preparation.
A. Borel, N. R. Wallach, [*Continuous cohomology, discrete subgroups, and representations of reductive groups.*]{} Annals of Mathematics Studies, 94. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1980. xvii+388 pp.
M. Burger, S. Mozes, Groups acting on trees: from local to global structure, Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 92 (2000), 113-150.
P.E Caprace, C. Ciobotaru, Gelfand pairs and strong transitivity for Euclidean buildings, preprint.
C. Ciobotaru, A Unified proof of the Howe-Moore property, preprint.
M. Cowling, [*Sur les coefficients des représentations unitaires des groupes de Lie simples.*]{} Analyse harmonique sur les groupes de Lie (Sém., Nancy-Strasbourg 1976–1978), II, pp. 132–178, Lecture Notes in Math., 739, Springer, Berlin, 1979.
M. Cowling, [*The Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of a semisimple group.*]{} Colloq. Math. 41 (1979), no. 1, 89–94.
W. Davis, T. Figiel, W.B. Johnson, A. Pelczynski, Factoring weakly compact operators. J. Fund. Anal. 7 (1974), 311–327.
D. Dikranjan, M. Megrelishvili, [*Minimality conditions in topological groups.*]{} Recent progress in general topology. III, 229–327, Atlantis Press, Paris, 2014.
R. Ellis. Locally compact transformation groups. 24, (1957), 119–125.
R. Ellis, M. Nerurkar, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 313 (1989), no. 1, 103–119.
W. T. van Est, [*Dense imbeddings of Lie groups.*]{} Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A. 54 = Indagationes Math. 13, (1951). pp. 321–328.
T. Gelander, On fixed points and uniformly convex spaces, 2 pages, arXiv:0805.3813.
I.M. Gelʹfand, S.V. Fomin, [*Geodesic flows on manifolds of constant negative curvature.*]{} Uspehi Matem. Nauk (N.S.) 7, (1952). no. 1(47), 118–137.
M. Goto, [*Faithful representations of Lie groups. I.*]{} Math. Japonicae 1, (1948). 107–119.
M. Goto, [*Absolutely closed Lie groups.*]{} Math. Ann. 204 (1973), 337–341.
M. Goto, H. Yamabe, [*On continuous isomorphisms of topological groups.*]{} Nagoya Math. J. 1, (1950). 109–111.
E. Hopf, [*Statistik der geodätischen Linien in Mannigfaltigkeiten negativer Krümmung.*]{} Ber. Verh. Sächs. Akad. Wiss. Leipzig 91, (1939). 261–304.
R. Howe, C. Moore, Asymptotic properties of unitary representations, J. Funct. Anal. 32 (1979), no. 1, 72–96.
S. Kaijser, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 90 (1981), no. 3, 423–444.
K. de Leeuw, I. Glicksberg, J. Analyse Math. 15, 1965, 135–192.
A. Lubotzky, S. Mozes, [*Asymptotic properties of unitary representations of tree automorphisms.*]{} Harmonic analysis and discrete potential theory (Frascati, 1991), 289–298, Plenum, New York, 1992.
G.A. Margulis, [*Discrete Subgroups of Semisimple Lie Groups*]{}, Springer-Verlag, 1990.
F.I. Mautner, [*Geodesic flows on symmetric Riemann spaces.*]{} Ann. of Math. (2) 65 (1957), 416–431.
M. Mayer, [*Asymptotics of matrix coefficients and closures of Fourier-Stieltjes algebras.*]{} J. Funct. Anal. 143 (1997), no. 1, 42–54.
C. C. Moore, [*Ergodicity of flows on homogeneous spaces.*]{} Amer. J. Math. 88 1966 154–178.
C. C. Moore, [*Restrictions of unitary representations to subgroups and ergodic theory, in Group representations in mathematics and physics.*]{}, Lecture Notes in Physics, no. 6, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1970.
H. Omori , . [18]{}, (1966), [97–117]{}.
R. Palais. When proper maps are closed. 24, (1970), 835–836.
G. Prasad, Elementary proof of a theorem of Bruhat?Tits?Rousseau and of a theorem of Tits. Bull. Soc. Math. France 110 (1982), no. 2, 197–202.
I. E. Segal, J. von Neumann, , , [52]{}, [1950]{}, [509–517]{},
T. Sherman, [*A weight theory for unitary representations.*]{} Canad. J. Math. 18 1966 159–168.
W. Veech, Monatsh. Math. 88 (1979), no. 1, 55–68.
R. J. Zimmer, [*Orbit spaces of unitary representations, ergodic theory, and simple Lie groups.*]{} Ann. of Math. (2) 106 (1977), no. 3, 573–588.
[^1]: The research was partly supported by the ERC and the ISF
[^2]: In the classical case one can deduce this property using a root space decomposition of the Lie algebra.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We present a construction that produces infinite classes of Kähler groups that arise as fundamental groups of fibres of maps to higher dimensional tori. Following the work of Delzant and Gromov, there is great interest in knowing which subgroups of direct products of surface groups are Kähler. We apply our construction to obtain new classes of irreducible, coabelian Kähler subgroups of direct products of $r$ surface groups. These cover the full range of possible finiteness properties of irreducible subgroups of direct products of surface groups: For any $r\geq 3$ and $2\leq k \leq r-1$, our classes of subgroups contain Kähler groups that have a classifying space with finite $k$-skeleton while not having a classifying space with finitely many $(k+1)$-cells.
We also address the converse question of finding constraints on Kähler subdirect products of surface groups and, more generally, on homomorphisms from Kähler groups to direct products of surface groups. We show that if a Kähler subdirect product of $r$ surface groups admits a classifying space with finite $k$-skeleton for $k>\frac{r}{2}$, then it is virtually the kernel of an epimorphism from a direct product of surface groups onto a free abelian group of even rank.
address: 'Laboratoire de Mathématiques d’Orsay, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, 91405 Orsay, France'
author:
- Claudio Llosa Isenrich
bibliography:
- 'References.bib'
title: Kähler groups and subdirect products of surface groups
---
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'We consider overdetermined systems of difference equations for a single function $u$ which are consistent, and propose a general framework for their analysis. The integrability of such systems is defined as the existence of higher order symmetries in both lattice directions and various examples are presented. Two hierarchies of consistent systems are constructed, the first one using lattice paths and the second one as a deformation of the former. These hierarchies are integrable and their symmetries are related via Miura transformations to the Bogoyavlensky and the discrete Sawada-Kotera lattices, respectively.'
author:
- |
Pavlos Xenitidis[^1]\
Department of Mathematics & Computer Science\
Liverpool Hope University, L16 9JD Liverpool, UK
title: On consistent systems of difference equations
---
Introduction
============
Difference equations defined on an elementary quadrilateral of the lattice, also referred to as quad equations, constitute probably the most well known and well studied class of discrete integrable systems, see for instance [@HJN] and references therein. Their integrability can be established in various ways and the most rigorous one is provided by the existence of infinite hierarchies of generalized symmetries in both lattice directions, i.e. evolution type differential-difference equations compatible with them.
Even though integrable quad equations admit only one hierarchy of symmetries in one direction, the same hierarchy may also be compatible with $N$-quad equations, i.e. difference equations defined on $N>1$ consecutive quadrilaterals on the lattice, [@AP1; @BMX; @X3]. More interestingly, such differential-difference equations may also define symmetries of [*overdetermined systems of difference equations*]{} which are [*consistent*]{} [@MX]. For the continuous case the notion of consistent systems of hyperbolic type was introduced in [@AS]. In the discrete case, there exist sporadic examples of consistent systems which suggest that they could be related to a quad equation [@NRGO], or follow from quad equations via potentiation [@MX], or even from the degeneration of symmetries of two-quad equations as we demonstrate below. But there do exist integrable consistent systems which cannot be derived from a scalar equation in any of the aforementioned ways.
Here we consider first of all consistent systems which involve two two-quad equations, or, in our terminology, consistent systems of order two. We discuss their properties and symmetries and their relation to quad equations. Motivated by these examples, we propose a general framework for consistent systems of any order, and analyse the stencil on which they are defined. We discuss certain choices for dynamical variables and how they are related to the initial value problem. In particular the so-called standard dynamical variables are closely related to the symmetries of the system, and thus to its integrability.
We construct two novel hierarchies of consistent systems and discuss their integrability properties. The first hierarchy is constructed using a nice and simple method which employs lattice paths connecting the origin with the lattice points $(i,N+1-i)$, with $i=1,\ldots,N$. The integrability of the members of this hierarchy is established by the derivation of the lowest order symmetries in both lattice directions which are related to the Bogoyavlensky lattice. The construction of the second hierarchy is more involved and only two systems were constructed explicitly. Their symmetries are given and it is shown that they are related to the Sawada-Kotera lattice. Moreover it is shown how one hierarchy can be viewed as a deformation of the other, and how these hierarchies generalise two well-known quad equations, namely equation $$u_{n,m} (u_{n+1,m}+u_{n,m+1}) u_{n+1,m+1} + \alpha = 0$$ derived in [@MX], and Adler’s Tzitzeica equation studied in [@A], $$u_{n,m} (u_{n+1,m} + u_{n,m+1}) u_{n+1,m+1} + c = u_{n,m} + u_{n+1,m+1} + \frac{u_{n,m} u_{n+1,m} u_{n,m+1} u_{n+1,m+1}}{c}.$$ In this way we establish that these two quad equations are not some isolated objects but the lowest order members of two integrable hierarchies of consistent systems.
The paper is organised as follows. In Section \[sec:2q\] we consider some examples in order to explore certain connections of quad and two-quad equations with consistent systems and analyse the properties of the latter. The following section is devoted to the development of a framework for the study and analysis of consistent systems of higher order, whereas Section \[sec:sys\] deals with the derivation of two hierarchies of consistent systems, the study of their properties, and the analysis of their relation. Finally, in the concluding section we discuss various perspectives on the subject.
From scalar equations to consistent systems {#sec:2q}
===========================================
In this section we introduce our notation and give some necessary definitions in order to make our presentation self-contained. Then we consider overdetermined systems and check whether they are consistent or not. We discuss how such systems can be derived from scalar equations and finally we present a systematic method for their construction starting with a two-quad equation and its lowest order symmetry.
Throughout this paper we deal with autonomous partial difference equations, or systems thereof, involving one unknown function $u$ of two independent discrete variables $n$ and $m$. Since $n$, $m$ do not appear explicitly in any of our systems, we can, without loss of generality, present all equations evaluated at $n=m=0$. Therefore, in what follows we use the notation $u_{i,j}$ to denote the value of $u$ at the lattice point $(i,j)$, i.e. $u_{i,j} = u(i,j)$. Moreover, ${\mathcal{S}}$ and ${\mathcal{T}}$ will denote the shift operators in the first and the second direction, respectively, defined as ${\mathcal{S}}^i{\mathcal{T}}^j(u_{0,0}) = u_{i,j}$.
With a symmetry of a system of partial difference equations we mean an evolution type differential-difference equation compatible with the discrete system. More precisely,
Let $u$ depend also on a continuous variable $t$. Then, the differential-difference equation $$\partial_t u_{0,0} =F( [u])$$ defines a symmetry of the system of difference equations $Q([u])=0$ if $$\sum_{i,j} \frac{\partial Q}{\partial u_{i,j}} {\cal{S}}^i {\cal{T}}^j(F) = 0$$ holds on solutions of the system. Here, the notation $[u]$ means that these functions depend on a finite but otherwise unspecified number of shifts of $u$.
We exemplify the notion of consistency with the use of two examples of systems involving two two-quad equations
Consider the overdetermined system
\[eq:nonint-sys\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} u_{1,1} + u_{0,1} u_{0,2}) u_{1,2} - \alpha = 0,\label{eq:nonint-sys-E1} \\
&& u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1}) u_{2,1} + \alpha = 0.\label{eq:nonint-sys-E2}
\end{aligned}$$
In order to verify its consistency, first we write these equations as $$\label{eq:noint-sys-1}
u_{1,2}= \frac{\alpha}{u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} u_{1,1} + u_{0,1} u_{0,2})} ,\quad u_{2,1} = \frac{-\alpha}{ u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1})},$$ and then check if the compatibility condition ${\cal{S}}\left(u_{1,2}\right) = {\cal{T}}\left(u_{2,1}\right)$ holds modulo system (\[eq:noint-sys-1\]). Equivalently, we can check if the two different ways to compute $u_{2,2}$ lead to the same answer. If we shift the first equation in the first direction and then use (\[eq:noint-sys-1\]) to eliminate $u_{1,2}$ and $u_{2,1}$, we will end up with $$u_{2,2} = \frac{u_{0,0}}{u_{1,0} u_{0,1}} \frac{(u_{1,0} u_{2,0} +u_{0,1} u_{1,1}) (u_{0,1} u_{0,2} + u_{1,0} u_{1,1})}{u_{1,1}^2 - u_{2,0} u_{0,2}}.$$ On the other hand, the shift of the second equation in the second direction and the use of the system for the elimination of $u_{1,2}$ and $u_{2,1}$ lead to the same expression for $u_{2,2}$. This clearly shows that the compatibility condition ${\cal{S}}\left(u_{1,2}\right) = {\cal{T}}\left(u_{2,1}\right)$ does not impose further restrictions on $u$, and therefore system (\[eq:nonint-sys\]) is consistent. $\Box$
Another consistent system is the bilinear equations for the $\tau$-function of the lattice KdV given in [@NRGO],
\[eq:tau-H1\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& (p+q) \tau_{0,2} \tau_{1,0} - (p-q) \tau_{0,0} \tau_{1,2} - 2 q \tau_{0,1} \tau_{1,1} = 0, \label{eq:tau-H1-E1} \\
&& (p+q) \tau_{2,0} \tau_{0,1} - (q-p) \tau_{0,0} \tau_{2,1} - 2 p \tau_{1,0} \tau_{1,1} = 0, \label{eq:tau-H1-E2}
\end{aligned}$$
where $p,q \in {\mathbb{R}}$. It is a simple calculation to verify that this system is consistent and in particular to show that its consistency leads to $$\tau_{2,2} = \left( \frac{p+q}{p-q}\right)^2 \frac{\tau_{2,0} \tau_{0,2}}{\tau_{0,0}} - \frac{4 p q}{(p-q)^2} \frac{\tau_{1,1}^2}{\tau_{0,0}},$$ i.e. a discrete Toda equation. $\Box$
Consistent systems are relatively rare and probably more difficult to construct. Such systems may follow from the potentiation of lower order systems as it is demonstrated in the following example. See also [@MX] for other examples.
[[*Potentiation of a quad equation*]{}]{}
We start with equation [@MX] $$\label{eq:quad-eq}
v_{1,0} v_{0,1} \left(v_{0,0}+v_{1,1}\right) + 1 = 0$$ and its conservation law $$({\cal{T}}-1) \ln \frac{v_{0,0}}{v_{2,0} v_{1,0} v_{0,0}-1} = ({\cal{S}}-1) \ln (v_{0,0} v_{1,0}).$$ We can use this conserved form of (\[eq:quad-eq\]) to introduce a potential $u$ via the relations $$\label{eq:intro-ex}
\frac{u_{1,0}}{u_{0,0}}\,=\,\frac{v_{0,0}}{v_{2,0} v_{1,0} v_{0,0}-1}\,,\quad \frac{u_{0,1}}{u_{0,0}}\,=\,v_{0,0} v_{1,0}\,.$$ If we solve them for $u_{1,0}$ and $u_{0,1}$, their compatibility condition ${\cal{T}}(u_{1,0}) = {\cal{S}}(u_{0,1})$ is identically zero on solutions of (\[eq:quad-eq\]). On the other hand, it follows from the equations that $$\label{eq:intro-ex1}
v_{1,0} = \frac{u_{0,1}}{u_{0,0} v_{0,0}},\quad v_{2,0} = \frac{u_{0,0} (u_{0,0} v_{0,0}+u_{1,0})}{u_{1,0} u_{0,1}}.$$ The compatibility condition ${\cal{S}}(v_{1,0}) = v_{2,0}$ of the latter system implies $$\label{eq:intro-con}
v_{0,0} = \frac{u_{1,0}}{u_{1,1}-u_{0,0}}.$$ Substituting this into the first relation in (\[eq:intro-ex1\]) and the quad equation (\[eq:quad-eq\]) we end up with the system
\[eq:intro-sys\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& (u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1} - (u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) u_{0,0} u_{1,2} - u_{0,2} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} =0, \label{eq:intro-sys-1}\label{eq:intro-sys-E1}\\
&& (u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}) (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1} - u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0}\,=\,0.\label{eq:intro-sys-E2}
\end{aligned}$$
It can be shown that system (\[eq:intro-sys\]) is consistent. Indeed, rearranging the equations of the system and write them as $$\label{eq:intro-sol-sys}
u_{1,2} = \frac{ (u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1}}{ (u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) u_{0,0} + u_{0,2} u_{1,1} },\quad u_{2,1} = u_{1,0} - \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0}}{(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1}},$$ we can easily show that both of them lead to the same expression for $u_{2,2}$, namely $$u_{2,2} = u_{0,0} \left( 1 - \frac{u_{2,0}}{u_{0,1}} - \frac{u_{1,0}}{u_{0,2}} + \frac{u_{0,0}}{u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}} \,\frac{u_{1,0} u_{2,0}}{u_{0,1}u_{0,2}}\right).$$ Finally, using the Lax pair for (\[eq:quad-eq\]) found in [@MX] along with relations (\[eq:intro-ex1\]) and (\[eq:intro-con\]) we end up with $$\label{lax-pair}
\Psi_{1,0}= \left( \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & 1 & 0\\ \tfrac{u_{1,0}}{u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}} & \tfrac{-u_{0,1}}{u_{0,0}} & \lambda \\ -1 & 0 & \tfrac{u_{1,1} -u_{0,0}}{u_{1,0}} \end{array} \right) \Psi_{0,0},\quad \Psi_{0,1}= \left( \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & 0 & 1\\ -1 & 0 & \tfrac{u_{1,1} -u_{0,0}}{u_{1,0}} \\ \tfrac{u_{0,2} u_{1,1} + u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} -u_{0,2})}{\lambda u_{0,1} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,0})} & \tfrac{-1}{\lambda} & 0 \end{array} \right) \Psi_{0,0},$$ which is a Lax pair for system (\[eq:intro-sys\]). $\Box$
Consistent systems can be derived from a rather unusual approach employing symmetries. It is well known that symmetries provide us the means to find particular classes of solutions, aka group invariant solutions, by solving the overdetermined system of the equation and the vanishing of the characteristic of the symmetry generator. But if the symmetry generator is a rational expression, we may consider the vanishing of its denominator as an additional equation. This looks odd in first place but surprisingly it provides us with equations consistent with our original equation as it is explained in the following example. See also [@BMX] for quadrilateral equations defining particular solutions of two-quad equations and [@AP] for examples involving higher order quad equations.
[[*Degeneration of symmetries and consistency*]{}]{}\[ex:deg\]
Consider the first equation of system (\[eq:intro-sys\]) as a single two-quad equation, $$\label{eq:intro-ex2-3}
(u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1} - (u_{1,0}-u_{0,2}) u_{0,0} u_{1,2} - u_{0,2} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} =0.$$ It is a straightforward but cumbersome calculation to show that the differential-difference equations $$\label{eq:intro-ex2-4}
\partial_{t^\prime} u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1})}{ (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) (u_{-1,0}-u_{0,1}) u_{-1,1} - u_{-1,0} u_{0,0} u_{1,0} } ,\quad \partial_{s} u_{0,0} \,=\,\frac{u_{0,0} u_{0,1} u_{0,2}}{(u_{0,2}-u_{0,-1}) (u_{0,1}-u_{0,-2})}$$ define generalized symmetries of (\[eq:intro-ex2-3\]). What is not so obvious is that if we shift the denominator of the first symmetry forward in the first direction and set it equal to zero, we will end up with $$\label{eq:intro-ex2-1}
(u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}) (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) u_{0,1} - u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} =0,$$ which is consistent with (\[eq:intro-ex2-3\]). In other words we could have derived consistent system (\[eq:intro-sys\]) not as a potential form of (\[eq:quad-eq\]) but starting with equation (\[eq:intro-ex2-3\]) and requiring the degeneration of one of its symmetries.
Alternatively, we could have considered equation (\[eq:intro-ex2-1\]) and its generalized symmetries $$\label{eq:intro-ex2-2}
\partial_{t} u_{0,0} \,=\,u_{0,0}\,\left(\frac{u_{2,0}}{u_{-1,0}} + \frac{u_{1,0}}{u_{-2,0}} \right),\quad \partial_{s^\prime} u_{0,0} \, = \,\frac{u_{0,0} u_{0,-1} u_{1,-1}(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1})}{(u_{1,1}-u_{0,0}) (u_{0,1}-u_{1,-1}) u_{0,-1} + (u_{0,1}-u_{1,-1}) u_{0,0} u_{1,0} - u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1}}.$$ It is not difficult now to see that the denominator of the second symmetry shifted forward in the second direction is the defining function of (\[eq:intro-ex2-3\]). Thus we could have derived system (\[eq:intro-sys\]) in two different ways without any reference to the quad equation (\[eq:quad-eq\]).
A very interesting observation is that the lowest order symmetries of system (\[eq:intro-sys\]) are given by the first flow in (\[eq:intro-ex2-2\]) and the second one in (\[eq:intro-ex2-4\]), i.e. by the symmetries of (\[eq:intro-ex2-3\]) and (\[eq:intro-ex2-1\]) which do not degenerate on the solutions of the overdetermined system (\[eq:intro-sys\]). $\Box$
Our last example is on the construction of a consistent system starting with a two-quad equation and its symmetry. This constructive approach will be used later in the derivation of a consistent system of order three.
[[*Construction of a consistent system*]{}]{} \[ex:const\]
We start with equation $$\label{eq:ex2-e1}
E_1 := u_{0,1} u_{0,2} \left(1+ a (u_{0,0}+u_{1,0})\right) + u_{1,0} u_{0,2} \left(1+ a u_{1,1}\right) + u_{1,0} u_{1,1} \left(1+ a u_{1,2}\right) = 0$$ which possesses a generalised symmetry of order 3 in the second lattice direction generated by $$\label{eq:ex2-sym}
\partial_s u_{0,0} = u_{0,0} (1+ a u_{0,0}) (u_{0,3} u_{0,2} u_{0,1} - u_{0,-1} u_{0,-2} u_{0,-3}).$$ Suppose that $E_2(u_{0,0},u_{1,0},u_{2,0},u_{0,1},u_{1,1},u_{2,1}) = 0$ is another equation consistent with (\[eq:ex2-e1\]). If we shift it forward in the second direction, eliminate $u_{2,2}$ and $u_{1,2}$ using (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) and its shift, then the resulting expression must independent of $u_{0,2}$. Thus, if we differentiate it with respect to $u_{0,2}$ and then shift backwards in the second direction, we will end up with $$a u_{1,1} \left(a u_{0,1} (\partial_{u_{0,1}} E_2) + (1+ a u_{1,1} ) (\partial_{u_{1,1}} E_2)\right) + (1+a u_{1,1}) (1+a u_{2,1}) (\partial_{u_{2,1}} E_2) = 0,$$ after the use of the backward shift of equation (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) for the elimination of variables $u_{2,-1}$ and $u_{1,-1}$.
On other hand if we use (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) and its shift to eliminate $u_{2,0}$ and $u_{1,0}$ from $E_2$, then the resulting expression should be independent of $u_{0,0}$. Its differentiation with respect to $u_{0,0}$ yields $$(1+a u_{1,0}) \left((1+ a u_{0,0}) (\partial_{u_{0,0}} E_2) + a u_{1,0} ) (\partial_{u_{1,0}} E_2)\right) + a^2 u_{1,0} u_{2,0} (\partial_{u_{2,0}} E_2)=0.$$ These two linear partial differential equations are compatible and their solution is $$E_2 = F(z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4) = F \left( \frac{u_{1,0}}{1+ a u_{0,0}}, \frac{u_{2,0}}{1+a u_{1,0}}, \frac{1+ a u_{1,1}}{u_{0,1}}, \frac{1+ a u_{2,1}}{ a u_{1,1}}\right) .$$
Now we require $E_2=0$ to be consistent with the symmetry (\[eq:ex2-sym\]), i.e. the determining equation $$\label{eq:ex2-deteq}
\sum_{i=0}^{2} \sum_{j=0}^1 \left(u_{i,j} (1+ a u_{i,j}) (u_{i,j+3} u_{i,j+2} u_{i,j+1} - u_{i,j-1} u_{i,j-2} u_{i,j-3})\right) \left(\partial_{u_{i,j}} E_2\right) = 0$$ must hold on solutions of $E_1 = E_2 = 0 $. We eliminate variables $u_{\ell,-3}$, $u_{\ell,-2}$, $u_{\ell,-1}$, $u_{\ell,2}$, $u_{\ell,3}$ and $u_{\ell,4}$ with $\ell =1,2$, from (\[eq:ex2-deteq\]) using (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) and its shifts. This results to an equation which apart from the variables appearing in the arguments of $E_2$ involves also $u_{0,-2}$, $u_{0,-1}$, $u_{0,2}$ and $u_{0,3}$. The coefficient of $u_{3,0}$ leads to $$a z_1 z_2 (1+a z_1) F_{z_1} + z_2 (1+a z_2) F_{z_2} - a z_2 z_3 F_{z_3} - z_4 F_{z_4}=0.$$ The general solution to this equation can be written as $$F(z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4) = G(t_1,t_2,t_3) \quad {\text{where}} \quad t_1= \frac{z_1 z_3}{1+a z_1},\,\,t_2= \frac{1+a z_2 (1+a z_1)}{a z_1}, \,\,t_3 = \frac{a z_2 z_4 (1+a z_1)}{z_1}.$$ In view of this, the coefficient of $u_{0,-2}$ becomes $$(1+t_1+t_1 t_2) G_{t_2} - (a-t_1 t_3) G_{t_3} + a z_1 \left( t_1 (1+t_1) G_{t_1} - t_2 G_{t_2} + a t_2 G_{t_3} \right) = 0,$$ where $z_1$ plays the role of a separation variable. Solving this system for $G$ we end up with $$E_2 = F(z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4) = G(t_1,t_2,t_3) = H\left(\frac{t_3+ a t_2 + t_1 t_3 }{1 + t_1 + t_1 t_2}\right) = H \left(\frac{a^2 z_1 z_2 (1+z_4) + a z_2 (1+z_4 +z_1 z_3 z_4) + 1}{z_1 (z_3 + a (1+z_2 z_3))} \right) = H(x).$$
Finally, taking into account this form for $E_2$ and after the elimination of all variables as described above, the determining equation (\[eq:ex2-deteq\]) can be written as $ x\, H^\prime(x) = 0 $, which clearly implies that $H(x) = x$ and $x=0$ is the sought equation, or explicitly $$u_{2,0}\left(1+a u_{2,1}\right) \left\{ u_{1,0} \left(1+a u_{1,1}\right) + u_{0,1} \left(1+a (u_{0,0}+u_{1,0})\right)\right\} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} \left\{\left(1+ a u_{0,0}\right) \left(1+ a u_{1,0}\right) + a u_{2,0} \left(1+ a (u_{0,0}+u_{1,0})\right)\right\}=0. \label{eq:ex2-e2}$$ It can be easily checked that equations (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) and (\[eq:ex2-e2\]) are consistent and (\[eq:ex2-sym\]) is a symmetry of the system.
A symmetry in the first direction can be found using only equation (\[eq:ex2-e2\]) and the method of [@X3] and can be written as
\[eq:sym-V\] $$\partial_t u_{0,0} = \frac{V_{0,0} p_{0,0}}{q_{0,0} q_{-1,0}} \left(\frac{V_{1,0} V_{2,0} p_{-1,0}}{q_{1,0}} - \frac{V_{-1,0} V_{-2,0} p_{1,0}}{q_{-2,0}} - r_{0,0}\right),$$ where $V_{0,0} = u_{0,0} (1+\alpha u_{0,0})$ and $$\begin{aligned}
q_{0,0} &=& (1+\alpha u_{0,0}) (1+\alpha u_{1,0}) (1+\alpha u_{2,0}) + \alpha u_{-1,0} \left(1+ \alpha(u_{0,0}+u_{1,0}+u_{2,0}) + \alpha^2 (u_{0,0} u_{1,0} + u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + u_{2,0} u_{0,0})\right),\\
p_{0,0} &=& (1+\alpha u_{0,0}) (1+\alpha u_{1,0}) + \alpha u_{-1,0} \left(1+ \alpha(u_{0,0}+u_{1,0}) \right)= \alpha^{-1} \partial_{u_{2,0}} q_{0,0},\\
r_{0,0} &=& u_{2,0} u_{1,0} (1+ \alpha u_{-1,0})- u_{-2,0} u_{-1,0} (1+ \alpha u_{1,0})+ \alpha u_{2,0} u_{-2,0} (u_{1,0}-u_{-1,0}).
\end{aligned}$$
It should be noted that the Miura transformation $w_{0,0} = u_{2,0} p_{0,0}/q_{0,0}$ maps symmetry (\[eq:sym-V\]) to the Bogoyavlensky lattice $\partial_t w_{0,0} = w_{0,0} (1+ a w_{0,0}) (w_{3,0} w_{2,0} w_{1,0} - w_{-1,0} w_{-2,0} w_{-3,0})$. $\Box$
Overdetermined systems of difference equations and consistency {#sec:def}
==============================================================
The systems we discussed in the previous section have three properties in common.
1. The two equations constituting these systems are defined on different stencils. The first equation of these systems is defined on two consecutive quadrilaterals in the vertical direction, whereas the second equation is given on two consecutive quadrilaterals horizontally. The two stencils form a staircase with two steps and their intersection is an elementary quadrilateral on the lattice.
2. Every equation of the system can be solved uniquely for the values of $u$ at the corners of the rectangular stencil they are defined. Specifically, equations (\[eq:nonint-sys-E1\]), (\[eq:tau-H1-E1\]), (\[eq:intro-sys-E1\]) and (\[eq:ex2-e1\]) can be solved uniquely for $u_{0,0}$, $u_{0,2}$, $u_{1,0}$ and $u_{1,2}$, whereas (\[eq:nonint-sys-E2\]), (\[eq:tau-H1-E2\]), (\[eq:intro-sys-E2\]) and (\[eq:ex2-e2\]) for $u_{0,0}$, $u_{2,0}$, $u_{0,1}$ and $u_{2,1}$.
3. They are consistent.
Using these properties as a prototype, we propose their generalization to overdetermined systems involving $N$ equations for one function $u$. More precisely, we consider overdetermined systems of $N$ equations for a scalar function $u$ which satisfy the following three properties. For simplicity in what follows we denote such a system with $C_N$ and refer to $N$ as its order.
1. [*Each equation of the system is defined on a different stencil.*]{}\
More precisely, with a given integer $N$ we consider the line $n+m=N+1$ on the ${\mathbb{Z}}^2$ lattice and the right isosceles triangle $\Delta_N$ with vertices at the points $(0,0)$, $(N+1,0)$ and $(0,N+1)$. The $N$ rectangles ${\cal{R}}_i$ inscribed in $\Delta_N$ with vertices at the lattice points $(0,0)$, $(i,0)$, $(0,j)$ and $(i,j)$, with $i+j=N+1$ and $i=1,\ldots, N$, are the stencils of the $N$ equations of the system, i.e. $$\label{eq:gen-cn}
C_N = \left\{ E_{i}\left(u_{0,0},\ldots,u_{i,0}, \ldots, u_{0,j},\ldots,u_{i,j}\right) = 0,\quad i=1,\ldots,N \,\,, {\mbox{ and }}\,\,\, j= N-i+1\right\} .$$
2. [*Each equation of the system can be solved uniquely for any of the values of $u$ at the corners of the rectangle it is defined*]{}.\
This means that $E_i=0$ can be solved uniquely for any of $u_{0,0}$, $u_{i,0}$, $u_{0,N+1-i}$ and $u_{i,N+1-i}$.\
A consequence of this requirement is that system $C_N$ can be solved uniquely for any set of values of $u$ lying on the same edge of the triangle $\Delta_N$.
3. [*System $C_N$ is consistent.*]{}\
The previous requirement along with the fact that variable $u_{i,N+1-i}$ appears only in $E_i =0$ imply that $C_N$ can always be solved uniquely for $(u_{1,N},\ldots,u_{N,1})$. In particular this allows us to rewrite system (\[eq:gen-cn\]) in the solved form $$\label{eq:gen-cn-1}
C_N = \left\{u_{i,N+1-i} = F_{i}\left(u_{0,0},\ldots,u_{i,0}, \ldots, u_{0,N+1-i},\ldots,u_{i-1,N+1-i}\right),\quad i=1,\ldots,N\right\}.$$ Using this equivalent form of $C_N$, we define consistency as follows.
\[def:con\] We call system (\[eq:gen-cn-1\]) consistent if the following relations hold on solutions of system (\[eq:gen-cn-1\]). $$\label{eq:con-con}
{\cal{T}}^{i-j}(F_{i}) - {\cal{S}}^{i-j}(F_j) = 0,\quad \forall \,\, i>j.$$
\[rem:con-ch\] It is sufficient to check only the consistency of consecutive equations, i.e. conditions (\[eq:con-con\]) with $(i,j) =(\ell+1,\ell)$, for all $\ell=1,\ldots,N-1$.
Alternatively, we can state that the system is consistent if the values $u_{i,j}$, with $0 < i,j \le N$ and $N+1<i+j \le 2 N$, can be found uniquely using the equations of $C_N$. For example when $N=2$ and $3$ this means to find uniquely the values of $u$ at the white disks in Figure \[fig:cn\]. It should be noted that all these values are in general functions of the $\tfrac{(N+1)(N+2)}{2}$ values of $u$ involved in $\Delta_{N-1}$.
\[rem:con-com\] The case $N=1$ corresponds to scalar quad equations, see also Figure \[fig:cn\], for which obviously the above notion of consistency is not applicable. However we include quad equations in our considerations because they may be interpreted as the first members of hierarchies of integrable consistent systems, see also next section. When $N=2$ the three requirements R1–R3 clearly coincide with the properties we listed at the beginning of this section. $\Box$
From the previous remark it is obvious that the second order systems (\[eq:nonint-sys\]), (\[eq:tau-H1\]), (\[eq:intro-sys\]) and (\[eq:ex2-e1\], \[eq:ex2-e2\]) satisfy the three requirements R1-R3. It is not difficult to see that the third order system
\[eq:sys-ord3\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,3} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) (u_{0,1}-u_{1,2})(u_{0,2}-u_{1,3}) + \nonumber \\
&&\qquad \qquad u_{1,0} \left( u_{0,2} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) (u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}) + u_{1,3} (u_{0,0} (u_{1,2}-u_{0,1})+u_{0,1} u_{1,1})\right) =0,\\
&& u_{0,2} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) (u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}) (u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}) (u_{1,1}-u_{2,2}) + \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad u_{2,0} \left( u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} (u_{1,1}-u_{0,0}) + u_{1,0} (u_{1,1}-u_{2,2}) (u_{0,0} (u_{0,1}-u_{1,2})-u_{0,1} u_{1,1} \right)=0,\\
&& u_{0,1} (u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}) (u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}) (u_{2,0}-u_{3,1}) + u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} =0,\end{aligned}$$
satisfies R1 and R2. For the consistency requirement we write the system as $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{1,3} =\frac{u_{0,2} \left(u_{0,3}+u_{1,0}\right) \left(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}\right) \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right)}{u_{0,0} \left(u_{0,3}+u_{1,0}\right) \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right)+u_{1,1} \left(u_{0,3} u_{1,2}-u_{0,1} \left(u_{0,3}+u_{1,0}\right)\right)},\\
&& u_{2,2} = \frac{u_{1,1} \left(u_{1,0} \left(u_{0,0} \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right)-u_{0,1} u_{1,1}\right) u_{2,0}+u_{0,1} \left(u_{1,1}-u_{0,0}\right) u_{2,1} u_{2,0}+u_{0,2} \left(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}\right) \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right) \left(u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}\right)\right)}{u_{1,0} \left(u_{0,0} \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right)-u_{0,1} u_{1,1}\right) u_{2,0}+u_{0,2} \left(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}\right) \left(u_{0,1}-u_{1,2}\right) \left(u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}\right)},\\
&& u_{3,1} = u_{2,0}+\frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0}}{u_{0,1} \left(u_{0,0}-u_{1,1}\right) \left(u_{1,0}-u_{2,1}\right)},\end{aligned}$$ and then check if the compatibility conditions ${\cal{S}}(u_{1,3}) = {\cal{T}}(u_{2,2})$, ${\cal{S}}(u_{2,2}) = {\cal{T}}(u_{3,1})$, ${\cal{S}}^2(u_{1,3}) = {\cal{T}}^2(u_{3,1})$ hold on solutions of the system. For the first two conditions we have to take into account only the system, whereas for the last one we have to use also the shifts of the system in order to replace $u_{2,3}$ and $u_{3,2}$. After some calculations with the help of symbolic software it follows that these conditions do hold on solutions of (\[eq:sys-ord3\]) and thus the system is consistent. $\Box$
Our requirements for the solvability of $C_N$ allow us to determine uniquely the solution of the system once appropriate initial values are given. More precisely,
Consider the infinitely extended edges of triangle $\Delta_N$, i.e. the lines $n=0$, $m=0$ and $n+m= N+1$. If initial values are given at
1. all the points on any two of these three lines, i.e. any two of the sets of values $\{u_{0,k}\}$, $\{u_{k,0}\}$ and $\{u_{k,N-k+1}\}$ for all $k\in {\mathbb{Z}}$,
2. and all the interior points of $\Delta_N$, i.e. $\{u_{a,b}\}$, for all $0<a,b<N$ with $a+b <N+1$,
then the solution $u$ of the consistent system $C_N$ can be determined uniquely everywhere on the ${\mathbb{Z}}^2$ lattice.
In particular, we refer to the values of $u$ along the lines $m=0$ and $n=0$, i.e. $u_{k,0}$ and $u_{0,k}$ for all $k \in {\mathbb{Z}}$, and all the interior points of $\Delta_N$ as [ *the standard dynamical variables*]{}.
The standard dynamical variables are of particular interest as they are involved in the generalized symmetries and the integrability of the underlying consistent system.
\[def:int-1\] We call consistent system $C_N$ integrable if it admits infinite hierarchies of symmetries which depend on a finite but otherwise unspecified number of standard dynamical variables.
All the consistent systems we have at our disposal admit two hierarchies of symmetries none of which involve any dynamical variable $u_{a,b}$ with $0<a,b<N$ and $a+b <N+1$. Thus we can slightly modify the above definition as follows.
\[def:int\] We call consistent system $C_N$ integrable if it admits infinite hierarchies of symmetries in both lattice directions each one of which depends on a finite but otherwise unspecified number of dynamical variables $u_{k,0}$ or $u_{0,k}$ only.
The second order systems (\[eq:intro-sys\]) and (\[eq:ex2-e1\], \[eq:ex2-e2\]) are integrable and their lowest order symmetries were given in the previous section in Examples \[ex:deg\] and \[ex:const\], respectively. The third order system (\[eq:sys-ord3\]) is also integrable and its lowest order symmetries are generated by $$\label{eq:sys-ord3-sm1}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = u_{0,0} \left(\frac{u_{3,0}}{u_{-1,0}} + \frac{u_{2,0}}{u_{-2,0}} + \frac{u_{1,0}}{u_{-3,0}}\right)$$ and $$\label{eq:sys-ord3-sm2}
\partial_s u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0} u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{0,3}}{(u_{0,3}+u_{0,-1}) (u_{0,2}+u_{0,-2}) (u_{0,1}+u_{0,-3}) },$$ respectively. $\Box$
Lattice paths and consistent systems of difference equations {#sec:sys}
============================================================
Having developed a general framework for consistent systems, in this section we present the construction of a hierarchy of consistent systems which employs lattice paths. We discuss the properties of these systems and prove their integrability by deriving their symmetries. Moreover we present a deformation for the first three members of this family and discuss their relations to known quad equations.
We start our derivations with the construction of certain polynomials which will be the building blocks of the hierarchy of consistent systems.
- Consider all the lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(i,j)$, where $i \ge 0$, $j \ge 0$ and $i+j > 0$, which can be constructed by moving only parallel to the positive direction of either axis. For every choice of $i$ and $j$ there exist $\tfrac{(i+j)!}{i! j!}$ different paths which connect $i+j+1$ points on the lattice, including the origin and the endpoint $(i,j)$. We denote these paths with ${\cal{P}}_{(i,j)}^{(a)}$, where $a = 1,\ldots,\tfrac{(i+j)!}{i! j!}$.
- With every path ${\cal{P}}_{(i,j)}^{(a)}$ we associate the product of the values of the function $u$ at the $i+j+1$ lattice points connected by the path, $${\cal{P}}_{(i,j)}^{(a)} = u_{0,0} \overset{i+j-1\, \text{ terms}}{\cdots \cdots \cdots} u_{i,j}.$$
- With the above association, we define the [*multilinear and homogeneous polynomials of degree*]{} $i+j+1$ $$Q_{(i,j)} = \sum_{a=1}^{(i+j)!/i! j!} {\cal{P}}^{(a)}_{(i,j)}, \quad {\mbox{with }} \quad i \ge 0,\,\,j \ge 0 {\mbox{~ and ~}} i+j > 0.$$
By exploiting the combinatorics in the construction of polynomials $Q_{(i,j)}$, we can find two different ways to determine these polynomials recursively as it is described below.
\[lem:def-Q\] If we define
\[eq:def-Q\] $$\begin{array}{ll} Q_{(i,j)} = 0, &{\text{ if at least one index is negative}}, \\ Q_{(0,0)} = u_{0,0}, & \end{array}$$ then polynomials $Q_{(i,j)}$, with $i,j \ge 0$ and $i+j>0$, can be determined recursively by $$\label{eq:def-Qb}
Q_{(i,j)} = u_{0,0} \left\{{\cal{S}} \left(Q_{(i-1,j)}\right) + {\cal{T}} \left(Q_{(i,j-1)}\right)\right\} ,$$ or $$\label{eq:def-Qc}
Q_{(i,j)} = \left\{Q_{(i,j-1)} + Q_{(i-1,j)}\right\} u_{i,j} .$$
Since we start always from the origin and we can make only one step every time either right or up, initially we can move from $u_{0,0}$ either to $u_{1,0}$ or to $u_{0,1}$, respectively. Then we use the paths starting from $(1,0)$ terminating at $(i,j)$ which are encoded into ${\cal{S}} (Q_{(i-1,j)})$, and the ones from $(0,1)$ ending at $(i,j)$ given by ${\cal{T}}(Q_{(i,j-1)})$. This observation and the properties of the polynomials lead to the first recursive definition (\[eq:def-Qb\]). Alternatively, we can reach point $(i,j)$ either from $(i,j-1)$ by moving one step up, or from $(i-1,j)$ by making one step right. The first approach is equivalent to $Q_{(i,j-1)} u_{i,j}$ and the second one to $Q_{(i-1,j)} u_{i,j}$ whereas their sum gives the second definition (\[eq:def-Qc\]).
With the above polynomials at our disposal and for any $N \ge 1$, we define the overdetermined system of equations $$\label{eq:SN}
\Sigma_N = \left\{Q_{(i,N-i+1)} + (-1)^{N-i} \alpha_N =0 \, , \quad i = 1, \ldots, N \right\},$$ where $\alpha_N \in {\mathbb{R}}^*$ is a parameter.
The geometric construction of $Q_{(i,j)}$ and their properties clearly imply that system $\Sigma_N$ satisfies requirements R1 and R2. Moreover,
\[prop:con\] System $\Sigma_N$ is consistent.
To check the consistency of system $\Sigma_{N}$ (\[eq:SN\]) first we solve its equations for $u_{i,N-i+1}$. In view of (\[eq:def-Qc\]) this leads to $$\label{eq:con-u}
u_{i,N-i+1} = \frac{-(-1)^{N-i} \alpha_{N}}{ F_i} := \frac{-(-1)^{N-i} \alpha_{N}}{Q_{(i-1,N-i+1)} + Q_{(i,N-i)}},\quad i=1,\ldots N.$$ Next we have to examine if $ (-1)^i {\cal{T}}^{i-j}(F_i) = (-1)^j {\cal{S}}^{i-j}(F_j)$, on solutions of $\Sigma_N$ for all $i,j=1,\ldots,N$ and $i > j$. For our purposes it is sufficient to see if these relations hold for any pair of consecutive values for indices $i$ and $j$, i.e. for any $(i,j) = (\ell+1,\ell)$ with $\ell=1, \ldots, N-1$. With these choices the above requirements become $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal{S}}(F_{\ell}) + {\cal{T}}(F_{\ell+1}) &=& {\cal{S}}\Big(Q_{(\ell-1,N-\ell+1)} + Q_{(\ell,N-\ell)}\Big) + {\cal{T}}\Big(Q_{(\ell,N-\ell)} + Q_{(\ell+1,N-\ell-1)}\Big) \\
&=& {\cal{S}}(Q_{(\ell-1,N-\ell+1)}) + {\cal{T}} (Q_{(\ell,N-\ell)}) + {\cal{S}}(Q_{(\ell,N-\ell)}) + {\cal{T}} (Q_{(\ell+1,N-\ell-1)}) \\
&=& \frac{Q_{(\ell,N-\ell+1)}}{u_{0,0}} + \frac{Q_{(\ell+1,N-\ell)}}{u_{0,0}} = \frac{-(-1)^{N-\ell} \alpha_N}{u_{0,0}} + \frac{-(-1)^{N-\ell-1} \alpha_N}{u_{0,0}} = 0,\end{aligned}$$ where we have also used (\[eq:def-Qb\]) and (\[eq:SN\]) in the last two steps, respectively. This clearly shows that for any two consecutive values of $i$, relations (\[eq:con-u\]) are consistent on solutions of $\Sigma_{N}$, and thus $\Sigma_{N}$ is consistent.
Hence $\Sigma_N$ satisfies all three requirements R1–R3. To prove $\Sigma_{N}$ is integrable, we study the symmetries of two equations, namely of $Q_{(N,1)} + \alpha_N =0$ and $Q_{(1,N)} - (-1)^N \alpha_{N}=0$, using the method of [@X3].
\[prop:sym\] Equation $Q_{(N,1)} + \alpha_N = 0$ admits infinite hierarchies of generalised symmetries in the first direction. The first member of this hierarchy has order $N+1$ and is generated by $$\label{eq:UN}
\partial_t u_{0,0} \,=\, u_{0,0} \left({\cal{S}}-1\right) \prod_{k=0}^{N} {\cal{S}}^{k-N-1} \left(\frac{1}{Q_{(N+1,0)} \,-\,\alpha_N} \right).$$ Respectively, equation $Q_{(1,N)} - (-1)^N \alpha_N = 0$ admits infinite hierarchies of generalised symmetries in the second direction. The first member of this hierarchy has order $N+1$ and is generated by $$\label{eq:UM}
\partial_s u_{0,0} \,=\, u_{0,0} \left({\cal{T}}-1\right) \prod_{k=0}^{N} {\cal{T}}^{k-N-1} \left(\frac{1}{Q_{(0,N+1)} \,+\,(-1)^N \alpha_N} \right).$$
Because of the invariance of $\Sigma_N$ under the transformation $\left(u_{k,l},\alpha_N \right) \mapsto \left(u_{l,k},(-1)^{N+1} \alpha_N \right)$, it is sufficient to study the symmetries of equation $Q_{(N,1)}+\alpha_N=0$. This can be done on a case-by-case basis and it is sufficient to show that $\partial_t Q_{(N,1)} =0$ on solutions of $Q_{(N,1)}+\alpha_N=0$ (see also [@MX] for $N=1$ and [@X3] for $N=2$).
We can now extend the symmetries of these equations to symmetries of system $\Sigma_{N}$.
The differential-difference equations (\[eq:UN\]) and (\[eq:UM\]) define the lowest order symmetries of system $\Sigma_{N}$.
Firstly we observe that relations $$\label{eq:con2}
{\cal{T}}^p(Q_{(N,1)}) = (-1)^p {\cal{S}}^p (Q_{(N-p,p+1)}), \quad {\cal{S}}^p(Q_{(1,N)}) = (-1)^p {\cal{T}}^p (Q_{(p+1,N-p)}),\quad p= 1,\ldots, N-1,$$ hold on solutions of $\Sigma_{N}$ as a consequence of the consistency of $\Sigma_N$. It follows from the first relation in (\[eq:con2\]) that $Q_{(N-p,p+1)}= (-1)^p {\cal{S}}^{-p} {\cal{T}}^p(Q_{(N,1)})$ for all $p=1,\ldots,N-1$, and thus $$\partial_t Q_{(N-p,p+1)}= (-1)^p {\cal{S}}^{-p} {\cal{T}}^p( \partial_t Q_{(N,1)}).$$ But since $\partial_t Q_{(N,1)} =0$ on solutions of $\Sigma_{N}$, we conclude that also $\partial_t Q_{(N-p,p+1)}=0$. Similarly the second relation in (\[eq:con2\]) leads to $Q_{(p+1,N-p)}= (-1)^p {\cal{S}}^{p} {\cal{T}}^{-p}(Q_{(1,N)})$ and subsequently to $\partial_s Q_{(p+1,N-p)}= (-1)^p {\cal{S}}^{p} {\cal{T}}^{-p}(\partial_sQ_{(1,N)})$. Since $\partial_sQ_{(1,N)}=0$ on solutions of $\Sigma_{N}$, we arrive at $\partial_s Q_{(p+1,N-p)}= 0$.
A final remark is that the difference substitution $$\label{eq:difsub}
v_{0,0} = \frac{1}{Q_{(N+1,0)} - \alpha_{N}}$$ maps (\[eq:UN\]) to the Bogoyavlensky lattice $$\label{eq:Bog}
\partial_t v_{0,0} = - v_{0,0} (\alpha_{N} v_{0,0} + 1) \left( v_{N+1,0} \ldots v_{1,0} - v_{-1,0} v_{-2,0} \ldots v_{-N-1,0} \right).$$ Indeed, in terms of the above substitution symmetry (\[eq:UN\]) can be written as $\partial_t u_{0,0} = u_{0,0} ({\cal{S}}-1) \prod_{k=0}^{N-1} v_{k-N-1,0}$, whereas the $t$-derivative of (\[eq:difsub\]) is $$\partial_t v_{0,0} = -v_{0,0}^2 Q_{(N+1,0)} \sum_{i=0}^{N+1} \frac{\partial_t u_{i,0}}{u_{i,0}}= -v_{0,0} (\alpha_N v_{0,0}+1) \sum_{i=0}^N ({\cal{S}}-1) \prod_{k=0}^{N+1} v_{i+k-N-1}= -v_{0,0} (\alpha_N v_{0,0}+1) \left( \prod_{i=1}^{N+1} v_{i,0} - \prod_{i=1}^{N+1} v_{-i,0} \right).$$ Similar considerations clearly hold for (\[eq:UM\]). $\Box$
We can easily implement recursive formulae (\[eq:def-Q\]) for the construction of $\Sigma_N$ and below we give the systems which correspond to $N=1$, $2$ and $3$.
- System $\Sigma_1$ is the known quadrilateral equation $$\label{eq:2}
u_{0,0} \left(u_{1,0} + u_{0,1}\right) u_{1,1} + \alpha_1 = 0,$$ which was first given in [@MX] along with its lowest order symmetries. $$\label{eq:2sym}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{2,0} u_{1,0} - u_{-1,0} u_{-2,0})}{\prod_{i=0}^2 (u_{i,0} u_{i-1,0} u_{i-2,0} - \alpha_1 )},\quad
\partial_s u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{0,2} u_{0,1} - u_{0,-1} u_{0,-2})}{\prod_{i=0}^2 (u_{0,i} u_{0,i-1} u_{0,i-2} - \alpha_1)}.$$ It was also derived in a different context in [@FX].
- System $\Sigma_2$ is constituted by the two equations
\[eq:3\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{1,1} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} \right) u_{1,2} - \alpha_2 = 0,\\
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + u_{1,0} u_{1,1} +u_{0,1} u_{1,1}\right) u_{2,1} + \alpha_2 = 0.\end{aligned}$$
Its lowest order symmetries in both directions are generated by $$\label{eq:3sym}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{3,0} u_{2,0} u_{1,0} - u_{-1,0} u_{-2,0} u_{-3,0})}{\prod_{i=0}^3 (u_{i,0} u_{i-1,0} u_{i-2,0} u_{i-3,0} - \alpha_2 )}, \quad \partial_s u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{0,3} u_{0,2} u_{0,1} - u_{0,-1} u_{0,-2} u_{0,-3})}{\prod_{i=0}^3 (u_{0,i} u_{0,i-1} u_{0,i-2} u_{0,i-3} + \alpha_2)},$$ see also [@X3].
- System $\Sigma_3$ is given by the three equations
\[eq:4\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{0,3}\right) u_{1,3} + \alpha_3,\\
&& u_{0,0} \left(u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{2,1}+ u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} + u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2} \right) u_{2,2} - \alpha_3 = 0,\\
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} + u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{2,1} +u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} +u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1}\right) u_{3,1} + \alpha_3 = 0= 0,\end{aligned}$$
and its lowest order symmetries are generated by $$\label{eq:4sym}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{4,0} u_{3,0} u_{2,0} u_{1,0} - u_{-1,0} u_{-2,0} u_{-3,0} u_{-4,0})}{\prod_{i=0}^4 (u_{i,0} u_{i-1,0} u_{i-2,0} u_{i-3,0} u_{i-4,0} - \alpha_3 )},\quad
\partial_s u_{0,0} = \frac{u_{0,0}^2 (u_{0,4} u_{0,3} u_{0,2} u_{0,1} - u_{0,-1} u_{0,-2} u_{0,-3} u_{0,-4})}{\prod_{i=0}^4 (u_{0,i} u_{0,i-1} u_{0,i-2} u_{0,i-3} u_{0,i-4} - \alpha_3)}.$$
We could have considered lattice paths connecting $(i,0)$ to $(0,j)$ by moving only left or up. This construction leads to consistent systems which actually follow from $\Sigma_N$ by reflecting them over the line $x=0$ (resp. over the line $y=0$), or equivalently by employing the point transformation $u_{k,l}\mapsto u_{k,-l}$ (resp. $u_{k,l} \mapsto u_{-k,l}$). We may also combine the latter transformations with a reciprocal one to derive other equivalent forms of $\Sigma_N$. There is however an interesting construction which employs these two transformations and polynomials $Q_{(N,1)}$, and leads to $N$-quad equations which may be viewed as a deformation of $Q_{(N,1)} + \alpha_{N} =0$. The derivation and some properties of these $N$-quad equations are summarised in the following statement.
\[prop:Tz-all\] Let $R_{(i,j)}$ be the polynomial following from $Q_{(i,j)}$ according to $$R_{(i,j)} = {\cal{S}}^i \left( \left. Q_{(i,j)}\right|_{u_{k,l} \rightarrow \frac{1}{u_{-k,l}}}\right) \prod_{k=0}^{i} \prod_{l=0}^{j} u_{k,l}= {\cal{T}}^j \left( \left. Q_{(i,j)}\right|_{u_{k,l} \rightarrow \frac{1}{u_{k,-l}}} \right) \prod_{k=0}^{i} \prod_{l=0}^{j} u_{k,l}\,.$$ Then the equation $$\label{eq:Tz-all}
Q_{(N,1)} + c_N \,=\, R_{(N,1)} + \frac{1}{c_N} \prod_{i=0}^{N} u_{i,0} u_{i,1},\quad N=1,2,3,\ldots,$$ where $c_N$ is a real constant, admits a hierarchy of symmetries in the first lattice direction. The first member of this hierarchy has order $N+1$ and is generated by $$\label{eq:sym-NT-n}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = u_{0,0} {\cal{S}}^{-N} \left( \frac{\prod_{i=0}^{N+1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(N-1,0)} - c_N \right)}{\prod_{i=0}^{N-1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(N+1,0)} -c_N \right) }\right) (1-{\cal{S}}^{-N-1}) \left(\frac{1}{ Q_{(N+1,0)} -c_N} - \frac{1}{ {\cal{S}}\left(Q_{(N-1,0)} -c_N\right)}\right).$$ Moreover, by setting $u \rightarrow u \epsilon^{-1}$, $c_N \rightarrow \alpha_{N} \epsilon^{-N-2}$ and $t \rightarrow t \epsilon^{N+2}$ and considering the limit $\epsilon \rightarrow 0$, equation (\[eq:Tz-all\]) reduces to $Q_{(N,1)} + \alpha_{N} =0$ and its symmetry (\[eq:sym-NT-n\]) becomes (\[eq:UN\]).
When $N=1$ this is Adler’s Tzitzeica equation, $$u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} + u_{0,1}) u_{1,1} + c_1 = u_{0,0} + u_{1,1} + \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1}}{c_1}.$$ The corresponding results were first presented in [@A], whereas the relation between (\[eq:2\]) and (\[eq:A2\]) was given in [@MX]. The existence of the higher order equations was suggested in [@AP] (see Remark 4 on page 13) but no explicit formulae were given. The differential-difference equations (\[eq:sym-NT-n\]) were given in [@AP1; @AP] along with the Miura transformations $$\label{eq:NT-n-miura}
{\cal{M}}_{N+1} \,:\quad v_{0,0} = \frac{{\cal{S}} (c_N-Q_{(N-1,0)})}{Q_{(N+1,0)}-c_N}\,u_{N+1,0},\quad {\cal{M}}_0 \,:\quad v_{0,0} = \frac{{\cal{S}} (c_N-Q_{(N-1,0)})}{Q_{(N+1,0)}-c_N}\,u_{0,0},$$ which map (\[eq:sym-NT-n\]) to the discrete Sawada-Kotera equation ${\rm{dSK}}^{(1,N)}$ $$\label{eq:dSK}
\partial_t v_{0,0} = v_{0,0}^2 \left( \prod_{i=1}^{N+1} v_{i,0} - \prod_{i=1}^{N+1} v_{-i,0}\right) - v_{0,0}\left(\prod_{i=1}^{N} v_{i,0} - \prod_{i=1}^{N} v_{-i,0} \right).$$ The degeneration is a straightforward calculation once the degrees of the polynomials involved are taken into account, $\deg Q_{(i,j)}=i+j+1$ and $\deg R_{(i,j)} = i j$.
Equation (\[eq:Tz-all\]) and its reflection across the line $x=y$ accompanied by the transformation $c_N \mapsto (-1)^{N+1} c_N$, i.e. $$\label{eq:Tz-all-b}
Q_{(1,N)} + (-1)^{N+1} c_N \,=\, R_{(1,N)} + \frac{(-1)^{N+1}}{c_N} \prod_{i=0}^{N} u_{0,i} u_{1,i},\quad N=1,2,3,\ldots,$$ may be used as building blocks of other consistent systems. Their construction uses the procedure described in Example \[ex:const\]. More precisely, it involves the lowest order symmetries of equations (\[eq:Tz-all\]) and (\[eq:Tz-all-b\]) along with the requirement that the symmetries must be compatible with every equation of the system. This construction is very involved and the complexity of the calculations increases with $N$. We constructed two new such systems which along with Adler’s Tzitzeica equation we denote with $A_1$, $A_2$ and $A_3$, respectively. They depend on a parameter $c_N$ ($N=1,2,3$), and degenerate to $\Sigma_1$, $\Sigma_2$ and $\Sigma_3$, respectively, by setting $u \rightarrow u \epsilon^{-1}$, $c_N \rightarrow \alpha_{N} \epsilon^{-N-2}$ and considering the limit $\epsilon \rightarrow 0$. They satisfy all our three requirements R1–R3 for consistent systems and admit infinite hierarchies of symmetries in both directions, the lowest order of which is $N+1$ and are generated by (\[eq:sym-NT-n\]).
- System $A_1$, as we have already mentioned, corresponds to Adler’s Tzitzeica equation $$\label{eq:A2}
u_{0,0} (u_{1,0} + u_{0,1}) u_{1,1} + c_1 = u_{0,0} + u_{1,1} + \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1}}{c_1},$$ a well known integrable equation [@A].
- System $A_2$ is constituted by the following two equations.
\[eq:3T\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{1,1} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} \right) u_{1,2} - c_2 = u_{0,0} u_{0,1} + u_{0,0} u_{1,2} + u_{1,1} u_{1,2} - \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2}}{c_2} \\
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + u_{1,0} u_{1,1} +u_{0,1} u_{1,1}\right) u_{2,1} + c_2 = u_{0,0} u_{1,0} + u_{0,0} u_{2,1} + u_{1,1} u_{2,1} + \frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1}}{c_2} \label{eq:A3a}
\end{aligned}$$
It can be easily verified that this is a consistent system which degenerates to (\[eq:3\]) as described above (with $N=2$). Its lowest order symmetries in the first direction are generated by $$\label{eq:A3-n}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = u_{0,0}\,\frac{\prod_{i=-2}^{1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(1,0)} - c_2 \right)}{\prod_{i=-2}^{-1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(3,0)} -c_2 \right) }\, (1-{\cal{S}}^{-3}) \left(\frac{1}{ Q_{(3,0)} -c_2} - \frac{1}{ {\cal{S}}\left(Q_{(1,0)} -c_2\right)}\right), \quad \left\{\begin{array}{l} Q_{(1,0)} = u_{0,0} u_{1,0} \\ Q_{(3,0)} = u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} \end{array}\right.,$$ which is related to the discrete Sawada-Kotera equation ${\rm{dSK}}^{(1,3)}$. Similar considerations hold for the symmetries in the other direction which follow from (\[eq:A3-n\]) by applying the changes $u_{\ell,0} \rightarrow u_{0,\ell}$, $c_2 \rightarrow -c_2$ and ${\cal{S}} \rightarrow {\cal{T}}$.
- System $A_3$ is given by
\[eq:4T\] $$\begin{aligned}
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} + u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{2,1} +u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} +u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1}\right) u_{3,1} + c_3 = \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} + (u_{0,0} u_{1,1}+ u_{0,0} u_{2,1} + u_{1,1} u_{2,1}) u_{3,1} + \frac{ u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} u_{3,1} }{c_3} \,, \label{eq:A4a} \\
&& \nonumber \\
&& u_{0,0} \left( u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2} +u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{0,3}\right) u_{1,3} + c_3= \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad u_{0,0} u_{0,1} u_{0,2} + (u_{0,0} u_{1,1}+ u_{0,0} u_{1,2} + u_{1,1} u_{1,2}) u_{1,3} + \frac{u_{0,0} u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{0,3} u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} u_{1,3}}{c_3}, \\
&& \nonumber \\
&& u_{0,0} \left(u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{2,1}+ u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} + u_{1,0} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} + u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{1,2} + u_{0,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2} \right) u_{2,2} - c_3= \nonumber \\
&&\qquad \qquad u_{0,0} \left(u_{1,0}+u_{0,1}+u_{2,1}+u_{1,2}\right) u_{2,2}-u_{0,0}-u_{1,1} - u_{2,2} + ({\cal{ST}} +1)\left( u_{0,0} (u_{1,0}+u_{0,1}) u_{1,1}\right) \nonumber \\
&&\qquad \qquad -\, \frac{u_{0,0} (u_{1,0}+u_{2,1}) (u_{0,1}+u_{1,2}) u_{2,2} + ({\cal{ST}} +1)\left( u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1}\right)}{c_3}\nonumber \\
&& \quad \quad+\, \frac{u_{0,0} \left((u_{1,0} (u_{2,0}+u_{1,1}) + u_{0,1} (u_{0,2}+u_{1,1})) u_{2,1} u_{1,2} + u_{1,0} u_{0,1} \left( (u_{2,0}+u_{1,1}) u_{2,1} + (u_{0,2}+ u_{1,1}) u_{1,2}\right) \right) u_{2,2}}{c_3} \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \qquad -\, \frac{ u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{0,1} u_{2,1} u_{1,2} u_{2,2} \left( u_{2,0} u_{0,2} + u_{1,1} (u_{2,0}+u_{0,2})\right)}{c_3} +\frac{u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{0,1} u_{1,1} u_{2,1} u_{0,2} u_{1,2} u_{2,2}}{c_3^2} .
\end{aligned}$$
It degenerates to (\[eq:4\]) and its lowest order symmetries in the first direction are generated by $$\label{eq:A4-n}
\partial_t u_{0,0} = u_{0,0} \frac{\prod_{i=-3}^{1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(2,0)} - c_3 \right)}{\prod_{i=-3}^{-1} {\cal{S}}^{i} \left(Q_{(4,0)} -c_3 \right) } (1-{\cal{S}}^{-4}) \left(\frac{1}{ Q_{(4,0)} -c_3} - \frac{1}{ {\cal{S}}\left(Q_{(2,0)} -c_3\right)}\right), \quad \left\{\begin{array}{l} Q_{(2,0)} = u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} \\ Q_{(4,0)} = u_{0,0} u_{1,0} u_{2,0} u_{3,0} u_{4,0} \end{array}\right.,$$ which is related to the discrete Sawada-Kotera equation ${\rm{dSK}}^{(1,4)}$. The symmetries in the other direction follow from (\[eq:A4-n\]) by applying the changes $u_{\ell,0} \rightarrow u_{0,\ell}$ and ${\cal{S}} \rightarrow {\cal{T}}$.
Conclusions & Discussion
========================
We considered $N$-th order overdetermined systems of difference equations which are consistent and integrable according to our requirements and definitions in Section \[sec:def\]. We demonstrated how such systems follow from known lower order integrable systems and presented two new hierarchies. The first one was constructed using lattice paths whereas the second hierarchy can be interpreted as a deformation of the former. In particular the first members of these hierarchies coincide with the quad equation (\[eq:2\]) introduced in [@MX] and Adler’s Tzitzeica equation (\[eq:A2\]) studied in [@A], respectively. In this way we have shown that these two equations are not isolated but they are the lowest order members of two hierarchies of consistent systems denoted here with $\Sigma$ and $A$, respectively. Systems $\Sigma_N$ can be constructed for any order $N$ but, due to computational limitations, we were able to construct only the first three members of the $A$ hierarchy.
There are a lot of interesting questions about consistent systems. It is very well known that multidimensional consistency is a strong integrability property closely related to other integrability aspects, e.g. Lax pairs and B[ä]{}cklund transformations. However it is not clear if the type of consistency considered here can be employed in a similar way. Most of the well known integrable equations also fit into the framework of direct linearization or Kac-Moody algebras or can be derived as reductions of discrete KP equations. Could overdetermined consistent systems be derived in any of these ways? On the other hand from the examples we presented it seems that there exists a relation between consistency and symmetries of $N$-quad equations. It would be interesting to explore this connection further in order to understand the structure of symmetries of $N$-quad equations but also to derive integrability conditions for consistent systems.
[99]{}
V.E. Adler (2011) On a discrete analog of the Tzitzeica equation [*arXiv:1103.5139*]{}
V. E. Adler and V. V. Postnikov (2011) Differential–difference equations associated with the fractional Lax operators [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*]{} [**[44]{}**]{} 415203 (17pp) doi:10.1088/1751-8113/44/41/415203
V. E. Adler and V. V. Postnikov (2014) On discrete 2D integrable equations of higher order [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*]{} [**[47]{}**]{} 045206 (16pp) doi:10.1088/1751-8113/47/4/045206
V. E. Adler and A. B. Shabat (2012) Toward a theory of integrable hyperbolic equations of third order [*J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.*]{} [**[45]{}**]{} 395207 doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/39/395207
G. Berkeley, A. V. Mikhailov, and P. Xenitidis (2016) Darboux transformations with tetrahedral reduction group and related integrable systems [*J Mathl Phys*]{} [**[57]{}**]{} 092701; doi: 10.1063/1.4962803
A. Fordy, P. Xenitidis (2017) ${\mathbb{Z}}_{N}$ graded discrete Lax pairs and discrete integrable systems [*J Phys A: Math Theor*]{} [**[50]{}**]{} 165205 (30pp) doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa639a
J. Hietarinta, N. Joshi and F. W. Nijhoff (2016) [*Discrete Systems and Integrability*]{} Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
A. V. Mikhailov, P. Xenitidis (2014) Second order integrability conditions for difference equations. An integrable equation [*[Lett. Math. Phys.]{}*]{} [**[104]{}**]{} 431–450 doi 10.1007/s111005-013-0668-8
F.W. Nijhoff et al (2000) On Discrete Painlev[é]{} Equations Associated with the Lattice KdV Systems and the Painlev[é]{} VI Equation [*Stud. Appl. Math.*]{} [**[106]{}**]{} 261–314
P. Xenitidis (2018) Determining the symmetries of difference equations [*Proc. R. Soc. A*]{} [**[474]{}**]{}: 20180340. dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2018.0340
[^1]: e-mail: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Nonnegative Matrix Factorization(NMF) is a common used technique in machine learning to extract features out of data such as text documents and images thanks to its natural clustering properties. In particular, it is popular in image processing since it can decompose several pictures and recognize common parts if they’re located in the same position over the photos. This paper’s aim is to present a way to add the translation invariance to the classical NMF, that is, the algorithms presented are able to detect common features, even when they’re shifted in different original images.'
author:
- Barbarino Giovanni
bibliography:
- 'mybib.bib'
title: Permutation NMF
---
$ $
Throughout all the document, we indicate the set of nonnegative real numbers as ${\mathbb}R_+$, and the element-wise (Adamard) product and division between matrices as $$A \,.*B \qquad A\, ./B$$ Moreover, we’ll refer to the $i$-th column and row of a matrix $A$ respectively with $A{_{:,i}}$ and $A{_{i,:}}$ .
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
The NMF is a powerful tool used in clustering, image processing, text mining, and so on. Its importance grew in the last decade due to its efficacy into extracting meaningful and easily interpretable features out of the data. For example, in the clustering problem of $m$ points into a $n$ dimensional space, the processed data can be naturally viewed as centroids of the clusters, or in its application to text mining, the NMF output clearly points to the common topics touched by the input documents. In this paper the focus is on the applications of NMF to the analysis and decomposition of images, as shown in the article of Lee & Seung [@nature], where they processed a set of faces and the algorithm automatically recognized their principal features like eyebrows, lips, noses, etc.
A serious drawbacks of this method is that NMF can’t recognize the same objects or parts of them if they’re located in different places on multiple images, or when they’re rotated or deformed. In other words, NMF is not invariant under space transformations, so the input data must always be pre-calibrated and adjusted.
One possible solution may be to add to the dataset a lot of copy of the same image, each time stretched, rotated and shifted in different ways, in order to make the NMF recognize the parts of an image even if they’re in different positions and with different shapes, but this leads to an huge rise of input data and of redundancy in the solution.
Some authors have suggested to set some standard transformations of the images (such as translations or symmetry) and to look for the features we want to obtain, along with additional parameters that indicate for each transformation of each feature if they’re present into the original images. This rises the number of the problem variables by a factor that’s usually larger or equal to the number of pixels in a picture, like in [@shif] and [@shif2], making the algorithm complexity go up by at least the same factor.
Here is presented a way to attack the problem of the translations, keeping the framework of NMF and the natural the graphical property of its output to represent the wanted parts of images, and bounding the rise in data weight and computational cost with the number of effective components we want to find and a logarithmic factor.
In the first chapter we review the original NMF problem, and we’ll discuss why it’s applicable to image processing. On the second chapter, we introduce the tools and notation needed to state the actual problem we want to solve. On the third chapter, we describe the algorithms used, and derive the asymptotic computational cost. On the fourth chapter we present some experiments on hand-made images, and on the conclusions we’ll talk about possible improvements.
NMF and image processing
========================
Nonnegative Matrix Factorization
--------------------------------
Given a data matrix $A\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}$ and a natural number $k$, the NMF problem requires to find the matrices $W,H$ that satisfy $$\label{NMF}
\min_{W,H}F (W,H) = \min_{W,H} \|A-WH^T\|^2_F \qquad W\in{{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}}\quad H \in {{\mathbb}R_+^{m\times k}}$$ where we used the Frobenius norm, defined as $$\|M\|_F^2 = \sum_{i,j}M_{ij}^2$$
A natural interpretation of NMF derives from the observation that, given any column of $A$, a good solution to the problem finds an approximation of it through a combination of $k$ nonnegative vectors, the columns of $W$, with nonnegative coefficients stored in a row of $H$. This means that the problem is equivalent to find a nonnegative set of $k$ vectors that approximately generate, through nonnegative coefficient, all the columns of $A$ (the minimum parameter $k$ that satisfy such conditions is often referred to as the *nonnegative rank* of the matrix $A$).
Usually, $k$ is much smaller then the other dimensions $n,m$ since the NMF is often used as a low-rank decomposition algorithm, and the resulting columns of $W$, called *features* or *components*, have a meaningful representation as characteristics or parts of the original data, that are the columns of $A$. Moreover, a large value of $k$ implies a large set of exact solutions for the exact NMF problem, and it translates into a lot of local minima into the minimization problem, that leads to inaccuracy on the algorithmic part, and ambiguity in the interpretation of solutions.
An other feature that is usually required to the input data is the sparsity, since it is proved that can improve the quality and understandability of the solution, along with gaining uniqueness properties (for further studies, see [@sparse], that proposes a preprocessing to improve the sparseness of $A$).
A common way to take advantage form the non-uniqueness of the solution is to normalize rows and columns of $A,W,H$, through a positive diagonal matrix $S$ of dimensions $k\times k$. In fact, given any pair $(W,H)$, then $WH^T=WS^{-1}SH^T$, so the matrices $(W',H') = (WS^{-1},HS^T)$ are still nonnegative, and this transformation doesn’t change the error we want to minimize. If we set the diagonal of $S$ as the $l^1$ norm of the columns of $W$, then $W'$ is column stochastic, and if the input matrix $A$ is also column stochastic, then an exact solution $A=WH^T$ requires the columns of $H^T$ to be stochastic as well, so that the columns of $A$ belong to the convex hull generated by the features in $H$.
We now see how this considerations are important in practical applications.
Image Processing
----------------
One of the problem confronted by researchers in image processing is to decompose different images into common parts or features, both for identification purposes or for compression ones. For example, a common technique used in animation in order to contain the memory used is to not memorize into digital supports every pixel of each single frame, but to memorize only particular compressed or coded informations that lets a recorder to reproduce the film with little loss of quality.
In general, when confronted with a large set of images like the frames of a film, or a database of similar pictures, it can be convenient to memorize the common parts only one time, gaining space and also computational time for the recombining process. The problem is thus to find an efficient algorithm that automatically recognizes the common features and an intelligent way of storage of the informations.
Given a gray-scale image $M$ expressed as a matrix of pixels, with values in the real range $[0,1]$, we can transform it into a real vector with as many coordinates as the pixels in the image. In particular, if $M\in{{\mathbb}R_+^{r\times s}}$, then we stack the columns of the matrix on top of one another, and obtain the vector $v\in {\mathbb}R_+^{rs}$ defined as $$v_{i + (j-1)r} = M_{ij} \quad \forall\, i,j$$ Given a set of pictures $\set{M_i}_{i=1:m}$ of the same shape, we can now vectorize them and stack the corresponding vectors as the columns of our data matrix $A$, and if we call $n=rs$ the number of pixels of a single picture, $A$ becomes a nonnegative matrix in ${{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}$, so, after having fixed the number $k$ of common component we want to find, the NMF framework produces two matrices $W,H$ such that $A\sim WH^T$.
As already noticed, each column of $A$ is approximated by a linear combination of the columns of $W$, that are nonnegative vectors of length $n=rs$. After having normalized $W$ by multiplication with a diagonal positive matrix (as discussed above), we can see its columns as images in the shape $r\times s$, so a generic column of $A$, that is one of the original images, is now approximated as the superimposition of the pictures represented by some of the columns of $W$. $$A\sim WH^T\implies A_{:,i} \sim H_{i,1}W_{:,1} + H_{i,2}W_{:,2} + \dots + H_{i,k}W_{:,k}$$ Ideally, the images in $W$ are parts of the pictures in $A$, like localized objects in the 2D space, so they’re usually sparse and disjoint images, that translates into sparse and nearly orthogonal vectors. In a famous experiment, Lee & Seung [@nature] processed a set of faces and the NMF automatically recognized their principal features like eyebrows, lips, noses, eyes, and so on, so that they were immediately human-recognizable. This example shows the importance of NMF as a decomposition tool for graphical entities.
As already said, the sparseness and the choice of $k$ are important factors. The sparseness is an index of the uniqueness of the solution, that is important on the side of interpretation of the output, since different solutions usually brings up set of pictures not human-recognizable as real objects and features. On the side of compression, we can see that the original $nm$ pixels of $A$ are now coded into $kn$ pixels in $W$ and $km$ coefficients in $H$, so the compression is useful when the approximation is good with a low $k$. On terms of images, it means that there are few components that span the whole set of pictures.
Transformations Issues
----------------------
When we use NMF on a matrix $A$ we usually expect the original images to have some predominant common features, so that the algorithm can find them with little noise. This may be true in the case of sets of static pictures, when calibrated and centered, but even in the case of facial recognition, there may be cases of misalignment, as already noticed by [@gaussinv] and many others. In general, the NMF suffers in this cases since it is not invariant under a vast set of transformations, for example shifts, rotations, symmetry, stretches and so on, in fact the common features must be in the exact same positions on the different pictures in order to be pinpointed.
This is a common problem faced in the animations programs, since, even if the subjects in a scene of a footage are the same, they constantly move on the screen, so their detection must follow some temporal scheme, and can’t be performed by a simple NMF.
Possible ways to deal with this problem are to change the data in one of the three matrices $A,W$ or $H$. For example, if we add ta $A$ a transformed copy of each original picture for every transformation in a set we choose, then the common features get detected even if they’re deformed, but this increases the size of the problem by the square of the number of alterations used, that’s usually greater than the number of pixels in a single image. One possible solution is obviously to rise the parameter $k$, but this leads to instability in the solution, as we already discussed.
A good idea seems instead to rise the quantity of data contained in the matrix $H$, since we strife to maintain the graphical property of the columns of $W$ to represent the common features of the original images. In the next chapters we’ll define new notations and operators to deal with a matrix whose elements are capable to transmit more informations on pictures than simple real numbers.
Permutations
============
In this document, our focus is on the problems related to the lack of translation invariance of NMF, so we’ll use shift permutations to modify the kind of elements contained in the matrix $H$. First of all, we define an operator between matrices not necessarily real.
Diamond Operator
----------------
Given an element $\tau \in {\mathbb}R\times S_n$, represented by a couple $\tau \equiv [r,\sigma]$, where $r$ is a real number, and $\sigma$ is a permutation of $n$ indexes (that is, an element of the permutations group $S_n$), then it’s well defined its action on a real vector $v\in{\mathbb}R^n$ $$\tau(v) \in {\mathbb}R^n \,\,:\,\, \tau(v)_i = [r,\sigma](v)_i = rv_{\sigma(i)} \quad\forall\,i$$ The action of $\tau$ on ${\mathbb}R^n$ makes it a linear operator, so it can be represented by a matrix, and in particular, since the action of each permutation $\sigma\in S_n$ is associated with a permutation matrix $P_\sigma$, it’s easy to see that $$\tau \equiv [r,\sigma] \implies \tau(v) = rP_\sigma(v)$$
The algebra generated by the permutation group over the real field is denoted as ${\mathbb}RS_n$, and its elements are finite sums of ${\mathbb}R\times S_n$ elements $$\alpha \in {\mathbb}RS_n \implies \alpha= \sum_{i=1}^s [r_i,\sigma_i] \quad r_i\in{\mathbb}R\quad \sigma_i\in S_n\,\,\forall i$$ As before, these elements have a natural action on ${\mathbb}R^n$, that is an extension of the action of ${\mathbb}R\times S_n$, given by $$\alpha(v) = \sum_{i=1}^s [r_i,\sigma_i](v) = \sum_{i=1}^s r_iP_{\sigma_i}v = \left(\sum_{i=1}^s r_iP_{\sigma_i}\right) v$$ so there exists an homomorphism of ${\mathbb}R$ algebras ${\varphi}:{\mathbb}RS_n\to {\mathbb}R^{n\times n}$ that associates to each element of the algebra a real matrix, and later we’ll see how it behaves on a particular subgroup.\
Let’s now suppose that $N$ is a matrix with entries in the above described algebra ${\mathbb}RS_n$, and $M$ is a real matrix. We need an operator to apply the elements of $N$ to the columns of $M$ , so we define the *diamond product* :
The diamond operator between a real matrix $A\in{{\mathbb}R^{n\times m}}$ and a matrix $N\in ({\mathbb}RS_n)^{m\times k}$ is defined as $$(A{\diamond}N){_{:,i}} := \sum_j N_{ji}(A{_{:,j}})$$ and returns a real matrix in ${{\mathbb}R^{n\times k}}$.
In other words, the $i$-th column of the diamond product is a linear combination of permutations of $M$ columns, with coefficients and permutations described by the elements of the $N$’s $i$-th column.
Let’s also define the multiplication between two matrices with entries in the algebra of permutations. Remember that ${\mathbb}RS_n$ is an algebra, so sum and product are well defined, and the elements of ${\mathbb}RS_n$ can be viewed as well as matrices through the homomorphism ${\varphi}$, so the two operations correspond to the usual sum and composition of matrices.
The diamond operator between two matrices $M\in ({\mathbb}RS_n)^{n\times m}$ and $N\in ({\mathbb}RS_n)^{m\times k}$ is defined as $$(M{\diamond}N)_ {ij} := \sum_k N_{kj}\cdot M_{ik}$$ and returns a matrix in $({\mathbb}RS_n)^{n\times k}$.
This operation differs from the normal multiplication of matrices only because ${\mathbb}RS_n$ isn’t a commutative algebra, so we need to specify the order of the multiplication between the elements. The inverted order is necessary to partially maintain the associativity of the operation: given a real matrix $A$, and two matrices $N,M$ with elements in the algebra, it’s easy to verify that $$(A{\diamond}M){\diamond}N = A{\diamond}(M{\diamond}N)$$ Ideally we need to invert the elements of $N$ and $M$ since $M$ is the first to act on the columns of $A$, followed by $N$.
One downside of this operation is that it doesn’t cope well with the normal matrix multiplication: given $A,B$ real matrices, and $M$ a matrix in the permutation algebra, then $$A(B{\diamond}M) \ne (AB){\diamond}M$$
Let’s now return to image transformations, and focus on a particular subgroup of the permutation algebra.
Shifts and Circulant Matrices
-----------------------------
Given a gray-scale image $M$, we’ve seen how to transform it into a vector $v\in {\mathbb}R_+^{rs}$. We want now to codify a shift on the image as a vectorial transformation: a shift of the original image $A$ by $r_1$ position on the horizontal axis and $s_1$ position on the vertical one will be encoded as a circular shift on $v$ of magnitude $p = r_1r + s_1$, that is, we produce a vector $w$ whose $i$-th coordinate is the $(i+p)$-th coordinate of $v$.
If we call $n=rs$, we can denote as $T_n$ the cyclic subgroup of the permutation group $S_n$ whose elements shift cyclically all the indexes of vectors in ${\mathbb}R^n$ by an integer constant. We’ll call $\sigma_p$ the shift by $p$ position, where $p\in \faktor {{\mathbb}Z}{n{\mathbb}Z}$: $$\sigma_p \in T_n \quad v\in {\mathbb}R^n\quad p\in \faktor {{\mathbb}Z}{n{\mathbb}Z} \implies \sigma_p(v) = w \quad : \quad w_i = v_{i+p} \quad \forall i$$ where the indexes are to be considered modulus $n$.
The elements of $T_n$ are linear operators, so can be represented by $n\times n$ matrices through the above mentioned homomorphism ${\varphi}$. In particular, the element $\sigma_1$ is associated to the circulant matrix $C$ that has 1 on the first cyclic superdiagonal and 0 anywhere else, and $\sigma_p = \sigma_1\circ \dots\circ \sigma_1$, so ${\varphi}(\sigma_p) = {\varphi}(\sigma_1)^p = C^p$ that has 1 on the $p$-th cyclic diagonal and zero otherwise. $${\varphi}(\sigma_1) = C =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & & & \\
& 0 & 1 & \phantom{\ddots} & \\
& & 0 & \ddots & \\
& & & \ddots & 1\\
1 & & & \phantom{\ddots} & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\qquad
{\varphi}(\sigma_2) = C^2 =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 1 & & \\
& 0 & 0 & \ddots & \\
& & 0 & \ddots & 1\\
1 & & & \ddots & 0\\
0 & 1 & & \phantom{\ddots} & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\quad \dots$$ $$\sigma_p(v) = C^p v$$ In the next section, we’ll use elements of type $\tau = [r,\sigma_p]\in {\mathbb}R_+ \times T_n$ to define a new problem with the same shape of a normal NMF, but on different domains, and since the shift $\sigma_p$ is completely identified by the remainder class $p$, we’ll refer to $\tau$ as the couple $[r,p]$.
PermNMF
-------
Now we reconsider the classic NMF, and widen the domain of the matrix $H$. Our aim here is to find a new method to decompose pictures into common components, even when they’re shifted, so, like in the NMF, we stack the original images as columns of the matrix $A$, and look for a matrix $W$ whose columns are the wanted common features, and a matrix $H$ with elements in ${\mathbb}R_+\times T_n$, so that it can tell us both the intensity and the position of each component in $W$ into each original picture in $A$.
In particular, we want to rewrite the NMF problem as
Given a matrix $A$ is in ${{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}$, we want to find a matrix $H$ in $({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n)^{m\times k}$ and a matrix $W$ in ${{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}}$ that minimize $$F(W,H) = \| A - W {\diamond}H^T\|_F^2$$
The diamond operator is defined on elements of ${\mathbb}RS_n$, but we restrict the entries of $H$ to elements in ${\mathbb}R_+\times T_n$, so that a single image (column of $A$) is a linear combination of the images represented by the columns of $W$, but shifted. We notice that expanding further the domain of $H$ usually leads to trivial and useless solutions; for example, if we let the elements of $H$ be in ${\mathbb}R_+T_n$, that are linear nonnegative combinations of permutations in $T_n$, then even with $k=1$ there’s a trivial solution that decomposes perfectly the matrix $A$: $$A = W{\diamond}H^T \qquad W = e_1 \qquad H_{i,1} = \sum_j [A_{ij}, j-1]$$ in fact, $$(W{\diamond}H^T){_{:,i}} = H_{i,1}(W) = \sum_j A_{ij} \sigma_{j-1}(e_1) = \sum_j A_{ij} e_j = A{_{:,i}}$$ In other words, a linear combination of the translations of a single pixel can reconstruct any image, so it is an exact and completely useless solution. Moreover, expanding to the group $T_n$ usually leads to the dismembering of the images represented by the columns of $W$, so we stick to work with this framework for this document.
An other particularity of this formulation is that, if we impose that each element of $H$ must be of the type $[r,0]$, that is, we fix all the permutations to be the trivial identity, then the problem returns exactly the original NMF, and the diamond operator coincides with the normal matrix multiplication.
Algorithm
=========
The PermNMF has the same structure of the normal NMF, so we can try to use similar solving algorithms. A characteristic we’d want from our solution is the sparsity of the $W$ columns, since they should represent isolated objects in the images, so the first algorithm considered is the MU update, since it is known to naturally produce sparse solutions. Unfortunately, the MU method efficiency, in the NMF case, comes from the approximation $$W^T A \sim W^T(WH^T) = (W^TW) H$$ but in our case, as already stated, there’s no associative property $$W^T A \sim W^T(W{\diamond}H^T) \ne (W^TW){\diamond}H^T$$ For this reason, we resort to an ALS/PG setting.
**ALS Adapted Update Method**
*Inputs : $ A\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}, \quad W\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}}, \quad H\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n )^{m\times k} $*
$H =\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{X\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n)^{m\times k}} \|A-W{\diamond}X^T\|^2_F$ $W =\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{X\in {{\mathbb}R^{n\times k}}} \|A-X{\diamond}H^T\|^2_F$ make $W$ nonnegative
The update of $W$ requires to solve a convex problem, so we can use some of the usual methods, like a modified Projected Gradient; this one is particularly good for this case, since we can’t transpose the expression in order to obtain the setting of the Active Sets algorithms.
For simplicity, we use the following PG algorithm, where we stop in case of low error or small step:
**PG Update Method**
*Inputs : $ A\in {{\mathbb}R^{n\times m}}, \quad W\in {{\mathbb}R^{n\times k}}, \quad H \in({\mathbb}RS_n)^{m\times k},\quad iter\in {\mathbb}N$*
$W = W - \nabla_W F(W,H)/i$ $err = \|A-W{\diamond}H'\|$ **break** $W$
We’ll refer to this function from now on as $$W = PG(A,W,H)$$ The computation for the gradient in the algorithm are developed in Appendix A, and it shows that $$\nabla_W \|A-W{\diamond}H^T\|^2_F = -2(A-W{\diamond}H^T){\diamond}H'$$ The operations performed in each cycle of the method have a computational cost of $O(mnk)$.
Let’s now focus on the update of $H$, that requires to solve an optimization problem on the group ${\mathbb}R\times T_n$. We start by solving a largely simplified problem.
Single Permutation NNLS
-----------------------
Let’s suppose to have two vectors $v,w$ in ${\mathbb}R^n$, and we want to find the best element $\tau = [r,p]$ of ${\mathbb}R_+\times T_n$ that minimizes $$E(\tau) = \|v - \tau(w)\|^2$$ where the norm used is the euclidean one.
A natural assumption is that $w\ne 0$, otherwise every element $\tau$ gives the same value of $E(\tau) = \|v\|^2$. If we knew the optimal $p$, then we could find $r$ without fail, because it becomes a simple Nonnegative Least Squares (NNLS) problem. $$r_p := \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{r\in {\mathbb}R}\|v - r\sigma_p(w)\|^2 =
\faktor{v^T\sigma_p(w)}{\sigma_p(w)^T\sigma_p(w)}$$ $$r_p^+ := \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{r\in {\mathbb}R^+}\|v - r\sigma_p(w)\|^2 =
\begin{cases}
0 & v^T\sigma_p(w)< 0 \\
\faktor{v^T\sigma_p(w)}{\sigma_p(w)^T\sigma_p(w)} & v^T\sigma_p(w) \ge 0
\end{cases}$$ A simple solution consists into computing the optimal $r_p^+$ for every $\sigma_p\in T_n$, and check which couple $[r_p^+,p]$ gives us the minimal error. We know that $\sigma_p(w)^T\sigma_p(w)=\|w\|^2$, so we can compute the error as a function of $p$ $$\|v - r_p\sigma_p(w)\|^2 = \|v\|^2 - \frac{(v^T\sigma_p(w))^2}{\|w\|^2}$$ The problem is thus equivalent to maximize $(v^T\sigma_p(w))^2$, but we’re interested only in the positive case, so we focus on maximizing the scalar product $v^T\sigma_p(w)$, since if $v^T\sigma_p(w)<0$ then $r_p^+ = 0$ for every $p$, so $E([r_p^+,p]) = E([0,p])=\|v\|^2$.\
By definition, $\sigma_p(w)$ is the vector $w$ shifted, so we can call $C$ the real nonnegative matrix that has all the shifted versions of $w$ as columns, and compute the maximal component of $v^TC$. Since $C$ is a circulant matrix, this operation costs $O(n\log n)$ if performed with Fast Fourier Transformations, so this method is fast and gives us the correct solution.
**Single Permutation NNLS**
*Inputs : $ v,w\in {\mathbb}R^{n},\quad w\ne 0$*
*Output : $ \tau\in {\mathbb}R^+\times T_n$*
$p = \operatorname*{arg\,max}_i \,\,(v^TC)_i$ $r = v^T\sigma_p(w) / \|w\|^2$ $r=0$ $[r,p]$
From now on, we’ll use this algorithm with the syntax $$\tau = \text{SinglePermNNLS}(v,w)$$ Let’s now increment the number of permutations needed.
Multiple Permutation NNLS
-------------------------
Given now a vector $v\in {\mathbb}R^n$, and a bunch of vectors $w_1,w_2,\dots,w_k\in {\mathbb}R^n$ we can now try to find the best elements $\tau_1,\dots,\tau_k\in({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n)$ that minimize the quantity $$\|v - (\tau_1(w_1) + \tau_2(w_2) + \dots + \tau_k(w_k))\|$$ We’re thus looking for the best linear combination with positive coefficients of the shifted vectors $w_i$ that gives us the original vector $v$. If we call $W$ the matrix with $w_i$ as columns, and $x$ the (column) vector of $\tau_i$, then we can rewrite the problem in a compact way as $$\min_{x\in ({\mathbb}R\times T_n)^k} \|v-W{\diamond}x\|^2 \qquad v\in{\mathbb}R_+^n \quad
W \in {\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}$$ A way to solve this problem is using the precedent algorithm in an alternated fashion. In fact, if we fix $\tau_2,\tau_3,\dots,\tau_k$, then it becomes a Singular Permutation NNLS problem on $\tau_1$, and we know how to solve it exactly.
So we can solve the problem sequentially for each $\tau_i$ and repeat. The initial value of $x$ is usually given as an input parameter, but it can also be generated casually at the beginning of the algorithm.
**Multiple Permutations NNLS**
*Inputs : $ v\in {\mathbb}R^{n},\quad W\in {\mathbb}R^{n\times k},\quad iter\in {\mathbb}N, \quad x\in ({\mathbb}R^+\times T_n)^k$*
*Output : $ x\in ({\mathbb}R^+\times T_n)^k$*
$w = W{\diamond}x$ $w = w - x_i(W{_{:,i}})$ $x_i = SimplePermNNLS(v-w,W{_{:,i}});$ $w = w + x_i(W{_{:,i}})$ $x$
From now on, we’ll use this algorithm with the syntax $$x = \text{MultPermNNLS}(v,W,x)$$ Its computational cost is the number of iterations multiplied $k$ times the cost of The Single Permutation Problem, so it is $O(kn\log(n)) $ considering $iter$ as a constant. In particular cases, it may be useful to randomize the choice of the index $i$, since it’s important not to impose a preference order on the components in $W$.
Final Method
------------
We can now return to the original problem $$H =\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{X\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n)^{m\times k}} \|A-W{\diamond}X^T\|^2_F$$ Like the normal NMF, it can be decomposed into smaller problems $$\|A-W{\diamond}X^T\|^2_F=\sum_{i=1}^m \|A{_{:,i}}-W{\diamond}(X^T){_{:,i}}\|^2$$ $$H{_{i,:}} = \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{x\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n)^{k}} \|A{_{:,i}}-W{\diamond}x\|^2$$ that can be solved with the Multiple Permutation NNLS algorithm. If we put everything together, we obtain the final method
**ALS Adapted Update Method**
*Inputs : $ A\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}, \quad W\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}}, \quad H\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n )^{m\times k} $*
$H{_{i,:}} =MultPermNNLS(A{_{:,i}}, W, (H^T){_{:,i}})$ $W = GD(A,W,H)$ make $W$ nonnegative
Every step of This ALS Update Method costs $O(kmn\log(n))$ if we consider the number of iterations in the internal methods as constants. We will stop the updates when the convergence is too slow, when we loop on the same matrices, or when we reach a number of iteration too high.
Extension and Other Works
-------------------------
Given a set a pictures, now we’re able to perform a PermNMF and obtain a set of $k$ common features that can reconstruct the original data once combined through coefficients and permutations codified in $H$. Given one of the images in $W$, the algorithm tells us if it is present in the original images, but it doesn’t detect if it appears multiple times. One example of such instance may be a set of radar images, in which different objects intercepted by the wave signals have distinct shapes, but each one can appear multiple time in the same picture.
One possible solution is to perform an initial PermNMF with a parameter $k$ proportional to the effective number of distinct objects with multiplicity that can appear on a single image, discard the found components with low coefficients, and repeat the PermNMF on the output components with a low $k$ corresponding to the number of distinct shapes without multiplicity. Let’s call $K$ the first larger parameter, and $A\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times m}}$ the set of pictures to analyze. We obtain $$A \sim {\widetilde}{W}{\diamond}H_1^T \sim (W {\diamond}H_2^T){\diamond}H_1^T = W {\diamond}(H_2^T {\diamond}H_1^T)$$ where ${\widetilde}W\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times K}}$, $W\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}}$ and $H_1\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n )^{m\times K}$, $H_2\in ({\mathbb}R_+\times T_n )^{K\times k}$, so the final decomposition will be again a real matrix with $k$ components, and a matrix $H_2^T {\diamond}H_1^T\in ({\mathbb}R_+T_n )^{k\times m}$. This last matrix is able to tell, for each component, even if there are multiple instances in every original image.
The computational cost of such method (for each cycle, till convergence) is $$O(nmKlog(n) + nKklog(n)) = O(nKlog(n)(m+k))$$ that, under the assumption $k<<m$, is equivalent to $O(nmKlog(n))$, meaning that the second step has a negligible computational cost compared to the first. If $K$ is still on the order of magnitude of $k$, the asymptotic cost doesn’t change, but if that’s not the case, it is better to look for other ways.\
On this topic, Potluru, Plis and Calhourn in [@shif] offer an algorithm that uses Fast Fourier Transformations and circulant matrices in order to compute and codify permutations of the components, called ssiNMF (sparse-shift invariant NMF). As in the PermNMF, the basic idea is to find $k$ components and a set of permutations that could reconstruct the original images, but the ssiNMF sets as target the permutations in the group ${\mathbb}R_+T_n$, corresponding through ${\varphi}$ with all the circulant nonnegative matrices, so that all the operations can be performed through FFTs. Thanks to this, their algorithm is able to directly construct an approximation $$A \sim W{\diamond}H^T \qquad W\in {{\mathbb}R_+^{n\times k}} \quad H\in ({\mathbb}R_+T_n )^{m\times k}$$ Eggert, Wersing and Korner in [@shif2] took a more general approach to the problem: as we set a subgroup of $S_n$, they chose a general set of transformations of the plane, seen as operators on the columns of $W$, and multiplied the number of parameter of $H$ by the cardinality of the chosen set, so that for each transformation of the components there would be coefficients in $H$ stating their intensity in the original images.
Both the approaches suffer by the presence of the trivial and exact solution described in section 2.3: a single pixel can generate any image if we allow too many transformations of the space. They propose to perform a common modification on the NMF framework, that is adding a penalty factor to ensure the sparseness of the output, since the presence of a single pixel in the component output corresponds to a lot of positive coefficients in $H$, and it leads to the presence of an additional parameter $\lambda$ to set manually or through validations techniques.
An other characteristic of both the algorithm is the rise in memory used and asymptotic computational cost by at least a factor on par with the number of pixels on a single image, leading to a cost by iteration at least of $O(n^2mk)$. When compared with the PermNMF algorithm, we see that they’re comparable when $K\sim nk/\log(n)$, meaning that a component have to appear in the original image on average $n/\log(n)$ times.
Experiments
===========
In these experiments, we use the PermNMF algorithm seen in the previous chapter, with the initial parameters $W$ and $H$ generated randomly, and the $iter$ variable set to 10 in both the $MultPermNNLS$ and the $PG$ methods.\
In the first experiment (Figure 1) we use 2 simple shapes (a square and a cross) of 9 pixel that move into a frame of dimensions 20x20, and add a casual error of mean 0.15 (where each pixel has an intensity between 0 and 1). In this case the algorithm manages to find the right components after less than 10 repetitions on average. The images shown on the bottom row are the column of $W$, and they’re distinguishable as a cross and a square, with little noise given by the imperfections on the original images.\
In the second experiment, we generate 20 images of shape 30x30 from three simple figures (a plane, a tank and a ship), with a nois of mean 0.15. Each image can include up to two copies of the same figure, so we need to perform a first PermNMF with $k=6$, and then a second time with $k=3$ to extract the original ones. The first application of the algorithm is slowed down by the presence of the same shapes multiple times in the images, but the second application is real fast. As said, we managed to extract first the common features with their multiplicity, and then the actual features. Multiplying the two $H$ matrices we obtained in the two steps of the algorithm, we can deduce the actual position with multiplicity of the shape found in all the 20 original images.
Future Works
============
The PermNMF has not been throughly studied and analyzed. First of all, it lacks a convergence result, both because the usual arguments used for the ALS algorithms vastly use the fact that the two subproblems in the classical NMF are convex, and because we switched the framework to non-continuous spaces such as ${\mathbb}R_+ \times \faktor{{\mathbb}Z}{n{\mathbb}Z}$, where it is still not even well defined a canonical concept of “local minimum” (the usual topological embedding of this space in ${\mathbb}R^3$ gives a notion of stationary points that doesn’t cope well with the nature of permutations).
On the point of view of the PermNMF problem, there’s a lot to say, for example, on whether there exists an exact algorithm, or if there are bounds on the minimum $k$, or even if the solution is unique (up to trivial transformations). In [@sparse], Gillis find a preprocessing for the input data $A$ that gives a more well-posed problem then the normal NMF, so such a transformation could be beneficial even to the PermNMF. In [@NPhard], the authors found precise conditions for $A$ under which there exists a polynomial time algorithm for the exact NMF problem, and stated that in general the approximation problem is NP-hard, so it’s highly possible that even the PermNMF problem is a NP-hard problem, and that a the polyomial time algorithm could be adapted for this case.
On the side of the algorithm itself, it’s possible that a MU (Multiplicative Update) approach on $W$, even if expensive, could retain its descend property, so it can become a substitute or an aid for the PG method. On both the update of $W$ and $H$, it is still possible to apply a CD (Coordinate Descend) method, even if it also lost most of his efficiency due to the bad behavior of the diamond operator. Both this methods, MU and CD, are also recommended for the generation of sparse solutions, a feature we’d like to obtain. On the Multiple PermNNLS algorithm, moreover, it’s also possible to consider an active-set like method to choose preemptively which element to update in every cycle, in order to make the error drop faster.
Eventually, we studied the problem when the elements of $H$ are restricted to ${\mathbb}R_+\times T_n$, but it’s possible also to consider other subgroups and subalgebras of ${\mathbb}RS_n$ in order to encode different transformations of the plan, or just to make the NMF invariant with respect to particular linear operators.
Computation of $W$ gradient
===========================
Let’s compute the gradients needed. $$\|A-W{\diamond}H^T\|^2_F = \sum_{i,j} \left[a_{ij} - \left(\sum_s h_{js}(w_s)\right)_i \right]^2$$ In the following steps, we consider the general element of $H$ as a (circulant) matrix, using implicitly the homomorphism ${\varphi}$. $$\frac{\partial}{\partial w_{uv}} \sum_{i,j} \left[a_{ij} - \left(\sum_s h_{js}(w_s)\right)_i \right]^2$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j} (A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij}\frac{\partial}{\partial w_{uv}} \left(\sum_s h_{js}(w_s)\right)_i$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij} \frac{\partial}{\partial w_{uv}}(h_{jv}(w_v))_i$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij} \frac{\partial}{\partial w_{uv}}\sum_k (h_{jv})_{ik}w_{kv}$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij} \frac{\partial}{\partial w_{uv}} (h_{jv})_{iu}w_{uv}$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j}(h_{jv})_{iu}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij}$$ If we denote the matrix $h_{jv}$ as the couple $[r,\sigma_t]$, then its transpose is represented by the couple $[r,\sigma_{n-t}]$. Let’s call $H'$ the matrix with the same dimension of $H$ and $h_{ij}=[r,\sigma_t] \implies h'_{ij}=[r,\sigma_{n-t}]$, so we have $$(h_{ij})_{hk} = (h'_{ij})_{kh}$$ We can continue the computation as $$-2 \sum_{i,j}(h_{jv})_{iu}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij}$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{i,j}(h'_{jv})_{ui}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{ij}$$ $$=
-2 \sum_{j}(h'_{jv}(A-W{\diamond}H^T)_{j})_u$$ $$= -2((A-W{\diamond}H^T){\diamond}H')_{uv}$$ So we can write in a compact form the gradient $$\nabla_W \|A-W{\diamond}H^T\|^2_F = -2(A-W{\diamond}H^T){\diamond}H'$$
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
Consider a single walker on the slit plane, that is, the square grid $\mathbb
Z^2$ without its negative $x$-axis, who starts at the origin and takes his steps from a given set $\mathfrak S$. Mireille Bousquet-Mélou conjectured that – excluding pathological cases – the generating function counting the number of possible walks is algebraic if and only if the walker cannot cross the negative $x$-axis without touching it. In this paper we prove a special case of her conjecture.
author:
- Martin Rubey
title: Transcendence of generating functions of walks on the slit plane
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Let $\mathfrak S$ – the set of [*steps*]{} – be a finite subset of $\mathbb
Z^2$. A [*walk on the slit plane*]{} is a sequence $(0,0)=w_0,w_1,\dots,w_n$ of points in $\mathbb Z^2$, such that the difference of two consecutive points $w_{i+1}-w_i$ belongs to the set of steps $\mathfrak S$ and none of the points but the first lie on the half-line $\{(x,0):x\leq 0\}$. An example for such a walk with set of steps $$\mathfrak S=\{(-1,-2),(-1,1),(-1,2),(1,-2),(1,1),(1,2)\}$$ is shown in Figure \[fig:walks\].
$$\begin{xy}<16pt,0pt>:
{\xylattice{0}{4}{-7}{7}\xylattice{-10}{0}{1}{7}\xylattice{-10}{0}{-7}{-1}}
@i @={(-1,2),(-1,-2),(-1,1),(1,1),(1,1),(1,2),(1,-2),(1,1),(1,-2),
(1,1),(-1,-2),(-1,2),(-1,1),(-1,-2),(-1,-2),(-1,1),(-1,2),(-1,1),
(-1,-2),(1,-2),(-1,-2),(1,-2),(1,1),(1,-2),(1,1),(1,1),(1,-2),(1,1),
(-1,2),(1,1)},
(-1,1)="prev", @@{;p+"prev";"prev";**@{-}="prev"*{\bullet}},
(0,0);(-1,1)**\dir{-}?*\dir3{>}
\end{xy}$$
Recall that a generating function $F(t)=\sum_{n\ge 0} f_n t^n$ is [*algebraic*]{}, if there is a nontrivial polynomial $P$ in two variables, such that $P(F(t),t)=0$. Otherwise, it is [*transcendental*]{}.
In [@BousquetMelou2001] Mireille Bousquet-Mélou conjectured the following:
\[cnj:Mireille\] Consider the generating function for walks in the slit plane with a given set of steps $\mathfrak S$, counted according to their length and their end-coordinates: $$S(x,y;t)=\sum_{\substack{\text{$W$ walk on the slit plane}\\
\text{starting at the origin}\\
\text{with steps in $\mathfrak S$}}}
t^{\operatorname{length}W} x^{\operatorname{x-final}W} y^{\operatorname{y-final}W}.$$ Suppose that the set of steps is not degenerated and thus all four quadrants of the plane can be reached by some walk, and that the greatest common divisor of the vertical parts of the steps is equal to one.
Then this generating function is algebraic in $t$, if and only if the height of any step is at most one.
In fact, she proved one part of this conjecture in Section 7 of the above paper, namely, that walks with steps that have height at most one have an algebraic generating function. Furthermore, in Section 8 she proved for one family of step-sets that the corresponding generating functions have to be transcendental. In the present paper, we prove the following:
\[thm:transcendental\] Let H and V be two finite sets of integers, the greatest common divisor of the integers in each set being equal to one. Furthermore, assume that both of the sets H and V contain positive and negative numbers, and that V contains an element with absolute value at least $2$. Finally, assume that the minimum of V is at least $-2$.
Let $\mathfrak S$ be the Cartesian product of the two sets: $\mathfrak S={\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}\times{\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$, where H is the horizontal and V is the vertical part of the steps. Then the following generating functions for walks in the slit plane with set of steps $\mathfrak S$ are transcendental in $t$:
- the generating function $S_{i,0}(t)$ for walks ending at a prescribed coordinate $(i,0)$,
- the generating function $L(t)$ for loops, i.e., walks that return to the origin,
- the generating function $S_0(1;t)$ for walks ending anywhere on the x-axis, and
- $S(1,1;t)$, which is the generating function for walks ending anywhere in the slit plane.
For example, the set of steps of the walk in Figure \[fig:walks\] is the Cartesian product of ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}=\{-1,+1\}$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}=\{-2,+1,+2\}$.
In fact we consider a slightly more general problem: we allow the steps in ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}$ and ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ to be weighted with positive real numbers. The weight of a step in the product set $\mathfrak S={\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}\times{\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ then is the product of the weights of its corresponding vertical and horizontal parts and the weight of a walk is the product of the weights of its individual steps.
As in [@BousquetMelou2001], we will use a special case of the following theorem to determine in which cases the generating function cannot be algebraic:
[@Flajolet1987] Let $F(t)$ be an algebraic function over $\mathbb Q$ that is analytic at the origin, then its $n$^th^ Taylor coefficient $f_n$ has an asymptotic equivalent of the form $$f_n=\frac{\beta^n n^s}{\Gamma(s+1)}
\sum_{i=0}^m C_i\omega_i^n+{O}(\beta^n n^t),$$ where $s\in\mathbb Q\setminus\{-1,-2,-3,\dots\}$, $t<s$; $\beta$ is a positive algebraic number and the $C_i$ and $\omega_i$ are algebraic with ${\left\lvert \omega_i\right\rvert}=1$.
It follows easily that an algebraic function cannot have an appearance of a negative integer power of $n$ anywhere in the full asymptotic expansion of its Taylor coefficients.
An expression for the generating function for walks on the slit plane
=====================================================================
The fundamental theorem for walks on the slit plane is the following:
(Proposition 9 in [@BousquetMelou2001])\[thm:cycle\] Let $$B(x;t)=\sum_{\substack{\text{$W$ walk on $\mathbb Z^2$}\\
\text{starting at the origin}\\
\text{ending on the $x$-axis}\\
\text{with steps in $\mathfrak S$}}}
x^{\operatorname{x-final}(W)}t^{\operatorname{length}(W)}$$ be the generating function for bilateral walks, that is, walks that end on the $x$-axis but are otherwise unconstrained.
For $i\ge 1$, the generating function $S_{i,0}(t)$ for walks on the slit plane ending at $(i,0)$ can be computed by induction on $i$ via the following identity: $$\sum_{k=1}^i\frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k}\sum_{\substack{i_1+i_2+\dots+i_k=i\\
i_1>0,i_2>0,\dots,i_k>0}} S_{i_1,0}(t)S_{i_2,0}(t)\dots S_{i_k,0}(t)
= [x^i]\log B(x;t).$$
Note that it follows that $\log B(x;t)$ has positive Taylor coefficients.
Now we can take advantage of the special structure of the set step $\mathfrak
S$. Since it decomposes into a horizontal and a vertical part, the generating function for bilateral walks factorises: $$B(x;t)=\bar B(H(x)t)$$ where $$\bar B(t)=\sum_{\substack{\text{$W$ walk on $\mathbb Z$}\\
\text{from $0$ to $0$}\\
\text{with steps in ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$}}}
t^{\operatorname{length}(W)}$$ is the generating function for [*bridges*]{} and $$H(x)=\sum_{h\in{\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}}x^h$$ is the [*step (Laurent-)polynomial*]{} for ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}$.
Transcendence of $[x^i]\log B(x;t)$
===================================
In this section we show that $[x^i]\log B(x;t)$ cannot be algebraic if the set ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ contains an element with absolute value strictly greater than one.
To this end, we consider the asymptotic expansion of $[t^n x^i]\log
B(x;t)$. Since $B(x;t)$ factorises, we have $$\label{eq:factorisation}
\begin{split}
[t^n x^i] \log B(x;t)&=[t^n x^i] \log \bar B\left(H(x)t\right)\\
&=[x^i] \left(H(x)\right)^n [t^n]\log \bar B(t).
\end{split}$$
Therefore, we have divided the problem in two: we will show that the asymptotic expansions of both $[x^i]\left(H(x)\right)^n$ and $[t^n]\log \bar B(t)$ contain a term $n^{-k/2}$ for some odd $k$.
Asymptotics of the horizontal part
----------------------------------
Let $min$ be the minimal integer such that $H(x)x^{min}$ is a polynomial. To determine the asymptotics of $[x^i] \left(H(x)\right)^n=[x^{n\cdot min}]x^{-i}
\left(H(x)x^{min}\right)^n$, we can use the following theorem:
Let $g(z)$ be an analytic function of degree $d$ with positive coefficients assumed to be aperiodic and such that $g(0)\neq 0$, and let $a(z)$ be analytic except possibly at zero, where a pole is allowed. Let $\lambda$ be a positive number of some subinterval $[\lambda_a,\lambda_b]$ of the open interval $]0,d[$. Then, with $N=\lfloor\lambda n\rfloor$, one has uniformly for $\lambda \in [\lambda_a,\lambda_b]$ $$[z^N]a(z)(g(z))^n= a(\zeta)\frac{(g(\zeta))^n}{\zeta^{N+1}\sqrt{2\pi n
R}}(1+{o}(1)),$$ where $\zeta$ is the unique positive root of the equation $$\zeta\frac{g^\prime(\zeta)}{g(\zeta)}=\lambda$$ and $$R=\frac{d^2}{d\zeta^2}[\log g(\zeta)-\lambda\log\zeta].$$
Let $p=\gcd\{k+min:k\in{\ensuremath{\mathcal{H}}}\}$ and note that in the case $p>1$, every $p$^th^ coefficient of $\left(H(x)\right)^n$ will be zero. Thus, we take $g(x)=H(x^{1/p})x^{min/p}$, and $a(x)=x^{-i/p}$, and use the theorem to determine $[x^{n\cdot min/p}]a(x)(g(x))^n$. In this situation, $\lambda=min/p$ is constant, therefore $\zeta$ and $R$ must be constant, too. Hence, the asymptotic expansion of $[x^i] \left(H(x)\right)^n$ contains an appearance of $n^{-1/2}$.
Asymptotics of the vertical part
--------------------------------
To determine the asymptotic behaviour of $[t^n]\log \bar B(t)$ we will use analysis of singularities. In a first step, we have to determine the singularities of the expression. Following the general theory of singularity analysis, all the contributions from these singularities must be added up.
According to the remark after Theorem \[thm:cycle\] and the factorisation , we have that $[t^n]\log \bar B(t)$ is always positive. Therefore we can apply Pringsheim’s theorem:
[@Hille] If a function with a finite radius of convergence has Taylor coefficients that are nonnegative, then one of its singularities of smallest modulus – a dominant singularity – is real positive.
Since the logarithm is singular only at the origin, and $\bar B(t)$ is strictly positive for positive real numbers, Pringsheim’s theorem implies that one dominant singularity of $\log \bar B(t)$ is in fact a singularity – call it $\rho$ – of $\bar B(t)$. Of course, there can be other dominant singularities of $\log \bar B(t)$ arising from singularities of $\bar B(t)$. We will discuss them below.
Furthermore, it might happen – although we believe that it does not – that $\bar B(t)$ has zeros on the circle around the origin with radius $\rho$, thus also making $\log\bar B(t)$ singular. However, such singularities can never contribute a summand of order $n^{-k/2}$ for odd $k$, so we can simply ignore them. Note that $\bar B(t)$ cannot vanish for ${\left\lvert t\right\rvert}<\rho$, since $\rho$ is a dominant singularity of $\log \bar B(t)$.
Now we want to compute the contribution of the dominant singularities of $\bar
B(t)$ to the asymptotic expansion of $\log\bar B(t)$. To do so, we need a better understanding of $\bar B(t)$, which is the generating function for bridges with step set ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$.
Luckily, this generating function has already been studied. We define the [*step (Laurent-)polynomial*]{} for ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ as $$V(y)=\sum_{v\in{\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}}y^v$$ and the [*characteristic curve*]{} determined by ${\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ by the equation $$\label{eq:characteristiccurve}
1-t V(y)=0\quad\text{or equivalently}\quad y^{min_v}=t(y^{min_v}V(y))=0,$$ where $min_v=-\min {\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}$ is the minimal integer to make the equation polynomial.
We say that the functional equation is [*reduced*]{}, if the greatest common divisor of the exponents of the monomials in $V(y)$ is equal to one, which is one of the assumptions in our main Theorem \[thm:transcendental\].
We say that the functional equation has [*period*]{} $p$, if the greatest common divisor of the exponents of the monomials in $y^{min_v}V(y)$ is equal to $p$.
As is well known, the period is also the number of dominant singularities of $\bar B(t)$, which are all conjugate to the real dominant singularity $\rho$. In our case however, it can be seen ([@BanderierFlajolet2002 Section 3.3]) that the asymptotic formula for bridges is obtained from the asymptotic expansion derived from the singularity at $\rho$ by multiplying with $p$. Since we are only interested in the presence or absence of a term $n^{-k/2}$ for some odd $k$ in the asymptotic expansion, we can assume from now on that the functional equation is aperiodic, i.e., has period one.
It can be seen [@BanderierFlajolet2002; @Hille] that the solutions of this functional equation organise themselves into small and large branches. Here, small means that the solution $y(t)$ tends to zero as $t$ tends to zero, whereas large means that $y(t)$ tends to infinity as $t$ approaches zero.
It is only the set of small solutions that is interesting for us, and it can be seen – using a limit case of Pellet’s Theorem, see for example [@Marden] – that there are $min_v$ of them. A nice expression for the generating function for bridges is given by the following theorem:
[@BanderierFlajolet2002 Theorem 1 and proof of Theorem 3]\[thm:bridges\] The generating function for bridges is an algebraic function given by
$$\begin{split}
\bar B(t)&=t\sum_{j=1}^{min_v}\frac{y_j^\prime(t)}{y_j(t)}
=t\frac{d}{dt}\log(y_1(t)y_2(t)\cdots y_{min_v}(t))\\
&=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int_{{\left\lvert y\right\rvert}=\tau}\frac{dy}{y(1-tV(y))},
\end{split}$$
where the expressions involve all the small branches $y_1,y_2,\dots,y_{min_v}$ of the characteristic curve , and $\rho$ is the radius of convergence of $\Bar B(t)$. Furthermore, the principal branch $y_1(t)$, i.e., the branch with real coefficients, has a square root singularity at $\rho$ and the product of all the other small branches is analytic for all $t$ with $\size t \leq\rho$. More precisely, $\rho$ is given by $\rho=1/V(\tau)$, where $\tau$ is the unique positive number with $V^\prime(\tau)=0$.
Thus, applying the Newton-Puiseux theorem, we can develop $\bar B(t)$ around the singularity $\rho$, setting $\tilde t=\sqrt{\rho-t}$: $$\bar B(t)=a_{-1}/\tilde t + a_0 + a_1 \tilde t + a_2 \tilde t^2+\cdots$$
Composing this expansion with the Taylor expansion of the logarithm we obtain $$\log\bar B(t)=\log a_{-1}/\tilde t +
\log(1+\frac{a_0}{a_{-1}}\tilde t+\frac{a_1}{a_{-1}}\tilde t^2+\cdots).$$
Now we want to find a term $n^{-k/2}$ for some odd $k$ in the asymptotic expansion of the coefficients of the above series. Clearly, $$[t^n]\log a_{-1}/\tilde t=[t^n]\log a_{-1}/\sqrt{\rho-t}\sim c_0\rho^{-n}n^{-1},$$ for some constant $c_0$, is not what we are looking after. However, we have $$\log(1+\frac{a_0}{a_{-1}}\tilde t+\frac{a_1}{a_{-1}}\tilde t^2+\cdots)
=\frac{a_0}{a_{-1}}\tilde t+\cdots$$ and $$[t^n]\frac{a_0}{a_{-1}}\tilde t=[t^n]\frac{a_0}{a_{-1}}\sqrt{\rho-t}\sim c_1\rho^{-n}n^{-3/2},$$ for some constant $c_1$. Provided that $a_0$ does not vanish, this term will guarantee transcendence of the generating function for walks on the slit plane. Thus we need the constant term in the singular expansion of $\bar B(t)$.
Since the product of the non-principal branches $y_2(t)y_3(t)\dots y_{min_v}(t)$ is analytic and non-zero at $\rho$, the contribution of $t\frac{d}{dt}\log(y_2(t)\cdots y_{min_v}(t))$ to the constant term in the singular expansion of $\bar B(t)$ around $\rho$ is the sum of the residues of $1/y(1-\rho V(y))$ at the zeros of $1-\rho V(y)$ that are strictly smaller than $\tau$ in modulus.
To obtain the contribution of $t\frac{d}{dt}\log(y_1(t))$, we proceed as follows: $$\begin{split}
&[\tilde t^0]t\frac{d}{dt}\log(y_1(t))\\
&=[\tilde t^0](\rho-\tilde t^2)(-\frac{1}{2\tilde t})\frac{d}{d\tilde t}
\log(y_1(t))\\
&=-\frac{\rho}{2}[\tilde t]\frac{d}{d\tilde t}\log(y_1(t))\\
&=\rho[\tilde t^2]\log(y_1(t)).
\end{split}$$ To obtain the coefficient of $\tilde t^2$ in $z=\log(y_1(t))$, we consider the Taylor expansion of $0\equiv G(t,z)=1-tV(e^z)$ around $(\rho,\log\tau)$, where $\tau=y_1(\rho)$. We set $\tilde z=z-\log\tau$ and write $G$ short for $G(\rho,\log\tau)$, subscripts denote the partial derivative: $$\begin{split}
0&=G(t,z)\\
&=G
-G_t\tilde t^2
+G_z\tilde z
-G_{t,z}\tilde t^2 \tilde z
+\frac{1}{2}G_{z,z}\tilde z^2
-\frac{1}{2}G_{t,z,z}\tilde t^2\tilde z^2
+\frac{1}{6}G_{z,z,z}\tilde z^3 +\dots,
\end{split}$$ since $G_{t,t}\equiv 0$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
G&=0\\
G_t&={\relax
\ifx\right\right\relax \left.\fi-V(e^z)\right\rvert}_{(t=\rho,z=\log\tau)}
=-\frac{1}{\rho}\\
G_z&={\relax
\ifx\right\right\relax \left.\fi-te^zV^\prime(e^z)\right\rvert}_{(t=\rho,z=\log\tau)}
=-\rho\tau V^\prime(\tau)=0\\
G_{t,t}&=0\\
G_{t,z}&={\relax
\ifx\right\right\relax \left.\fi-e^z V^\prime(e^z)\right\rvert}_{(t=\rho,z=\log\tau)}
=0\\
G_{z,z}&={\relax
\ifx\right\right\relax \left.\fi-t\left(e^{2z}V^{\prime\prime}(e^z)
+e^z V^\prime(e^z)\right)\right\rvert}_{(t=\rho,z=\log\tau)}
=-\rho\tau^2 V^{\prime\prime}(\tau)\\
G_{z,z,z}&=-\rho\tau^3 V^{\prime\prime\prime}(\tau)
-\rho\tau^2 V^{\prime\prime}(\tau).\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, substituting into the Taylor expansion $\tilde z=\alpha\tilde
t+\beta\tilde t^2+{O}(\tilde t^3)$ we obtain $$\begin{split}
0&=-G_t\tilde t^2
+\frac{1}{2}G_{z,z}\tilde z^2
+\frac{1}{6}G_{z,z,z}\tilde z^3 +{O}(\tilde t^4)\\
&=\left(-G_t
+\frac{1}{2}G_{z,z}\alpha^2\right)\tilde t^2
+\left(G_{z,z}\alpha\beta
+\frac{1}{6}G_{z,z,z}\alpha^3\right)\tilde t^3+O(\tilde t^4).
\end{split}$$ Thus $$\begin{aligned}
\notag
\alpha&=\sqrt{\frac{2G_t}{G_{z,z}}}
=\frac{1}{\rho\tau}\sqrt{\frac{2}{V^{\prime\prime}(\tau)}}\\
\label{eq:beta}
\beta&=-\frac{\alpha^2G_{z,z,z}}{6G_{z,z}}
=-\frac{\tau V^{\prime\prime\prime}(\tau)+3V^{\prime\prime}(\tau)}
{3\left(\rho\tau V^{\prime\prime}(\tau)\right)^2}.\end{aligned}$$
It is easy to check that $\beta$, i.e., the coefficient of $\tilde t^0$ in the singular expansion of $t\frac{d}{dt}\log(y_1(t))$ is exactly one half of the residue of $1/y(1-\rho V(y))$ at $\tau$.
In summary, we have shown the following:
Consider bridges with set of steps V. Let $y_1(t),y_2(t),\dots,y_{min_v}(t)$ be the solutions of the functional equation $1-t\sum_{v\in{\ensuremath{\mathcal{V}}}}y^v=0$ that tend to zero as $t$ goes to zero, $y_1(t)$ being the branch with real positive Taylor coefficients. Let $\tau$ be the unique positive real number with $V^\prime(\tau)=0$ and let $\rho=\frac{1}{V(\tau)}$. Furthermore, let $\tau_k=y_k(\rho)$ for $k\in\{2,3,..,min_v\}$.
Then the constant term in the singular expansion of the generating function for bridges is $$\label{eq:constantterm}
\frac{1}{2}\operatorname{res}_{y=\tau}\frac{1}{y(1-\rho V(y))}
+\sum_{k=2}^{min_v} \operatorname{res}_{y=\tau_k}\frac{1}{y(1-\rho V(y))}.$$
Unfortunately, we were not able to show that this expression does not vanish if the step set contains a step of height strictly greater than one. However, we have the following conjecture, that we are able to prove partially for some special cases:
Let $V(y)$ be a Laurent-polynomial with positive coefficients with highest exponent equal to $max_v$ and lowest exponent equal to $-min_v$. Let $\tau$ be the unique positive solution of $V^\prime(\tau)=0$ and $$\begin{split}
f_<(y)&=\prod_{\substack{V(\kappa)=V(\tau)\\\size{\kappa}<\tau}}(y-\kappa)
=\sum_{k=0}^{min_v-1} a_k z^k\\
\intertext{and}
f_>(y)&=\prod_{\substack{V(\kappa)=V(\tau)\\\size{\kappa}>\tau}}(y-\kappa)
=\sum_{k=0}^{max_v-1} b_k z^k.
\end{split}$$ Consider the decomposition $$\label{eq:partial}
\frac{1}{y(V(y)-V(\tau))}=\frac{\alpha+\beta y}{(y-\tau)^2}
+\frac{p_<(y)}{f_<(y)}+\frac{p_>(y)}{f_>(y)},$$ where the degree of $p_<$ is $min_v-2$ and the degree of $p_>$ is $max_v-2$.
Then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:f<}
0&<a_0<a_1<\dots<a_{min_v-1}\\
\label{eq:f>}
0&<b_{max_v-1}<b_{max_v-2}<\dots<b_0,
\end{aligned}$$ the leading term of $p_<$ is negative if $min_v>1$ and the leading term of $p_>$ is positive if $max_v>1$.
The negativity of the leading term of $p_<$ in the conjecture would already imply that the constant term of the singular expansion of $\bar B(t)$ around $\rho$ does not vanish: $-\frac{1}{\rho}(\frac{\beta}{2}+[y^{min_v-2}]p_<(y))$ is exactly the value given by . Since replacing $y$ by $1/y$ in the Laurent-polynomial $V(y)$ changes the sign of $\beta$ in the decomposition , we can assume that $\beta$ is negative or zero. In fact, if $min_v=1$, it follows from that $\beta$ is negative. Since $[y^{min_v-2}]p_<(y)<0$ for $min_v>1$, the claim follows.
We can prove parts of the conjecture for $\min_v\leq 3$: In general, it is easy to see that the product of $f_<$ and $f_>$ has positive coefficients and that both of their constant terms must be positive.
If $min_v\leq 2$ we can show and by inductive arguments. We were also able to check the case $min_v=3$ and $max_v\leq 4$.
If $min_v=2$ we can also show that $[y^{min_v-2}]p_<(y)<0$: in this case, $p_<(y)$ is constant and equals $1/(\tau_2 V^\prime(\tau_2))$, where $\tau_2$ is the only negative zero of $V(y)=V(\tau)$ which is smaller than $\tau$ in modulus. Since $V(y)$ tends to infinity as $y$ approaches $0-$, we have that $V^\prime(\tau_2)>0$, which implies the claim.
Finally, if $min_v=2$ and the coefficients of $V$ are either zero or one, we can also conclude that $\beta$ is negative: in this case the numerator of equals $$-\tau
V^{\prime\prime\prime}(\tau)-3V^{\prime\prime}(\tau)+3\tau^{-1}V^\prime(\tau)
=-3 a_{-1}\tau^{-3}+3a_1\tau^{-1}-15a_3\tau+\dots$$ If $a_1=0$ then the above expression is trivially negative. Otherwise we have to show that $3\tau^{-1}<15\tau$. We show that $\tau>\frac{1}{2}$, which is sufficient: We have $$\begin{aligned}
V^\prime(y)&=-2y^{-3}+\sum_{k\geq -1}k a_k y^{k-1}\\
&\leq -2y^{-3}+\frac{1}{(1-y)^2}\end{aligned}$$ which is negative for $y\leq\frac{1}{2}$.
Transcendence
=============
It is now a simple matter to complete the proof of the main Theorem \[thm:transcendental\]: Since in the circumstances of the theorem the asymptotic expansion of $$[t^n x^i] \log B(x;t)=[x^i] \left(H(x)\right)^n [t^n]\log \bar B(t)$$ contains a term $n^{-2}$, the series $[x^i] \log B(x;t)$ cannot be algebraic. When $i$ is minimal such that there is at least one walk in the slit plane with steps in $\mathfrak S$ ending at $(i,0)$, Theorem \[thm:cycle\] gives that $[x^i] \log
B(x;t)$ is the generating for such walks. To settle the transcendence of $S_{i,0}(t)$ for general $i$, we only need to note that $[t^n] \log B(x;t)\sim
c_0\rho^{-n}n^{-1}$, where, as we proved in the last section, $c_0=\sqrt{\frac{2G_t}{G_{z,z}}}=\frac{1}{\rho\tau_k}\sqrt{\frac{2}{V^{\prime\prime}(\tau_k)}}$, and thus does not vanish. Hence, the leading term of $[t^nx^i] \log B(x;t)$ contains a factor of $1/n^{3/2}$. Thus, in the convolution formula for $S_{i,0}(t)$, the term $1/n^2$ in the asymptotic expansion of $[x^i] \log
B(x;t)$ cannot be cancelled by terms of the asymptotic expansion of the product of two or more functions $S_{i_j,0}$.
The proof of the non-D-finiteness of the other functions can be copied verbatim from the proof of Proposition 22, page 282 of [@BousquetMelou2001].
Acknowledgements
================
I would like to thank Michael Drmota, Bernhard Gittenberger, Bernhard Lamel and Bodo Laß for numerous stimulating discussions concerning the nature of the solutions of the functional equation . Also I’m very grateful for two anonymous referees who pointed out numerous mistakes and a wrong conjecture appearing in the manuscript. And, of course, I would like to thank Mireille Bousquet-Mélou for introducing me to the problem and for a wonderful stay in Bordeaux.
[99]{}
Cyril Banderier and Philippe Flajolet, *Basic analytic combinatorics of directed lattice paths*, Theoret. Comput. Sci. **281** (2002), no. 1-2, 37–80, Selected papers in honour of Maurice Nivat. [MR ]{}[2003g:05006]{}
Mireille Bousquet-M[é]{}lou, *Walks on the slit plane: other approaches*, Advances in Applied Mathematics **27** (2001), no. 2-3, 243–288, Special issue in honor of Dominique Foata’s 65th birthday (Philadelphia, PA, 2000). [MR ]{}[2002j:60076]{}
Michael Drmota, *A bivariate asymptotic expansion of coefficients of powers of generating functions*, European Journal of Combinatorics **15** (1994), no. 2, 139–152. [MR ]{}[94k:05014]{}
Philippe Flajolet, *Analytic models and ambiguity of context-free languages*, Theoretical Computer Science **49** (1987), no. 2-3, 283–309, Twelfth international colloquium on automata, languages and programming (Nafplion, 1985). [MR ]{}[89e:68067]{}
Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick, *The average case analysis of algorithms*, 1994.
Einar Hille, *[Analytic function theory. Vol. I, II. 2nd ed. corrected.]{}*, [Chelsea Publishing Company]{}, 1973.
Morris Marden, *Geometry of polynomials*, Second edition. Mathematical Surveys, No. 3, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1966. [MR ]{}[37 \#1562]{}
[^1]: LaBRI, Université Bordeaux I, Research financed by EC’s IHRP Programme, within the Research Training Network Algebraic Combinatorics in Europe, grant HPRN-CT-2001-00272. [[email protected]]([email protected])\
<http://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~rubey>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Incoherent photoproduction of the $\eta$-meson on the deuteron is studied for photon energies from threshold to 800 MeV. The dominant contribution, the $\gamma$N-$\eta$N amplitude, is described within an isobar model. The final state interaction derived from the CD-Bonn potential is included and found to be important for the description of the production cross section close to threshold. Possible effects from the $\eta N$ final state interaction are discussed.'
address: |
$^a$Institut für Kernphysik, Forschungszentrum Jülich, D-52425 Jülich\
$^b$Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701
author:
- 'A. Sibirtsev$^a$, Ch. Elster$^{a,b}$, J. Haidenbauer$^a$, and J. Speth$^a$'
title: 'Incoherent Photoproduction of $\eta$-mesons from the Deuteron near Threshold'
---
=cmr5
FZJ-IKP-TH-2001-08
Introduction
============
Recent measurements by the TAPS collaboration [@Krusche1; @Metag; @Hejny] at the MAMI accelerator of the $\eta$-meson photoproduction on deuterium and helium indicate an enhancement of the total inclusive cross section at photon energies close to the reaction threshold. The data were specifically collected with high statistical accuracy in order to clarify the first observation [@Krusche1] of the rather large total cross section in that energy regime. It was suggested [@Metag] that such a threshold enhancement could result either from the formation of the quasi bound $\eta$-nucleus state or from the interaction between the final nucleons.
Indeed, a strong influence of the final state interaction (FSI) on the cross sections of $\pi$, $\eta$, $\eta^\prime$ and $\omega$-meson production in nucleon-nucleon ($NN$) collisions was observed in experiments at the IUCF, COSY and CELSIUS accelerator facilities [@Meyer; @Calen1; @Calen2; @Smyrski; @Moskal1; @Hibou; @Moskal3; @Machner]. With the exception of the $\eta$ channel, those experiments producing mesons in $NN$ collisions can be described almost perfectly by theoretical calculations accounting only for the final state interactions between the nucleons [@Moskal3; @Machner]. In case of $\eta$ production there is evidence that the $\eta N$ FSI could play a role as well [@Calen1; @Calen2]. Therefore, one might expect that the TAPS data can be understood in terms of the strong neutron-proton ($np$) FSI and possibly an $\eta N$ FSI.
However, recent calculations [@Arenhovel1] which include the $np$ as well as the ${\eta}N$ final state interactions underestimate the cross section for the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ at photon energies close to the threshold. Within a different approach, three body calculations [@Arenhovel2] of the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ performed by the same authors reproduce the main features of the experimental data, but again do not explain the rather large total cross section near the reaction threshold. On the other hand, an older calculation of the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ performed by Ueda [@Ueda], which considers the formation of a quasi bound $\eta{d}$ state, leads to a much too strong enhancement of the production cross section close to threshold, and is ruled out by the TAPS data. Therefore, the explanation of the TAPS data is still open and needs further investigations.
Here we evaluate the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ within the impulse approximation. In addition we account for the FSI between the neutron and proton by employing the most recent CD-Bonn potential [@Machleidt1]. In Sect. 2 we specify the elementary $\gamma N\rightarrow \eta N$ amplitude which serves as input for our calculation of the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$. Specifically, we assume that the elementary $\eta$-production proceeds via the excitation of the $N^*$ $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance. The free parameters of our model are fixed by a fit to available data for the reaction $\gamma p\rightarrow \eta p$. In Sect. 3 we provide some details about the evaluation of the reaction amplitude for $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ and present results for the impulse approximation as well as for the inclusion of the FSI in the $np$ system. Possible effects from the $\eta N$ FSI are discussed in Sect. 4. In addition we provide predictions for the angular spectrum and for the momentum spectrum of the produced $\eta$ meson for selected incident photon energies in the vicinity of the $\eta$-production threshold. The section ends with a brief summary of our results.
The elementary $\gamma{N}{\to}\eta N$ amplitude.
================================================
The dominant contribution to $\eta$-meson photoproduction from a nucleon is given by the $N^*$ isobar excitation [@Knochlein; @Benmerrouche]. We do not consider the nucleon s-channel pole term nor $t$-channel vector meson exchanges, since their contributions were found to be negligible [@Knochlein; @Benmerrouche].
The square of the invariant collision energy of the reaction $\gamma{N}{\to}N\eta$ is defined as $$s=m_N^2+2m_N \, E_\gamma ,
\label{etos}$$ where $m_N$ and $E_\gamma$ are the nucleon mass and the photon energy, respectively. The photon momentum $k$ and the $\eta$-meson momentum $q$ in the center of mass system are given by $$k=\frac{s-m_N^2}{2\sqrt{s}}, \,\,\,\,
q=\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(s,m_N^2,m_\eta^2)}{2\sqrt{s}},$$ where $m_\eta$ stands for the mass of the $\eta$-meson. The Kälen function is defined as $$\lambda(x,y,z)=(x-y-z)^2-4yz.$$ The resonant contribution is given by helicity amplitudes in the relevant partial waves [@Walker; @Capstick], namely $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
A_{l\pm} & = & \pm F A_{1/2}^N \ , \\
B_{l\pm} &= & \pm F \left[\frac{4}{l(l+2)}\right]^{1/2} A_{3/2}^N \ ,
\label{helicities} \\
\nonumber
C_{l\pm} & = & \pm F C_{1/2}^N \ ,\end{aligned}$$ where the factor $F$ accounts for the resonance decay into the $N\eta$ channel. $l$ denotes the orbital angular momentum. Taking into account the phase space factor and the relativistic Breit-Wigner propagator as introduced in Ref. [@PDG] one obtains
$$F= \left[\frac{\Gamma_\eta}{\pi(2j+1)} \, \frac{k}{q}\,
\frac{m_N}{\sqrt {s}} \right]^{1/2} \!\!
\frac{\sqrt{s}}{M_R^2-s-i\sqrt{s} \ \Gamma} \ .
\label{F}$$
Here $M_R$ is the resonance mass, and $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma_\eta$ are the total and $R{\to}N\eta$ partial resonance widths, respectively, while $j$ is the spin of the resonance.
The standard relation between the Breit-Wigner helicity amplitudes and electric, magnetic and longitudinal multipoles are given in Refs. [@Knochlein; @Benmerrouche].
Following the analysis of pion photoproduction, we account for the energy dependence of the hadronic widths [@Manley] in order to satisfy the threshold dependence [@Knochlein; @Donnachie] of the multipole amplitudes of the outgoing meson momentum $q_\xi$. The energy dependence of the partial width for each final meson $\xi$ is given as $$\Gamma_\xi = \Gamma_\xi (M_R) \frac{\rho_\xi(\sqrt{s})}{\rho_\xi(M_R)},$$ where $\Gamma_\xi (M_R)$ is the $R{\to}N\xi$ partial resonance width at the resonance pole, while $\rho_\xi$ is given by [@Manley] $$\rho_\xi(\sqrt{s}){=}\frac{q_\xi}{\sqrt{s}} B_l^2 (q_\xi R), \,\,\,\,
q_\xi{=}\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(s,m_N^2,m_\xi^2)}{2\sqrt{s}} \ .
\label{rhob}$$ Here $B_l$ is the Blatt-Weisskopf function for the orbital angular momentum $l$. The interaction radius was taken as $R$ = 1 fm, and $m_\xi$ stands for the mass of the meson. The function $\rho_\xi(M_R)$ in Eq. \[rhob\] is evaluated at the resonance pole $\sqrt{s}{=}M_R$. In addition, the total energy-dependent resonance width is given by the sum over the partial widths of all available final states.
In principle, one may consider the contributions from the resonances $P_{11}(1440)$, $D_{13}(1520)$, $S_{11}(1535)$, $S_{11}(1650)$, $D_{15}(1675)$, and higher mass resonances to the photoproduction of $\eta$-mesons [@Knochlein] and evaluate the resonance parameters from the available differential cross section data and recoil nucleon polarization data [@Benmerrouche]. Contributions from $S$-wave resonances provide an isotropic angular spectrum $d\sigma/d\cos\theta$ of $\eta$-mesons, with $\theta$ denoting the $\eta$-meson emission angle in the c.m. system. The $P$-wave resonances contribute proportionally to $\cos\theta$, while the $D$-wave resonances result in a $\cos^2\theta$ dependence. Although contributions from higher partial waves to the total photoproduction cross section of $\eta$-mesons can be very small, they can be evaluated from the differential $d\sigma/d\cos\theta$ cross section with the help of interference terms. However, most recent data [@Krusche1] for differential cross sections of the reaction $\gamma{p}{\to}p\eta$ at photon energies from 716 to 788 MeV indicate that, within the experimental errors, the angular spectrum is dominated almost entirely by the $S$-wave distribution. Estimated contributions from $P$ and $D$-wave resonances can be given only at very low confidence level [@PDG3]. Furthermore, data on the nucleon recoil polarization, which in principle must be sensitive to the resonant contribution [@Benmerrouche], have large uncertainties and are thus not significant.
Since there is no strong experimental evidence [@PDG3] for contributions to the $\eta$-meson photoproduction from resonances other than the $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance in the near-threshold region, we will consider in the following only this resonance. The partial decay widths, $S_{11}(1535){\to}N\eta$ and $S_{11}(1535){\to}N\pi$, are related to the relevant coupling constant $g_{RN\xi}$, $\xi{=}\eta,\pi$, by $$\Gamma_\xi = \frac{g^2_{RN\xi}}{4\pi} \frac{q_\xi (E_N+m_N)}{M_R}.$$ Here the momentum $q_\xi$ and the nucleon energy $E_N$ are evaluated in the rest frame of the resonance at the pole position of $S_{11}(1535)$.
Considering only the contribution of the $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance, the data for $\eta$-meson photoproduction off protons can be well fitted with the following resonance parameters at the $S_{11}(1535)$ pole: $$\begin{aligned}
M_R=1544~MeV, \,\,\, \Gamma=203~MeV, \nonumber \\
\Gamma_\eta/\Gamma=0.45 \,\,\ , \Gamma_\pi/\Gamma=0.45 \,\,\ ,
\Gamma_{\pi\pi}/\Gamma=0.1 \ . \end{aligned}$$ For the electromagnetic helicity amplitudes in Eq. \[helicities\] we use the values $A^p_{1/2}$ = 0.124 $GeV^{-1/2}$ and $A^n_{1/2}$ = -0.1 $GeV^{-1/2}$. The result of this fit for the total cross section for the reaction $\gamma{p}{\to}p\eta$ is displayed in Fig. \[fi1\].
The Reaction $\gamma d \rightarrow \eta n p$
============================================
Using the impulse approximation (IA) the amplitude ${\cal M}$ of the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ for given spin $S$ and isospin $T$ of the final nucleons can be written as $${\cal M}_{IA}{=}A^T(s_1)\phi(\vec{p}_2){-}(-1)^{S+T}A^T(s_2)
\phi (\vec{p}_1),$$ where $\phi(p_i)$ stands for the deuteron wave function and $p_i$ ($i=1,2$) is the momentum of the proton or neutron in the deuteron rest frame. The quantity $A^T$ denotes the isoscalar or isovector photoproduction amplitude at the squared invariant energy $s_N$ given by $$s_N=s-m_N^2-2(E_\gamma+m_d)E_N+2\vec{k}_\gamma\cdot\vec{p}_N.$$ Our calculation within the framework of the IA is shown in Fig. \[mainz2\] and corresponds to the dashed line. It describes the data [@Krusche1] at photon energies above $\simeq$680 MeV reasonably well. Close to the reaction threshold, however, the IA result substantially underestimates the data. We take this as an indication that effects from the ($NN$ and/or $\eta N$) final state interaction play an important role here. Indeed, as already mentioned in the Introduction, it is well known from meson production in $NN$ collisions that close to threshold FSI effects lead to a significant modification of the cross section.
In meson production in $NN$ collisions FSI effects result predominantly from strong $S$-wave interactions in the outgoing $NN$ system. Therefore, we will take into account this contribution for the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$. The corresponding amplitude is given by $${\cal M}_{FSI}=m_N\int dk k^2 \frac{T(q,k) A^T(s_N) \phi(p_i)}{q^2-k^2+i\epsilon}.$$ Here $q$ is the nucleon momentum in the final $np$ system and $T(q,k)$ is the half-shell $np$ scattering matrix in the $^1S_0$ and $^3S_1$ partial waves. In the calculations presented here, the half-shell t-matrix is obtained at corresponding on-shell momenta $q$ from the latest CD-Bonn potential [@Machleidt1], which describes the $NN$ data base with a $\chi^2$/datum of about 1. In order to find out if a high precision description of the $NN$ data, in our specific case the $NN$ s-waves, is crucial, we carried out the calculations with an older one-boson-exchange model, OBEPQ [@physrep], also describing the s-waves reasonably well. We found the difference of those two calculations being negligible.
The total cross section $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ including the $np$ FSI in $S$-waves is displayed in Fig. \[mainz2\] as solid line. Now the model calculation describes the data [@Krusche1] reasonably well and lies, in fact, within the experimental uncertainties. As expected, the FSI interaction gives rise to a significant increase of the production cross section close to threshold as is required for getting agreement with the data.
Discussion
==========
In $\eta$-production experiments in $pp$ as well as in $np$ collisions one has observed that there is an even stronger enhancement of the production cross section close to threshold, which cannot be explained by FSI effects from the $NN$ interaction alone [@Calen1; @Calen2; @Moskal3]. This additional enhancement is, in general, seen as an indication of FSI effects due to the $\eta N$ interaction [@Grishina; @Pena]. Thus, it may be suggested that similar effects are seen in the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$. In order to expose a possible influence from the $\eta N$ FSI we again show the experimental data in Fig. \[FSIo\], but now divide them by our model calculation, which includes the enhancement from the FSI between the nucleons. Any effects from the $\eta N$ FSI present in the data would then reveal themselves as additional enhancement. Indeed, as can be seen in Fig. \[FSIo\], there is a deviation from our calculation for energies very close to threshold, which may be interpreted as being caused by an $\eta N$ FSI, though the error bars are large. It is interesting to mention, that the magnitude and also the energy range of this deviation are comparable to the effects seen in $\eta$-production via hadronic probes. In the reactions $pp\rightarrow pp\eta$ as well as in $pn\rightarrow d\eta$ the observed additional enhancement very close to threshold was a factor of 2 to 3, cf. Ref. [@Calen2] and [@Calen1], respectively, and the enhancement was limited to excess energies below roughly 15 MeV for the former and roughly 10 MeV for the latter reaction. In any case, it would be very useful to have data with higher statistics available at those energies very close to threshold in order to chart the possible enhancement due to the $\eta N$ FSI more accurately [@Hejny].
Angular spectra of $\eta$-mesons in the photon-deuteron rest frame are shown for different photon energies in Fig. \[mainz5a\]. The IA calculation underestimates the data at $E_\gamma$=627-665 MeV, but already reasonably reproduces experimental results at 665-705 MeV.
Momentum spectra of the $\eta$-mesons in the $\gamma{-}d$ rest frame at different photon energies are displayed in Fig. \[mainz5b\]. At the lower photon energy, 627-665 MeV, the IA calculation differs considerably from the full calculation including FSI. The latter leads to a significant enhancement of the yield for larger $\eta$ momenta. This is not surprising because in this case the $\eta$-meson carries away much of the available kinetic energy and the $NN$ system emerges with a small relative momentum, and the interaction is particularly strong. This enhancement at large $\eta$ momentum is clearly seen in the new still preliminary data of the TAPS collaboration [@Hejny]. As the photon energy increases, the difference between the IA and the calculation including the $NN$ FSI becomes smaller. At a photon energy of 665-705 MeV, the effect of the FSI has basically vanished, consistent with the observations in Fig. 2.
We would like to emphasize that the theoretical results displayed in Figs. \[mainz5a\],\[mainz5b\] represent an average over a finite energy interval. This is done in order to make the predictions comparable to the experiments where likewise an averaging over energy bins is made [@Krusche1; @Hejny]. Specifically for the momentum distribution of the $\eta$ meson this averaging has a significant influence on the results. The maximal $\eta$-momentum available at a given fixed photon energy for the reaction $\gamma{d}{\to}np{\eta}$ is defined by $$p_\eta^{max}{=}\frac{\lambda^{1/2}(s,[m_p+m_n]^2,m_\eta^2)}{2\sqrt{s}},$$ where $s$ is defined in Eq. \[etos\]. Averaging over the photon energy leads to a smearing of $p_\eta^{max}$. Since the $NN$ FSI is most strongly felt for $\eta$ momenta close to $p_\eta^{max}$ its effect is also smeared out by averaging over $E_\gamma$ as is the case with the results shown in Fig. \[mainz5b\]. Predictions for a sharp incident photon energy show a much stronger structure due to FSI as is exemplified in Fig. \[mainz6\]. Clearly, this suggests that a high enery resolution in the experiments is very desirable if one wants to see and study effects from the FSI.
Summary
=======
We calculated the reaction $\gamma d \rightarrow np\eta$ including the dominant $S_{11}(1535)$ resonance and the neutron-proton final state interaction. We find that the impulse approximation reproduces the cross section for inclusive photoproduction of $\eta$-mesons and the $\eta$-meson angular spectrum quite well for energies around 680 MeV and higher. At lower energies the consideration of the FSI between the outgoing nucleons is necessary to describe the relative enhancement of the cross-section data with respect to the impulse approximation. Though the $NN$ FSI accounts for a large part of the observed enhancement, our analysis suggests that there is still a remaining discrepancy with regard to the data for very small excess energies. This discrepancy is of similar size as found in the $\eta$-production in $NN$ collisions and may be taken as signature of the $\eta N$ final state interaction very close to threshold.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We acknowledge valuable discussions with V. Baru, A. Gasparian, V. Hejny, B. Krusche, A. Kudryavtsev, V. Metag, H. Ströher and J. Weiss. This work was performed in part under the auspices of the U. S. Department of Energy under contract No. DE-FG02-93ER40756 with the Ohio University.
[00]{}
B. Krusche et al., Phys. Lett. B **358**, 40 (1995). V. Metag, in [*Baryons’98. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on the Structure of Baryons*]{}, edited by D.W. Menze and B.Ch. Metsch (World Scientific, Singapore 1999), pp. 683. V. Hejny et al., in preparation; H. Ströher, private communication. H.O. Meyer et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **65**, 2846 (1990); H.O. Meyer et al., Nucl. Phys. A **539**, 633 (1992). H. Calén et al., Phys. Lett. B **366**, 39 (1996). H. Calén et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **80**, 2069 (1998). J. Smyrski et al., Phys. Lett. B **474**, 182 (2000). P. Moskal et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **80**, 3202 (1998); P. Moskal et al., Phys. Lett. B **474**, 416 (2000). F. Hibou et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**, 492 (1999). P. Moskal et al., Phys. Lett. B **482**, 356 (2000). For an overview and further references see, e.g., H. Machner and J. Haidenbauer, J. Phys. G **25**, R231 (1999). A. Fix and H. Arenhövel, Z. Phys. A **359**, 427 (1997). A. Fix and H. Arenhövel, Phys. Lett. B **492**, 32 (2000). T. Ueda, Phys. Lett. B **291**, 228 (1992). R. Machleidt, Phys. Rev. C **63**, 024001 (2001). R. Machleidt, K. Holinde, Ch. Elster, Physics Reports [**149**]{}, 1 (1987). B. Krusche et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. **74**, 3736 (1995). W. Dilg, Phys. Rev. C **3**, 103 (1975). S. Klarsfeld, J. Martorell and D.W.L. Sprung, J. Phys. G **10**, 165 (1984). G. Knöchlein, D. Drechsel and L. Tiator, Z. Phys. A **352**, 327 (1995) M. Benmerrouche and N.C. Mukhopadhyay, Phys. Rev. D **51**, 3237 (1995). R.L. Walker, Phys. Rev. **182**, 1729 (1969). S. Capstick and B.D. Keister, Phys. Rev. D **51**, 3598 (1995). Particle Data Group, Rev. Mod. Phys. **48**, 157 (1976). D.M. Manley et al., Phys. Rev. D **30**, 904 (1984); D.M. Manley and E.M. Saleski, Phys. Rev. D **45**, 4002 (1992). A. Donnachie, High Energy Physics, **V**, Ed. H.S. Burhop, New York Academic Press (1972). Particle Data Group, Eur. Phys. J. C **15**, 1 (2000). V.Yu. Grishina, L.A. Kondratyuk, M. Büscher, J. Haidenbauer, C. Hanhart, and J. Speth, Phys. Lett. B **475**, 9 (2000). H. Garcilazo and M.T. Peña, Phys. Rev. C **61**, 064010 (2000).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Using the lag-luminosity relation and various BATSE catalogs we create a large catalog of burst redshifts, peak luminosities and emitted energies. These catalogs permit us to evaluate the lag-luminosity relation, and to study the burst energy distribution. We find that this distribution can be described as a power law with an index of $\alpha=1.76\pm 0.05$ (95% confidence), close to the $\alpha=2$ predicted by the original quasi-universal jet model.'
author:
- 'D. L. Band'
- 'J. P. Norris'
- 'J. T. Bonnell'
title: 'Burst Statistics Using the Lag-Luminosity Relationship'
---
[address=[Code 661, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771]{} ]{}
[address=[Code 661, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771]{} ]{}
[address=[Code 661, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771]{} ]{}
Introduction
============
Jet models predict the distribution of the isotropic-equivalent energy $E_{iso}$: quasi-universal jet profile models predict an approximate power law distribution with index $\alpha=2$, where $N(E_{iso})
\propto E_{iso}^{-\alpha}$[@1]. The isotropic-equivalent energy $E_{iso}$ is the total energy radiated if the observed flux were radiated isotropically. To study the distribution of burst intensities, we used the lag-luminosity relationship to create a burst database with redshifts, peak luminosities, and burst energies, and then we fit energy distributions to the burst database. Of course, this database can be used for other studies.
In the lag-luminosity relation[@2] the peak bolometric luminosity $L_B$ is a function of the lag $\tau_B$ between two energy bands in the burst’s frame—$L_B=Q(\tau_B)$. But $\tau_0$ is measured in our frame. We model $\tau_B=(1+z)^c \tau_0$: time dilation contributes -1 to c, while the redshifting of temporal structure with a smaller lag from higher energy contributes $\sim$1/3 (pulses are narrower at high energy). The peak bolometric luminosity is related to the peak bolometric energy flux $F_B = L_B / [4\pi D_L^2]$, where $D_L$ is the luminosity distance. The peak bolometric energy flux is related to the peak photon flux P (integrated over an energy band, e.g., 50–300 keV for BATSE data): $F_B = \langle E\rangle P$. The result is an implicit equation that must be solved for each burst: $$P = Q\left((1+z)^c \tau_0 \right) / \left[\langle E \rangle
4\pi D_L^2\right]$$ After solving eq. 1 for the redshift, $L_B$ and $E_{iso}$ can be calculated from $F_B$ and the energy fluence, respectively.
The original lag-luminosity relation was a single power law, e.g., $L_B\propto \tau_B^{-1.15}$. But this power law over-predicts the luminosity of GRB980425 (assuming this burst was SN1998bw). Consequently Salmonson[@3] and Norris[@4] suggested breaking the single power law; for $\tau_B>$0.35 s the power law index is -4.7. A population of nearby, long lag bursts resulted.
With a database of bursts with $E_{iso}$ we can now calculate the energy distribution. The methodology presented here[@5] can also be applied to the luminosity function. The probability of detecting a given energy is truncated by the detection threshold: $p(E_{iso}
\,|\, E_{iso,th}M(\vec{a}))$ where $E_{iso,th}$ is the threshold value of $E_{iso}$ for that burst and $M(\vec{a})$ is the model (e.g., the functional form of the energy distribution) with parameters $\vec{a}$. For the ensemble of bursts the probability of detecting bursts with the observed energies is $$\Lambda = \prod_i p\left(E_{iso,i} \,|\, E_{iso,th,i}
M(\vec{a}) \right)$$ where the product is over each burst. This probability is the likelihood for the model $M(\vec{a})$. In frequentist statistics, we maximize $\Lambda$ with respect to the parameters $\vec{a}$ to get a best fit value. In Bayesian statistics the likelihood is a factor in the “posterior,” which can be used for confidence ranges and best fit values; the Bayesian approach allows the use of “priors” reflecting our expectations for $\vec{a}$.
Note that to study the energy distribution we do NOT need a complete sample in terms of observed fluences, only a sample that has no bias on the intrinsic $E_{iso}$. There can be gaps in the distribution of peak fluxes, but $E_{iso}$ has to be drawn uniformly from $p(E_{iso} \,|\,
E_{iso,th}M(\vec{a}))$ in our sample. On the other hand, if we want the burst rate per comoving volume as a function of redshift, then we do need a complete sample.
But is the resulting energy distribution a good representation of the data? The likelihood (frequentist approach) or posterior (Bayesian approach) can be used to compare models (functional forms), but do not indicate “goodness-of-fit.” However, our methodology assumes the energies are drawn uniformly from $p(E_{iso} \,|\,
E_{iso,th}M(\vec{a}))$. The cumulative distribution of $p(E_{iso} \,|\, E_{iso,th}M(\vec{a}))$ should therefore be a straight line, and the average value should be 1/2, with a statistical uncertainty of $[12N]^{-1/2}$ for $N$ bursts.
Results
=======
We started with 1438 BATSE bursts for which we calculated lags. Of these, 1218 have positive lags. These bursts also have hardness ratios, peak fluxes and durations. To calculate the average energy $\langle E\rangle$ we used the “GRB” spectral fits of Mallozzi et al.[@6] to the peaks of 580 of these bursts. For the 858 bursts without fits we assumed average spectral indices $\alpha=-0.8$ and $\beta=-2.3$. Plotting HR$_{32}$ (the 100–300 keV to 50–100 keV hardness ratio) vs. $E_p$ shows a clear correlation which can be approximated by $E_p$=240 HR$_{32}^2$ keV; we used this relation for the bursts without spectral fits.
Redshifts were calculated for this database for both the original simple power law lag-luminosity relation and the broken power law Salmonson[@3] and Norris[@4] introduced to incorporate GRB980425. As expected, the difference in the lag-luminosity relations is apparent at low redshifts: the broken power law results in a population of nearby bursts. There were few physically implausible high $z$ bursts (e.g., $z>20$) and thus no additional cutoffs on the lag-luminosity relation are required. In the absence of additional information, the choice between the two lag-luminosity relations depends on whether GRB980425 is considered to be a typical low luminosity burst. For the remainder of this analysis we use a single power law lag-luminosity relation.
As an aside, we found that the redshift calculation is sensitive to the value of $\langle E\rangle$. Calculating this quantity inconsistently can introduce errors into the resulting database.
We calculated the energy $E_{iso}$ for each burst from the redshift and energy fluence. The results were reasonable (see Fig. 1): few bursts had $E_{iso}>10^{54}$ erg or $E_{iso} < 10^{51}$ erg.
{height=".3\textheight"}
The energy detection threshold $E_{iso,th}$ can be calculated by scaling $E_{iso}$ by the ratio of the threshold peak photon flux to the observed peak flux. BATSE’s threshold peak flux was $P_{min}\sim$0.3 ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$; however, the number of bursts in our sample with $E_{iso}$ just above the threshold is suspiciously low (see Fig. 1), suggesting that the sample’s true threshold was greater than 0.3 ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. Consequently we used $P_{min}\sim$0.5 ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ as the threshold, deleting bursts with $P<0.5$ ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$.
The left hand side of Fig. 2 shows the likelihood surface for our sample assuming a power law functional form, where the two parameters are the low energy cutoff $E_2$ and the power law index $\alpha$ (i.e., $N(E_{iso})\propto
E_{iso}^{-\alpha}$ for $E_{iso}\ge E_2$). The likelihood is maximized by $E_2$ equal to the lowest observed value $E_{iso}$, although lower values are not ruled out. The best fit spectral index is $\alpha=1.76\pm0.05$ (95% confidence). Although $\langle P(>E_{iso}) \rangle$= 0.4642$\pm $0.0089 ($N$=1054, assuming $P_{min}\sim$0.5 ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$) deviates from 1/2 by $4\sigma$, considering the possible systematic errors (e.g., in the estimation of $E_p$ from the hardness ratio), this value of $\langle P(>E_{iso})\rangle$ indicates that a power law energy distribution is a fairly good characterization of the data.
{height=".25\textheight"} {height=".25\textheight"}
We also tried a lognormal energy distribution (right hand side of Fig. 2). The maximum likelihood occurs at $E_{\rm
iso,cen} = 3 \times 10^{51}$ ergs and $\sigma_E = 2.7$. The surface’s shape indicates that the data permit a high central value of $E_{iso}$ and a narrow distribution, or a low central value of $E_{iso}$ and a broad distribution. The observational cutoff truncates the true energy distribution, and the low energy extent is relatively unknown. We find $\langle P(>E)\rangle$=0.4821$\pm$0.0089 ($N$=1054, assuming $P_{min}\sim$0.5 ph cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$), consistent with 1/2 at the 2$\sigma$ level.
Implications
============
A quasi-universal jet profile that is a power law in the off-axis angle $\theta$—the energy per solid angle $\epsilon(\theta)\propto\theta^{k}$—results in a power law energy distribution (or luminosity function) with index $\alpha=1-2/k$ (hence $\alpha=2$ for $k=-2$), while a Gaussian profile results in $\alpha=1$. Lloyd-Ronning et al.[@1] found that if the profile parameters are distributions, the luminosity functions could be approximated by power laws with $\alpha\sim 2$ for power law profiles and $\alpha\sim 1$ for Gaussian profiles, but with curvature. The additional degrees of freedom introduced by varying the parameters give the jet models the freedom to fit a wide variety of energy distribution shapes. We find that our burst data can be fit by a power law energy distribution with $\alpha=1.76\pm0.05$ (95% confidence); considering only the statistical uncertainty the power law distribution is formally not a good fit, but with the likely systematic uncertainties the power law distribution is probably a good description of the data. While our power law fit is inconsistent with the original jet profile model ($k=-2$ and therefore $\alpha=2$), it is consistent with the jet profile models where parameters are permitted to vary.
A log-normal energy distribution also describes the data; the data permit a smaller average energy if the distribution is wider.
Lloyd-Ronning, N., Dai, X., & Zhang, B. 2003, ApJ, submitted \[astro-ph/0310431\] Norris, J. P., Marani, G. F., & Bonnell, J. T. 2000, ApJ, 534, 248 Salmonson, J. 2001, ApJ, 546, 29 Norris, J. P. 2002, ApJ, 579, 386 Band, D. 2001, ApJ, 563, 582 Mallozzi, R., et al. 1998, in Gamma-Ray Bursts, 4th Huntsville Symposium, AIP Conference Proceedings 428, eds. C. Meegan, R. Preece and T. Koshut (AIP: Woodbury, NY), 273
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Deep Neural Network has been found vulnerable recently. A kind of well-designed inputs, which called adversarial examples, can lead the networks to make incorrect predictions. Depending on the different scenarios, goals and capabilities, the difficulty to generate the attack is different. For example, generating a targeted attack is more difficult than a non-targeted attack, a universal attack is more difficult than a non-universal attack, a transferable attack is more difficult than a nontransferable one. The question is: Is there exist an attack that can survival in the most harsh adversity to meet all these requirements. Although many cheap and effective attacks have been proposed, this question is still not completely solved over large models and large scale dataset. In this paper, we learn a universal mapping from the sources to the adversarial examples. These examples can fool classification networks into classifying all of them to one targeted class. Besides, they are also transferable between different models. Our code is released at:'
author:
- |
Junde Wu\
Harbin Institute of Technology\
[[email protected]]{}
- |
Rao Fu\
Harbin Institute of Technology
bibliography:
- 'egbib.bib'
title: 'Universal, transferable and targeted adversarial attacks'
---
Introduction
============
Deep Neural Network has outperformed many previous techniques in a wide domain. Their high accuracy and fast speed make them to be widely deployed in applications. Despite these great successes, it has been found vulnerable to the adversarial examples: the output of the networks can be manipulated by adding a kind of meticulously crafted subtle perturbations to the input data. This property is shown to be generally exist. Whether in the tasks of computer vision, like classification [@szegedy2013intriguing], objection detection [@xie2017adversarial], semantic segmentation [@fischer2017adversarial] or in tasks of Natural Language Processing [@jia2017adversarial] and Reinforcement Learning [@huang2017adversarial].
In the classification task, the adversarial attacks aim to manipulate the network to misclassify. Previous works have proved generating this kind of adversarial examples can be very cheap and effective [@goodfellow2014explaining]. But the difficulty of the attack varies with the adversarial goals, perturbation scope and adversary knowledge. To put it clearly, we taxonimize the threat models by different goals, adversary’s knowledge and perturbation scope. The taxonomy is shown in Figure \[fig:taxonomy\].
![The taxonomy of adversarial attacks[]{data-label="fig:taxonomy"}](fig0_tax.jpg){width="50.00000%"}
$\bullet$ Adversarial Goals
- *Non-targeted misclassification* forces the victim model to incorrectly classify the input into an arbitrary class.
- *Targeted misclassification* forces the victim model to incorrectly classify all the inputs to a specific targeted class.
$\bullet$ Adversarial Knowledge
- *White-box attacks* assume threat model knows everything about the victim model, including the network architecture and the training dataset.
- *Black-box attacks* assume threat model can’t get access to the victim model. It only knows the standard output of the network, like the labels of the inputs and the corresponding scores. But if the adversarial examples are transferable, a white-box attack can be transferred to a black-box model.
$\bullet$ Perturbation Scope
- *Individual attacks* solve the optimization problem for each single input. The perturbations for each clean input are all different.
- *Universal attacks* denote the attacks that are able to learn a universal mapping relation between the inputs and adversarial examples, but don’t need to solve the optimization problem for each input.
In Figure \[fig:taxonomy\], the difficulty of the attacks increases with axes $x,y,z$. In this paper, we mainly explore how to produce attacks under the strictest conditions, which is correspond to point (2,2,2) in Figure \[fig:taxonomy\], denoting the transferable, universal and targeted attacks.
In the following, we first discuss related work in section 2. We then propose low frequency fooling image in section 3. We introduce our method of producing adversarial examples in section 4, corresponding experiments and comparisons are provided in section 5. We provide some discussions and analyses in section 6.
Related work
============
All the attacks can be diveded Some methods can be directly deployed in a black-box attack since they don’t require gradients. For example, Chen *et al*. [@chen2017zoo] used symmetric difference gradient to estimate the gradient and Hessian. Su *et al*. [@su2019one] utilized differential evolution to find the optimal solution. Zhao *et al*. [@zhao2017generating] built a generator to map the latent vector to the adversarial examples, and used search algorithms to search the effective noise. However, all these methods have to compromise on adversarial goals or perturbation scope. [@chen2017zoo] has to optimize on every single image. [@su2019one] aimed to generate adversarial examples by only modifying one pixel and only experimented on small images. [@zhao2017generating] is non-targeted attack.
Most other methods have to get access to the victim model, but due to the transferability of adversarial examples proposed by Papernot *et al*.[@papernot2016transferability], they are able to be transferred to other victim models [@rozsa2016adversarial], [@goodfellow2014explaining], [@papernot2016limitations], [@moosavi2016deepfool], [@carlini2017towards] or even the black-box services [@liu2016delving]. However, it’s still hard to ensure good transferability when considering the distortion of adversarial examples, time consumption and targeted attack. [@szegedy2013intriguing] first used L-BFGS method to generate the adversarial examples, but it’s time-consuming. [@goodfellow2014explaining] and its extended methods [@rozsa2016adversarial], [@kurakin2016adversarial], [@dong2018boosting], [@tramer2017ensemble] performed only one step gradient at each pixel to speed up the optimization. [@papernot2016limitations] computed Jacobian matrix of given sample trying to make most significant changes with smallest perturbations. [@moosavi2016deepfool] further reduced the intensity of perturbation by considering the classifier is linearized around the samples. [@carlini2017towards] defined a new objective function to describe the distance between sources and adversarial examples for better optimized the distance and penalty term. [@liu2016delving] discovered targeted attacks are harder to transfer than non-targeted attacks and optimized on ensemble deep neural networks to improve transferability. However, all these optimization-based methods are individual attacks, which means they have to optimize on each single source image. [@moosavi2017universal] first found the universal perturbation over large dataset but it is unable to deployed to targeted attacks. In this paper, we show the existence of a universal mapping form the source images to the transferable and targeted adversarial examples with small distortions.
Low frequency fooling image
===========================
Before going into the adversarial examples, let’s discuss about the fooling images. This nomenclature is adopted from [@nguyen2015deep], which means the images that are meaningless to humans, but the networks classify them to certain classes with high confidences.
For producing a fooling image, we solve the following optimization problem: $$\label{equation:fooling}
I_{f} = \mathop{\arg\max} P(y|I_{f})$$ where $I_{f}$ denotes the fooling image, $P(y|I_{f})$ denotes the classifier’s confidence of the targeted label $y$ when inputting image $I_{f}$. If the neural networks are differentiable with respect to their inputs. We can use derivatives to iteratively tweak the input towards the goal. The way to produce fooling images very like the way to visualize the network [@olah2017feature]. The difference is the target layer and constraint. Neural network visualization optimizes the layers which it aims to visualize. And for recognition, neural network visualization will add extra constraints to this optimization problem, forcing the goal to lie in the low frequency space. A contrast of fooling image and network visualization result is shown in Figure \[fig:comparison with fooling\].
[0.2]{} ![The comparison of fooling image and visualized image of class ’starfish’ in VGG19. Both images maximize the activation of the last fully connected layer before softmax.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with fooling"}](fig1_niave_ae.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![The comparison of fooling image and visualized image of class ’starfish’ in VGG19. Both images maximize the activation of the last fully connected layer before softmax.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with fooling"}](fig1_DRandTR_ae.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
A question is why the networks will naturally produce the high frequency unrecognizable noise. Odena *et al*. [@odena2016deconvolution] indicated they may be closely related to the structure of the networks, especially the strided deconvolutional layers and the pooling operations. Since Odena *et al*. [@odena2016deconvolution]\] pointed out the deconvolution operations are the root of the grid effect, one possible interpretation is when we leverage the gradients going backward from the targeted label, as what we do when solving Eqn. (\[equation:fooling\]), every convolution layer in the network will serve as a deconvolutional layer. Therefore, the gradients will have to go through excess deconvolutional layers (generally 2 or 3 deconvolutional layers are able to produce grid effect). The grid effect is sequentially magnified by these deconvolutional layers, and finally become these high frequency noises.
If these high frequency noises are closely related to the structure of the networks, are the low frequency fooling images can be unrelated to the structure of networks, thus being more general and transferable than these high frequency ones? To answer this question, we tried several methods to constrain the high frequency noises in the fooling images.
1\. Transformation Robustness (TR) constrains high frequencies by applying small transformations to the fooling images before optimization. Here, we rotate, scale and jitter the images. The constrained optimization process can be expressed as: $$\label{equation:TR}
I_{f}^{tr} = \mathop{\arg\max} P(y|\ T(I_{f}^{tr}))$$ where $T$ denotes the composition of the specific transformations.
2\. Decorrelation (DR) decorrelated the relationship between the neighbour pixels. Here, we do it by using gradient descent in the Fourier basis, as what [@olah2017feature] did to visualize the network. It can be expressed as: $$\label{equation: DR}
\begin{split}
&\theta = \mathop{\arg\max} P(y|\mathcal{F}(\theta))\\
&I_{f}^{dr} = \mathcal{F}(\theta)
\end{split}$$ where $\mathcal{F}$ denotes Fourier transform.
3\. Transformation Robustness and Decorrelation (TR and DR) are able to combine together to generate fooling images, which is expressed as: $$\label{equation:TR}
\begin{split}
&\theta = \mathop{\arg\max} P(y|\ T(\mathcal{F}(\theta)))\\
&I_{f}^{tr\&dr} = \mathcal{F}(\theta)
\end{split}$$
4\. Gradient optimized Compositional Pattern Producing Network (Gradient-CPPN) uses CPPN to map the source images to the adversarial examples. CPPN is a neural network that map a position of the image to it’s color. Thus, the frequency of the outputted fooling image is related to the architecture of CPPN. The simpler the structure of the network, the lower the frequency of getting images. This method optimizes CPPN parameters by the gradients of the victim model, which can be expressed as: $$\label{equation:G-CPPN}
\begin{split}
&CPPN(M_{p}) = \mathop{\arg\max} P(y|\ CPPN(M_{p}))\\
&I_{f}^{gcppn} = CPPN(M_{p})
\end{split}$$ where $M_{p}$ is a 2-D position map.
5\. CPPN encoded Evolutionary Algorithms (EA-CPPN) is proposed by [@nguyen2015deep]. This method uses CPPN encoded image to represent genomes and uses EA to optimize.
We choose VGG16 as our victim model to train the fooling images and test the results on Clarifai.com, which is a black-box image classification service. We shown some examples in Figure \[fig:comparison with low and high\]. We find that consistent with our hypothesis, low-frequency images can fool Clarifai.com into classifying them as targeted or related classes, while high-frequency noises are fail to fool the system. In all these low-frequency images, gradient optimized CPPN performs better than the other methods.
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_naive.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_TR.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_DR.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_TR+DR.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_cppn.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.2]{} ![Some samples of high-frequency fooling image: \[fig:fig2\_naive\] and low-frequency fooling images generated by different methods: \[fig:TR\]-\[fig:EA-CPPN\]. The classes following the images are predicted by Clarifai.com.[]{data-label="fig:comparison with low and high"}](fig2_cppnea.jpg "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
As our goal is to generate the transferable targeted adversarial examples, these low-frequency fooling images are not enough. In the next section, we will introduce how we leverage these low-frequency images to generate transferable targeted adversarial examples. For the convenience, in the following, we refer to these constrained low-frequency fooling images as $I_{lf}$, and unconstrained high-frequency fooling image as $I_{hf}$.
Generating adversarial examples
===============================
Method
------
For generating the adversarial examples, we aim at mapping the distribution of the source images to the targeted adversarial distribution. The samples in this distribution should maintain the similarity with the source images in the low level (pixel level), but have the similar high-level features with fooling images. These high-level features preserve the attribution of the fooling images to ensure the success of the attack and also, we assume, the low-frequency property to ensure the transferability. We prove this assumption by comparing the high-level features of fooling images with different frequencies. We find the mean and variance of different distributions cluster together, which denotes the $I_{lf}$ have some specific properties to ensure their transferabilities.
We build a conditional image generation function to shift the original source image distribution to inherit $I_{lf}$ distributions’ properties. Put formally, let $I_{s}$ and $I_{f}$ be the source images and fooling images that sampled from two observed distributions $q(I_{s})$ and $q(I_{f})$, and $I_{a}$ be the targeted adversarial examples. Our goal is to learn the conditional distribution $q(I_{s-f}|I_{f})$ to satisfy: $$\label{equation:adversarial}
I_{a} = \mathop{\arg\max}_{I_{a}\backsim q(I_{s-f}|I_{f})} P(y|I_{a})$$ where $I_{s-f}$ denotes the sample produced by endowing $I_{s}$ with the properties of $I_{f}$.
We build an an encoder-decoder convolutional neural network to serve as the conditional distribution generator. We call it Fooling Transfer Net (FTN). The details of FTN is described in the next section.
Network structure
-----------------
Inspired by the image-to-image translation [@NIPS2017_6672], [@liu2019few] and style transfer task [@gatys2016image]. FTN is built with an encoder $E$ and an AdaIN decoder $D$. We learn the properties of distribution $q(I_{f})$ from its’ high-level representations in the victim model, which are denoted as $\phi_{i}(\hat{I_{f}})$, where $\hat{I_{f}}\backsim q(I_{f})$ and $i$ denotes the targeted layer of the victim model.
The encoder $E$ consists a sequence of convolutional layers and several residual blocks to encode the source images to a latent vector. The AdaIN decoder is made of two layers AdaIN Residual Blocks followed by several deconvolutional layers. AdaIN Residual Blocks are the residual blocks with adaptive instance normalization layers, will first normalize the activations of a sample in each channel to have a zero mean and unit variance and then scale it with learned scalars and biases. In our translation network, the scalars and biases are got from the means and variances of $\phi_{i}(\hat{I_{f}})$.
Specifically, we extract the $\phi_{i}(\hat{I_{f}})$ in a pretrained classifier, and put them through several fully connected layers to get a certain number of (depending on the number of encoded features) scalars and biases. These scalars and biases are then applied to do the affine transformation to the scaled latent code. Here, we aims at extracting the latent content representations from the source images using the encoder and extracting the class-specific representation from fooling image. Then we shift the latent content code using class-specific representation. In this way, we hope to remain the content information of the original images but adjust them to the targeted attribution.
We supervise the network by the original source images $I_{s}$ and the fooling images high-level representation $\phi_{i}(\hat{I_{f}})$. $I_{s}$ constrain the output to maintain maximum content information and $\phi_{i}(\hat{I_{f}})$ constrain the output to have the similar high-level representations with the fooling images. An illustration of FTN is shown in Figure \[fig:FTN\].
{width="\textwidth"}
Loss function
-------------
We constrain the network by three loss function, the content loss $L_{c}$, the representation loss $L_{rep}$, and total variance loss $L_{tv}$.
The content loss is used to keep content similarity between the adversarial examples and the source images. We use the structural similarity (SSIM) index as our content loss function. SSIM is method to predict the perceived quality of the images. In our contrast experiment, it performs better than traditional $L_{2}$ loss function.
The representation loss constraint the output adversarial examples to have similar high-level representations with fooling images in the pretrained classifier. In this paper, we choose VGG19 as our classifier and empirically, choose layer $relu5_2$, $relu5_3$ and $relu5_4$ as the targeted representation. The representation is expressed as: $$\label{equation:mse}
\mathcal{L}_{rep}=\frac{1}{C_{j} H_{j} W_{j}}\left\|\phi_{j}(I_{a})-\phi_{j}(I_{f})\right\|_{2}^{2}$$
The total variance loss applies a total variation regularization to punish the reconstruction noise.
The total loss of the network is expressed as: $$\label{equation:mse}
\mathcal{L}_{total}=\mathcal{L}_{SSIM} + \gamma \mathcal{L}_{rep} + \lambda \mathcal{L}_{tv}$$ where $\gamma$ and $\lambda$ are the weight constants of $\mathcal{L}_{rep}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{tv}$.
Experiment
==========
Models: In the paper, we choose a classic classification model: VGG19 as our *training victim model* and test the transferability on the other more delicate classification models, like Inception-v3, ResNet-18, ResNet-50 and Densenet. We denote them as *validation victim models*. There have two points we need to clarify. Firstly, we haven’t put a lot of energy on the selection of *training victim model*. That’s because relevant experiments have been done by many previous works [@goodfellow2014explaining], [@liu2016delving], [@ilyas2019adversarial]. And the conclusion has seemed to be uncontroversial: the adversarial examples trained on the more basic models are equipped with more transferability. We don’t think our method can be an exception of it. Thus, doing this comparison will be time-consuming, not so meaningful and also distract the readers. Secondly, previous works have shown that using ensemble-based approach can get higher attack success rate [@liu2016delving], [@tramer2017ensemble]. But we only trained our net on a single victim model. That’s because we also think our method has no reason to be an exception. Training on a single victim model can preserve more test models to prove the transferability. We welcome the reports that showing our method will be an exception of the previous conclusion.
Dataset: FTN is trained on ILSVRC 2012 classification training set and tested on its’ validation set.
Inception-v3 Resnet-18 Resnet-50 Densenet Clarifai.com
--------------- -------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- --------------
Niave 1$\%$ 2$\%$ 1$\%$ 1$\%$ 0$\%$
TR 67$\%$ 79$\%$ 74$\%$ 76$\%$ 51$\%$
DR 72$\%$ 76$\%$ 83$\%$ 75$\%$ 62$\%$
TR$\&$DR 78$\%$ 81$\%$ 78$\%$ 83$\%$ 67$\%$
Gradient-CPPN 96$\%$ 94$\%$ 91$\%$ 93$\%$ 86$\%$
EA-CPPN 0$\%$ 1$\%$ 0$\%$ 0$\%$ 0$\%$
{width="\textwidth"}
Target: We choose attribution ’starfish’ as our default targeted class. We choose this class cause it is almost impossible to tangle with other classes. The features of starfish are distinct from most other objects. Thus it can avoid the circumstance that the model naturally misclassify the source images to the targeted class and then overestimate the performance of our proposed method. The targeted attack of the other classes can be checked in the appendix.
Measure: We measure our results by two important factors: transferability and distortion. The transferability is measured by the *transfer success rate*, which means the percentage of the generated adversarial examples are correctly classified to the targeted label by *validation victim models*. The distortion describes the difference between the generated adversarial examples and the source images. We measured the distortion by *root mean square deviation* (RMSD), which is computed as: $d = \sqrt{\frac{1}{n} \|I_{a}-I_{s}\|_{2}^{2}}$. We also use the ratio of transfer success rate and distortion, which is denoted as RTD as a measure to compare different methods. Put formally, it is calculated as: $$\label{equation:RTD}
RTD = \frac{transfer\quad success\quad rate}{RMSD} * 100$$
Low-frequency fooling image
---------------------------
In the paper, we proposed low-frequency fooling images and FTN to transfer the source images with them. In this section, we aim to prove $I_{lf}$ are more transferable than $I_{hf}$ and FTN can maintain this transferability.
We have given the examples that $I_{lf}$ are more transferable than $I_{hf}$ above. Here, we do the comprehensive experiment to prove this result. We compare the five high-frequency-constrained methods: CPPN Gradient, CPPN EA, DR, TR, DR+TR and the direct gradient ascent method with no constrain for high-frequency gradients. All the results are trained on *training victim model* and tested on *validation victim models*. The *transfer success rate* of randomly selected 100 samples are shown in Table \[tab:fooling image\]. We can see high-frequency constrained methods generally perform better than direct gradient ascent method, and CPPN Gradient method is the best in them.
And then, we will show FTN can maintain the transferability of $I_{lf}$. In other words, using more transferable fooling images in FTN can generate more transferable adversarial examples than the others. For the sake of fairness, we adjust the hyper-parameters for every methods to get their best effects. The ratio of *transfer success rate* and distortion is shown in Table \[tab:FTN\_self\] and the visual comparison is shown in Figure \[fig:FTN\_dif\_fool\]. We can see the better class images can contribute to generate more transferable or less distorted adversarial examples for the same model.
RMSD Inception-v3 Resnet-18 Resnet-50 Densenet Clarifai.com
--------------- ------- -------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- --------------
TR 10.13 3.94 4.34 4.65 4.21 3.00
DR 10.28 4.52 5.33 5.43 5.10 3.94
TR$\&$DR 10.34 6.34 6.81 6.49 7.02 5.41
Gradient-CPPN 5.21 13.32 13.39 12.13 12.23 12.11
FTN
---
**AdaIN normalization** We design the AdaIN Residual Blocks in FTN for shifting the latent source distribution by the property of latent class distribution. But in ablation experiment, we see the results are not substantially different. In contrast, the chooses of targeted representation layers and the loss functions play more decisive roles. However, we find the AdaIN residual really help the training process to converge more quickly and the setting of hyper-parameters more easily. The AdaIN Residual Blocks allow more flexibility of the decisive hyper-parameter $\gamma$, which denotes the weight of representation loss relative to content loss. **Selection of representations** We’ve tried many feasible combination of the targeted representation layers in VGG19. In style transfer, the style representations are generally chose as the activations from low to high. But for generating adversarial examples, the lower representations will endow more superficial similarity between the adversarial examples and fooling images instead of the semantic features. We choose some typical selections and show them in Figure \[fig:FTN\_dif\_layer\].
{width="\textwidth"}
**Loss function** For the content loss, we tried $L_{2}$ loss function, perceptual loss [@johnson2016perceptual] and SSIM loss. We show the visual comparison in figure\[\]. The SSIM loss generates the best visual effect in them. For the representation loss, we tried many loss functions that might be better than simple $L_{2}$ loss (e.g. cosine similarity, KL divergence, a bunch of discriminative nets). But unfortunately, none of them works better than $L_{2}$. Intuitively, we think there exists a better loss function for the representations. We hope further researches can find a better way than us.
Comparison with other methods
-----------------------------
Different with most adversarial-examples-generating methods, we learn the universal mapping in the paper instead of doing optimization for every single image. For fairly comparison, we degrade our method to the single image when comparing with the methods that process one particular image every time. These methods include, FG, FGS, Deepfool, JSMA and C$\&$W attack. We do the optimization on VGG19 model and test on *validation victim models* and Clarifai.com. Clarifai.com is a black-box image classification system, no one can get access to its’ dataset, network structure and parameters, which is good to test the transferability of adversarial examples. As shown in Table \[tab:FTN\_out\], our method can access higher transfer success rate than the other methods for the targeted attack.
RMSD Inception-v3 Resnet-18 Resnet-50 Densenet Clarifai.com
---------- ------ -------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- --------------
FG 3.56 1$\%$ 2$\%$ 1$\%$ 1$\%$ 0$\%$
JSMA 3.21 2$\%$ 2$\%$ 0$\%$ 1$\%$ 0$\%$
DeepFool 3.98 28$\%$ 33$\%$ 34$\%$ 31$\%$ 1$\%$
C$\&$W 4.55 2$\%$ 3$\%$ 2$\%$ 2$\%$ 0$\%$
FTN 3.41 98$\%$ 94$\%$ 93$\%$ 95$\%$ 94$\%$
We also compare our method with another universal attack [@moosavi2017universal]. The quantitive results are shown in Table \[tab:universal\].
RMSD Inception-v3 Resnet-18 Resnet-50 Densenet Clarifai.com
----------- ------- -------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- --------------
Universal 16.25 63$\%$ 56$\%$ 41$\%$ 51$\%$ 12$\%$
FTN 5.68 92$\%$ 88$\%$ 87$\%$ 91$\%$ 86$\%$
Discussion
==========
In this paper, we proposed low-frequency adversarial examples and proved it is more transferable than the high-frequency ones. However, what low-frequency attacks mean? Why they can be more transferable than the high-frequency ones? In this section, we attempt to discuss and answer these questions.
Firstly, we find low-frequency attacks and high-frequency attacks are highly different. This difference not only lay on the pixel image but also lay on the classifier representations, which are decisive to the classification (although they will be classified to the same class). This conclusion actually can be confirmed by the observation of difference between $I_{lf}$ generated adversarial examples and $I_{hf}$ generated ones, as shown in Figure\[\]. Cause the generating processes are all the same except the change of class images. But we still do the more rigorous experiments to observe the difference between these representations. We compare the representations of two kinds of fooling images in VGG19 model. Our targeted representations are $relu5_2$, $relu5_3$, $relu5_4$, which we find most effective to supervise our model and most decisive to the final classification. We compute the mean and variance of them and find the mean and variance of the same kind of fooling image are highly similar. This proves although they will be classified to the same class, their high-dimensional features are different.
But what this difference means and how this difference cause the stronger transferability? For answering this question, we analysis the low-frequency attacks and high-frequency attacks on the manifold. In this way, we can think the classification models learn the classified boundaries in a high-dimensional space. The traditional strategy\[\] is learning a high-dimensional vector and add it to a source image point. These methods constraint the vector can help the source image to escape from its original boundary (non-targeted attack) or pass trough another specific boundary (targeted attack). We call the vector perturbation. Since these learning methods attempt to find the smallest vector to make the attack successful, these vectors are highly related to the victim model’s classification boundary.Moosavi *et al*. [@moosavi2017universal] took them as the normal vectors from the source image point to the boundary. However, although the classification boundary learned by the different models shared some similarities (which make some high-frequency adversarial examples are transferable to some extent), the curvature of the different boundaries can’t be the same. That causes some high-frequency adversarial examples fail to transfer or have to magnify the perturbation to transfer.
Our method decouples the perturbation from the curvature of the boundary surface. Note learning a high-frequency fooling image is finding a point that is classified to the targeted class but which may be sensitive to the difference of the different classification models’ boundaries. And learning a low-frequency fooling image is finding a point that is still classified to the targeted class but less sensitive to the different models’ boundaries. We speculate that is because the low-frequency fooling images are closer to the nature image manifold. And the classification boundaries are trained to be more robust to the nature images than the meaningless noise, since the training datasets are consisted of the nature images. After getting $I_{lf}$, we then find the point that is near the source image in the pixel space and is close to $I_{lf}$ in the representation space. This constraint condition is independent of the curvature of the boundaries, thus is expected to be more transferable than the previous methods.
References
==========
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: |
We demonstrate coherent control of optomechanically induced transparency and Fano resonances in a four mirror macroscopic optomechanical cavity, with two movable mirrors, each driven by an external mechanical pump. The variable control of the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical pumps provides a means of tuning the shape and nature of the Fano profiles. Further, our scheme shows the occurrence of tunable optomechanical features, even at very low mechanical driving field amplitudes, in macroscopic optomechanical cavities.
Keywords
: Four mirror, Fano resonance, optomechanically induced transparency, mechanical driving, optomechanical system
author:
- Nikhil Pramanik
- 'K. C. Yellapragada'
- Suneel Singh
- 'P. Anantha Lakshmi'
title: 'Coherent Control of Fano Resonances in a Macroscopic Four-Mirror Cavity'
---
Introduction
============
Quantum interference between different transition pathways gives rise to several interesting physical phenomena, such as Fano resonances [@fano1961; @ravirau2004], that have been observed in a variety of physical systems. For instance, in plasmonics, photons are allowed to travel through multiple transition pathways which interfere, thus making the occurrence of Fano line shapes quite common in such materials. Fano resonances have been observed in a wide variety of systems which include the phonon interactions in solids [@scott1974; @hase2006], electron transport in quantum wells, quantum dots [@faist1997; @kroner2008], 3D waveguides [@gunupudi2019], coupled photonic microcavities [@smith2004; @fan2002], plasmonic metamaterials [@luk2010; @liu2009] and nanostructures [@yoon2012; @sasaki2009; @Johnson2004; @kobayasi2004] and photonic materials [@rahmani2012; @rybin2009; @ding2012; @nojima2014; @shang2014].
Fano line shapes have also been used in obtaining information on the interaction between a wide variety of nanostructures with light [@gallinet2011], for local refractive index sensing applications [@verellen2009], efficient confinement of light [@Miroshnichenko2010], surface enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) [@ye2012], generation of slow light in metamaterials [@Wu2011], enhanced light transmission [@zhou2011] and sensitive biosensors [@Lee2011]. Fano interference is seen to play an important role in producing lasing without population inversion [@arkhipkin1983; @kocharovskaya1988; @scully1989; @fry1993] and as a tool to probe decoherence [@agarwal1984; @barnthaler2010] in the field of quantum optics and quantum information. More recently, Fano resonances have been widely studied theoretically in hybrid optomechanical systems with distinct configurations involving double cavities [@qu2013], whispering gallery modes [@zhang2017], BEC [@akram2017; @Yasira2016], two level atom/qubit [@akram2015; @jiang2017], to name a few. A detailed analysis of Fano resonances and the generation of slow light was carried out in Ref.[@akram2017; @jiang2017].
In the existing studies of cavity optomechanics, the optomechanical (OM) effects (that depend upon $G^2$) become significant only when the effective OM coupling parameter $G$ is sufficiently large. This in turn requires extremely small sizes of mirrors and cavity arm lengths because the OM coupling parameter is inversely proportional to cavity length, size and mass (physical dimensions) of the mirror. Obviously in macroscopic cavities i.e. for large cavity length, mirror size and weight, OM coupling $G$ is very weak and hence it is not possible to observe OM effects for such small values of $G$.
In this work we propose a novel scheme that enables one to observe OM effects even in macroscopic cavities, i.e., even for negligible G. We study the occurrence of Fano resonances and the related phenomenon of optomechanically induced transparency (OMIT) [@weissOMIT] by analyzing the fields generated at the anti-Stokes frequencies in a macroscopic cavity. By introducing coherent mechanical pump to act on two mirrors of the four mirror cavity, we show that optomechanical interaction can be enhanced, thus resulting in appearance of Fano resonances and OMIT features in the generated anti-Stokes signals. For suitable choice of amplitude and phase of the mechanical driving fields and mirror oscillation frequencies, we demonstrate the occurrence of tunable double Fano resonance in a macroscopic four mirror OM cavity. From a detailed study, we further identify the interfering contributions to the fields generated at anti-Stokes frequencies.
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. II a detailed description of the system that is studied here is provided, together with necessary mathematical formulation and solutions for the dynamical evolution of different quantities of interest. In Sec. III numerical results pertaining to the OMIT and the asymmetric Fano-like resonance induced by interference of two transition pathways are presented. We further show the generation of double Fano-like resonances for specific choice of the drive amplitudes and phases. A summary of results and conclusions are presented in Sec. IV.
\[sec:level2\]Model and Theory
===============================
Fig. \[fig:1\] shows a schematic of the four mirror cavity considered in this work. Mirrors 1 and 2 are movable, each of which are driven by a coherent mechanical pump while mirrors 3 and 4 are fixed. A pump laser of frequency $\omega_{pu}$ and a probe laser of frequency $\omega_{pr}$ enter the cavity from the left. The frequency of the cavity is taken to be $\omega_0$. Depending on which cavity is experiencing stronger field (as decided by the reflectivity and transmittivity of the beamsplitter and the optical length of each of the arms) will correspondingly exhibit stronger optomechanical coupling resulting from the radiation pressure, produced due to the incident input field inside the cavity. In this study, the parameters are chosen in such a manner as to render the field in arm 3 negligible [@farman2014].
![Schematic diagram of a four mirror cavity with two movable mirror.[]{data-label="fig:1"}](four_mirror_system.JPG){width="\linewidth"}
The Hamiltonian, describing various interactions that are considered here, is written in a rotating frame with frequency $\omega_0$ in Eq. (\[eq:H\]).
$$\begin{aligned}
H = ~ &\hbar\Delta_c a^{\dagger}a+\sum_{i=1,2} \left( \frac{p_i^2 }{2m_i} + \frac{1}{2}m_i\omega_{mi}^2x_i^2 -\hbar g a^\dagger a x_i\right) \\
& + i\hbar\epsilon_{pu}(a^\dagger - a) + i\hbar \epsilon_{pr} (a^\dagger e^{-i\delta t}-a e^{i\delta t}) \\
&-\sum_{i=1,2}s_{mi}x_i cos(\delta t + \phi_{mi})
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:H}$$
Here $a$ and $a^\dagger$ are the bosonic operators of the cavity field, $p_i$ and $x_i$ are the momentum and position variables of the two movable mirrors each of which are modeled as simple harmonic oscillators, with frequency $\omega_{mi}$, effective mass $m_i$ and mechanical decay rate $\gamma_{i}$ with $i$ taking the values 1,2. The pump (probe) amplitude $\epsilon_{pu}$ ($\epsilon_{pr}$) is related to the input pump (probe) power $P_{pu}$ ($P_{pr}$) as $\epsilon_{pu}=\sqrt{2\kappa P_{pu}/\hbar \omega_{pu}}$ ($\epsilon_{pr}=\sqrt{2\kappa P_{pr}/\hbar \omega_{pr}}$). The optomechanical coupling constant $g$ is given by $g = {\omega_{pu}}/({L_4+L_1t^2+L_2r^2})$ where $L_i$ ($i = 1,4$) are the respective arm lengths of the four mirror setup with $r$ and $t$ the reflection and transmission coefficients of the beam splitter. The quantities $s_{mi}$ and $\phi_{mi}$ $(i=1,2)$ are the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical drive.
It is often convenient to work with dimensionless position and momentum operators. We now define the dimensionless position and momentum operators for each of the two mirrors (Eq. (\[eq:dimless\])) and rewrite the Hamiltonian in terms of these operators as given by Eq. (\[eq:H2\]).
$$\begin{aligned}
x_i=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{m_i \omega_{mi}}} \; Q_i \;\: \text{and} \;\: p_i=\sqrt{m_i \hbar \omega_{mi}} \; P_i
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:dimless}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
H = \; &\hbar \;\Delta_c \; a^{\dagger}a+ \sum_{i=1,2}\frac{\hbar \omega_{mi}}{2} \; ( \; P_i^2+Q_i^2 \; ) -\hbar\sum_{i=1,2} G_{i} \; a^\dagger a Q_i\\
& + i\hbar \;\epsilon_{pu} \; (a^\dagger - a)+ i\hbar \; \epsilon_{pr} \; (a^\dagger \; e^{-i\delta t}-a \; e^{i\delta t}) \\
& - \sum_{i=1,2}S'_{mi} ~ Q_i \; cos\; ( \; \delta t + \phi_{mi} \;)
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:H2}$$
Here the first term describes the cavity field energy with the cavity detuning given by $\Delta_c=\omega_0 - \omega_{pu}$ and the second term is the energy of the two mechanical oscillators. The third term describes the optomechanical interaction arising due to the coupling between the two mechanical oscillators and the cavity field. The effective coupling coefficient between cavity field and mirror 1 and 2 respectively are given by $G_1=t^2g \sqrt{\hbar/m_1 \omega_{m1}}$ and $G_2=r^2g\sqrt{\hbar/m_2 \omega_{m2}}$. The fourth and fifth terms describe the interaction between the cavity field and the input pump and probe fields respectively, with $\delta=\omega_{pr}-\omega_{pu}$, the pump - probe detuning. The last term describes the mechanical pumping energy applied to each movable mirror, with the driving parameter $S'_{mi}$ defined by $S'_{mi}=s_{mi}\sqrt{\hbar/m_i \omega_{mi}}$ (i=1,2).
We denote the expectation values of each of the operators $\hat a$, $\hat Q$ and $\hat P$ with $\braket{a}$, $\braket{Q}$ and $\braket{P}$ respectively. Using the Hamiltonian given in Eq. (\[eq:H2\]), we derive the equations that describe the dynamical behaviour of these operator expectation values in Heisenberg picture, as follows. $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\braket{a}}{dt} = &-i\Delta_c \braket{a} + \epsilon_{pu} + \epsilon_{pr} e^{-i\delta t} + iG_1 \braket{a} \braket{Q_1}\\
& + iG_2\braket{a}\braket{Q_2}-\kappa \braket{a}\\
\frac{d\braket{Q_i}}{dt}= & ~ \omega_{mi}\braket{P_i}, (i=1,2)\\
\frac{d\braket{P_i}}{dt}=&-\omega_{m1}\braket{Q_i} + G_i \braket{a^\dagger} \braket{a} - \gamma_i \braket{P_i}\\
& + \frac{S'_{mi}}{\hbar}cos(\delta t+\phi_{mi}), (i=1,2). \\
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:HL}$$ In the above equations, $\kappa$ is the cavity decay rate. In obtaining the above equations of motion, the mean field assumption $\braket{MN}=\braket{M}\braket{N}$ for the relevant operators has been used. Next, each of the variables is separated into a steady state solution and a small fluctuation around its steady state value, i.e., $\hat{x}=x_s+\delta \hat{x}$. By substituting the same in each of the above equations, we can obtain the steady state solutions (Eq. (\[eq:SS\])) as well as the equations of motion for the fluctuations in each of these operators. The steady state solutions are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&P_{is}=0, (i=1,2)\\
&a_s= \frac{\epsilon_{pu}}{\kappa + i\Delta}\\
&Q_{is}=\frac{G_i\left|a_s\right|^2}{\omega_{mi}}, (i=1,2) \\
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:SS}$$ where $\Delta=\Delta_c-G_1Q_1-G_2Q_2$. The equations of motion for the fluctuations in each of the operators are obtained as
$$\begin{aligned}
(\frac{d}{dt}+(\kappa +i \Delta_c ))\delta a & = & \epsilon_{pr}e^{-i\delta t} + i G_1 (Q_{1s}\delta a+a_s\delta Q_1)
+iG_2(a_s\delta Q_2+ Q_{2s}\delta a)\\
(\frac{d^2}{dt^2}+\gamma_1 \frac{d}{dt}+\omega_{m1}^2)\delta Q_1& = & G_1\omega_{m1}(a_s^*\delta a+a_s\delta a^*)
+\frac{S'_{m1}\omega_{m1}}{\hbar}cos(\delta t+\phi_{m1})\\
(\frac{d^2}{dt^2}+\gamma_2 \frac{d}{dt}+\omega_{m2}^2)\delta Q_2& = & G_2\omega_{m2}(a_s^*\delta a+a_s\delta a^*)
+\frac{S'_{m2}\omega_{m2}}{\hbar}cos(\delta t+\phi_{m2}).
\end{aligned}$$
We next use the ansatz $$\begin{aligned}
&\delta X_i=X_i^- e^{-i\delta t} + X_i^+ e^{i\delta t}, (i=1,2), \\
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:ansatz}$$
for each of the variables and substitute this into the equations of motion for the fluctuations and group the coefficients of like-terms to obtain the solutions for the relevant quantities of interest. For example, the term $a_1^-$ is of interest in obtaining the anti-Stokes component of the output field from the cavity. In particular, the real part of anti-Stokes field is given by $Re(\eta_{as})=Re(2\kappa a_1^-/\epsilon_{pr})$ [@qu2013]. The resulting equations for the fluctuations in the relevant variables are obtained as
$$\begin{aligned}
(\kappa +i(\Delta-\delta))a_1^- &=& \epsilon_{pr} + iG_1a_sQ_1^- + iG_2a_sQ_2^-\\
(\kappa +i(\Delta+\delta))a_1^+ &=& iG_1a_sQ_1^+ + iG_2a_sQ_2^+\\
(\omega_{m1}^2-i\gamma_1\delta-\delta^2)Q_1^- &=& G_1 \omega_{m1}(a_s^* a_1^- + a_s (a_1^+)^*)+\frac{S'_{m1}\omega_{m1}}{2\hbar}e^{-i\phi_{m1}}\\
(\omega_{m1}^2+i\gamma_1\delta-\delta^2)Q_1^+ &=& G_1 \omega_{m1}(a_s^* a_1^+ + a_s (a_1^-)^*)+\frac{S'_{m1}\omega_{m1}}{2\hbar}e^{+i\phi_{m1}}\\
(\omega_{m2}^2-i\gamma_2\delta-\delta^2)Q_2^- &=& G_2 \omega_{m2}(a_s^* a_1^- + a_s (a_1^+)^*)+\frac{S'_{m2}\omega_{m2}}{2\hbar}e^{-i\phi_{m2}}\\
(\omega_{m2}^2+i\gamma_2\delta-\delta^2)Q_2^+ &=& G_2 \omega_{m2}(a_s^* a_1^+ + a_s (a_1^-)^*)
+\frac{S'_{m2}\omega_{m2}}{2\hbar}e^{+i\phi_{m2}},
\end{aligned}$$
the solutions of which are obtained as $$\begin{aligned}
%\begin{aligned}
%FINAL EQUATION
Q_2^- &=& \frac{\epsilon_{pr}a_s^* G_2 \chi_2(\delta)\alpha + 2 \Delta\chi_2(\delta) G_1 G_2 \left|a_{s}\right|^2 Q_1^- + S_{m2} \chi_2(\delta) \alpha \beta e^{-i \phi_{m2}}}{\alpha \beta - 2 G_2^2 \left|a_{s}\right|^2 \chi_2(\delta) \Delta }\\\
%\vskip 0.2cm
Q_1^- &=& \frac{\alpha\chi_1(\delta) [\epsilon_{pr}a_s^* G_1 (d_2+2\Delta G_2^2\left|a_{2s}\right|^2\chi_2(\delta))
+ \beta S_{m1} e^{-i\phi_{m1}}d_2]
+\alpha \beta \chi_1(\delta)\chi_2(\delta)2\Delta G_1 G_2 \left|a_{2s}\right|^2 S_{m2} e^{-i\phi_{m2}}}{d_1 d_2 - 4 \Delta^2 G_1^2 G_2^2 \left|a_s\right|^4\chi_1(\delta)\chi_2(\delta)}\\
%\vskip 0.2cm
a_1^- &=& \frac{\epsilon_{pr}+iG_1 a_s Q_1^- + i G_2 a_s Q_2^-}{\kappa + i (\Delta -\delta)}
%\end{aligned}
\label{eq:final2}\end{aligned}$$
Each of the hitherto undefined quantities that appear in the above solutions are defined by
$${\nonumber}
%\begin{aligned}
\alpha = (\kappa-i(\Delta+\delta));~~~ \beta = (\kappa+i(\Delta-\delta));~~~
d_1=\alpha \beta -2 G_1^2 \left|a_s\right|^2\chi_1(\delta)\Delta;~~~d_2=\alpha \beta -2 G_2^2 \left|a_s\right|^2\chi_2(\delta)\Delta;$$
$$\Delta=\Delta_c-G_1Q_1-G_2Q_2;~~~S_{mi} = \frac{S'_{mi}}{2\hbar}, (i=1,2);~~~
\chi_1(\delta)=\frac{\omega_{m1}}{\omega_{m1}^2-i\gamma_1\delta-\delta^2} ~~~\text{and} ~~\chi_2(\delta)=\frac{\omega_{m2}}{\omega_{m2}^2-i\gamma_2\delta-\delta^2}~.
%\end{aligned}
\label{eq:final3}$$
In the next section we present numerical simulations of the results for the real part of the generated anti-Stokes field as a function of the normalized probe detuning $\delta_{pr}/\Omega$ where $\delta_{pr}=\omega_{pr}-\omega_{0}$, for a wide range of parameters and discussion of the results.
Results and Discussion
======================
Here we focus on a study of the generated anti-stokes field ($\eta_{as}$) in the four mirror cavity, for a wide range of values of the input parameters.
As shown in Fig. \[fig:grapha\], when the pump field of frequency $\omega_{pu}$ interacts with the mechanical mirror of frequency, say, $\Omega$, absorption and emission of phonons creates the anti-Stokes field ($\omega_{pu} + \Omega$) and the Stokes field ($\omega_{pu} - \Omega$) respectively [@gsagarwalbook]. If the frequency of pump laser is red-detuned (tuned below the resonance frequency of cavity exactly by an amount $\Omega$), then the anti-Stokes field becomes resonant with the cavity field and therefore gets enhanced, at the cost of suppression of the Stokes field, as now the Stokes field is far removed from resonance.
![Schematic illustration of frequencies used in obtaining Fano line shapes.[]{data-label="fig:grapha"}](leveldiagram.jpg){width="\linewidth"}
Ugo Fano, in a seminal paper [@fano1961], first described the asymmetric profile resulting in Rydberg spectral atomic lines and provided a detailed explanation of this feature arising due to resonant destructive interference between two transition pathways. In particular, one observes a minimum with an accompanying maximum very close to it, which is known by the name Fano resonance. Inside the four mirror cavity, when the frequency of the probe beam is tuned to that of the generated anti-Stokes field, destructive interference between these two fields gives rise to Fano-like resonance. As shown in Fig. \[fig:grapha\], interference takes place between the two transition pathways $\ket{a}\rightarrow\ket{E}$ and $ \ket{a}\rightarrow\ket{b}\rightarrow\ket{E}$, where $\ket{E}$ represents a continuum of states. Thus, when $\omega_{pr}=\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m1}$, destructive interference between the two fields (anti-Stokes and the probe) leads to a Fano-like resonance. Availability of two oscillating mirrors, which can be tuned independently of each other, at frequencies $\omega_{m1}$ and $\omega_{m2}$ respectively, provides two transition pathways from state $\ket{b}$ to the continuum $\ket{E}$. A suitable choice of these parameters gives rise to a double Fano-like resonance. For instance, choosing the mechanical oscillation frequency of both the mirrors to be equal ($\omega_{m1}=\omega_{m2}$) results in superposition of the two resonances. Under this condition, the resulting Fano-like profile can be modified, giving rise to novel features, by tuning the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical pump. These features are illustrated in the following figures.
In this study, we have considered a truly macroscopic 4-mirror cavity, with the following parameters. Each of the cavity lengths $L_i=35$ mm, ($i = 1,4$), the effective pump laser detuning $\Delta = \Omega=2\pi \times 10^7$ Hz, the cavity decay rate $\kappa=2\pi \times 10^6$ Hz, mechanical damping rate of each mirror $\gamma_{mi} = 2\pi \times 10^4$ Hz ($i=1,2$), mass of each mirror $m_i=14.5$g, ($i = 1,2$), wavelength of pump laser $\lambda=1064$ nm and pump power $P_{pu}=10$ $\mu$W respectively. It is to be noted that the parameters used in this study have been obtained from a careful survey of existing literature on macroscopic hybrid optomechanical systems [@kc2018; @sekatski2014; @suzuki2015; @ma1; @ma2; @ma3; @ma4; @ma8; @ma9; @ma10]. Due to the macroscopic nature of the parameters of the four-mirror setup, the optomechanical coupling is very weak to show any observable optomechanical effects such as the optomechanically induced transparency, the Fano resonances which were earlier reported in microscopic cavities [@qu2013; @farman2014]. This problem can however be circumvented by application of very nominal coherent driving field, resulting in observable optomechanical effects. In the following, we present numerical results for the real part of the anti-Stokes field for a variety of parameters, the details of which are contained in each of the figures, and demonstrate the significant role played by the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical drive, in observing the novel features reported here.
In the analytical expressions that were obtained in the previous section, the optomechanical interaction terms appear to several orders of the coupling parameter $G$. However, as the present OM system which has very weak optomechanical coupling, owing to its macroscopic nature as determined by the parameters that were considered, the quadratic and higher order terms result in negligible contribution to the features that are observed. We therefore neglect the higher order optomechanical interaction terms and retain only the linear terms in the interaction strength $G$. This gives rise to considerable simplification in the expression for $a_1^-$, which is obtained after neglecting all components containing second and higher order terms of effective OM coupling strength $G_i$ ($i=1,2$), as shown below. It is to be noted that the scheme proposed here, involving the coherent mechanical driving of the mirrors, enhances the optomechanical interaction giving rise to observable effects, even at very nominal mechanical driving amplitudes $s_{mi}$ ($ i = 1,2$).
$$\begin{aligned}
a_1^- = \frac{\epsilon_{pr}+i G_1 a_s S_{m1} \chi_1(\delta) e^{-i\phi_{m1}}+i G_2 a_s S_{m2} \chi_2(\delta) e^{-i\phi_{m2}}}{\kappa + i(\Delta - \delta)}.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:redu_eq}$$
This expression can be simplified further by assuming $G_1=G_2=G$, $\chi_1=\chi_2=\chi$ resulting in the following.
$$\begin{aligned}
a_1^- = \frac{\epsilon_{pr}+ A ( S_{m1}e^{-i\phi_{m1}}+ S_{m2}e^{-i\phi_{m2}} )}{\kappa + i(\Delta - \delta)},
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:small_eq1}$$
where $A$ appearing in the above equation is given by $A = i G a_s\chi(\delta)$. We now study the behaviour of output spectrum for various combinations of amplitudes and phases of the two coherent mechanical pumps. At first, we look at the case when $\phi_{m1}=\phi_{m2}=3\pi/2$.
![Real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $\omega_{m1}=\Omega$, $\phi_{m1}$=$3\pi/2$, (a) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN (blue), $6$fN (red), $0$ (black) and $s_{m2}$=$0$; (b) $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$5.5$ fN (blue), $s_{m1}$=$5.5$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$0$ (black); (c) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$11$fN, $\phi_{m2}$=$\pi/2$ (black).[]{data-label="fig:OMIT"}](omit1.jpg "fig:"){width="\linewidth"} ![Real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $\omega_{m1}=\Omega$, $\phi_{m1}$=$3\pi/2$, (a) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN (blue), $6$fN (red), $0$ (black) and $s_{m2}$=$0$; (b) $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$5.5$ fN (blue), $s_{m1}$=$5.5$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$0$ (black); (c) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$11$fN, $\phi_{m2}$=$\pi/2$ (black).[]{data-label="fig:OMIT"}](omit2.jpg "fig:"){width="\linewidth"} ![Real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $\omega_{m1}=\Omega$, $\phi_{m1}$=$3\pi/2$, (a) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN (blue), $6$fN (red), $0$ (black) and $s_{m2}$=$0$; (b) $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$5.5$ fN (blue), $s_{m1}$=$5.5$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$0$ (black); (c) $s_{m1}$=$11$fN and $s_{m2}$=$0$ (red), $s_{m1}$=$s_{m2}$=$11$fN, $\phi_{m2}$=$\pi/2$ (black).[]{data-label="fig:OMIT"}](omit3.jpg "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
Taking $\Delta=\delta=\Omega$, it is observed that a phase of $3\pi/2$ gives rise to OMIT at the line center. It is further seen that the strength of OMIT feature (as quantified by how close the dip is to its zero value) is proportional to the amplitude of the coherent mechanical pump which is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:OMIT\](a). Absence of mechanical driving i.e., $s_{m1}=0$ (black), shows absence of OMIT at the line center. Introducing a small driving amplitude of $s_{m1}=6$ fN (red) results in a dip at the line center, which indicates transmission of the probe beam on resonance. With further increase in the amplitude, $s_{m1}=11$ fN (blue) one observes a complete transmission of probe beam. The destructive interference between the probe beam and the anti-Stokes field when $\omega_{pr}=\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m1}$ gives rise to OMIT at the line center corresponding to $\omega_{m1}=\Omega$. The results of Fig. \[fig:OMIT\] show that an increase in the strength of mechanical pump gives rise to an enhancement in probe transmission, leading to complete transmission (OMIT) for a particular value of this parameter.
In Fig. \[fig:OMIT\](b), the absence of dip at the line center in the black curve shows clearly that OM effects are not present when the mechanical driving field is not applied, i.e., $s_{m1}=s_{m2}=0$. Introduction of a small mechanical pump of amplitude $s_{m1}=5.5$ fN on mirror 1, with $\omega_{m1}=\Omega$, gives rise to a dip at the line center, as seen in the red curve, showing clearly the generation of OMIT. Further inclusion of mechanical pump of the same amplitude ($s_{m2} = 5.5$ fN) on mirror 2, with both the phases held at the same value, i.e., $\phi_{m1} = \phi_{m2} = 3\pi/2$, gives rise to complete transparency of the probe beam at the line center (blue). This feature can be attributed as arising due to coherent addition of the OM contributions arising from each of the mechanical driving fields, which are at the same phase.
This can further be substantiated by exploring whether the effect will cancel out by tuning one of the mechanical driving fields completely out of phase with the second. This is indeed the case, as shown in Fig. \[fig:OMIT\](c), where the red curve shows complete transparency of probe beam at the line center, generated solely due to $s_{m1}$, at a phase $\phi_{m1} = 3 \pi/2$. Introducing the second mechanical drive $s_{m2}$ at a phase $\phi_{m2} = \pi/2$ provides another channel which destructively interferes to cancel out this OMIT effect as seen from the black curve. Thus, tuning the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical pumps gives a handle to control the generation of OMIT in a macroscopic cavity.
In the results presented so far, it was shown that OMIT is observed at the line center, when the phases of the mechanical driving fields were held at $3\pi/2$. It would be interesting to see the effect of varying the phase of the mechanical pump on the OMIT features. For this purpose, at first, we switch off one of the mechanical pumps, say $s_{m2}=0$ and keep the amplitude $s_{m1}$ fixed at a particular value of $11$ fN and vary it’s phase $\phi_{m1}$ at intervals of $\pi/2$ and record the changes in the output spectrum which are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:phase\].
Fig. \[fig:phase\](a) illustrates the case when only one of the mechanical driving fields is turned on ($s_{m1}=11$ fN and $s_{m2}=0$) at a phase $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$, with $Re(\eta_{as})$ reaching its minimum value at the line center, identical to the red curve in Fig. \[fig:OMIT\](c). Keeping all other parameters fixed, we now change the phase $\phi_{m1}$ of $s_{m1}$ to $\pi/2$, which gives rise to a sharp increase in $Re(\eta_{as})$ at the line center as shown in Fig. \[fig:phase\](b) showing remarkable absorptive behaviour of the cavity at $\pi/2$ phase. Other possible interesting values of phase $\phi_{m1}$ are explored further. The phase $\phi_{m1}=0$ results in a Fano-like lineshape as shown in Fig. \[fig:phase\](c) and by changing the value of the phase to $\phi_{m1}=\pi$, gives rise to the lineshape as shown in Fig. \[fig:phase\](d), which is a mirror image of the previous case. Similar features have been observed in other optomechanical systems [@jma2015; @jia2015]. These results clearly show the importance of coherent mechanical pump and its phase in controlling the spectral features of the generated fields. The sensitive changes in the behaviour of the system, which are detected as a function of the phase of mechanical driving, suggest that this method may be employed as a tool to detect the phase of an unknown harmonic force with considerable precision.
In the above, we have assumed that the oscillation frequencies of both the mirrors are equal to the effective cavity detuning, i.e. $\omega_{m1} =\omega_{m2}= \Omega$, the combination of which was giving rise to resonance at the line center. However, the ability to tune the oscillation frequencies of movable mirrors independently of one another can give rise to asymmetric lineshapes as shown in the Figures \[fig:phase\_2\](a) and (b). Here we have tuned the oscillation frequency $\omega_{m1}=1.2 \Omega$, due to which the anti-Stokes field will destructively interfere with the probe beam whenever $\omega_{pr} = \omega_{pu}+ 1.2 \Omega$, as shown in Fig. \[fig:phase\_2\](a). We observe occurrence of Fano-like resonance and a mirror image of the same, at a corresponding value of 0.2 of the normalized probe detuning, for phases $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$ and $\pi/2$ respectively. The results presented for various combinations of the mechanical drive fields and their phases show clearly the interference effects between two transition pathways, in this case the fields generated at the probe frequency and at the anti-Stokes frequency. It is interesting to note that these features have not been observed so far in macroscopic cavities (due to the very weak optomechanical effects in such systems) and are resulting purely due to the introduction of coherent mechanical driving field(s).
Next, we consider the case when both the mechanical pumps ($s_{m1}$ and $s_{m2}$) are switched on and degeneracy between oscillation frequencies of the mirrors is removed ($\omega_{m1} \ne \omega_{m2}$). This condition provides two distinct transition pathways (($\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m1})$ and $(\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m2}$)) to interfere with $\omega_{pr}$, which gives rise to two resonances as clearly illustrated in Fig. \[fig:6\]. Here, in addition to the OMIT generated at the line center, a sharp resonance peak at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega=0.3$ is observed. The parameter considered here are $\omega_{m1}= \Omega$, $\phi_{m1}= 3\pi/2$ and $\omega_{m2}=\Omega+0.3 \Omega$, $\phi_{m2}=\pi$. Fig. \[fig:6\], clearly shows that the strength (magnitude) of these OM features can be controlled by tuning the amplitude of the mechanical driving. When $s_{m1}=10.5$ fN, we see a minima in the generated anti-Stokes field ($Re(\eta_{as})$) at the line center and a maxima at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega$= 0.3 for $s_{m2}=38$ fN, as shown by the blue curve in Fig. \[fig:6\]. With a decrease in the amplitudes of both mechanical pumps, $s_{m1}=5$ fN and $s_{m2}=20$ fN, we see a considerable decrease in the strength of resonant curves, as can be seen from the red curve. The black curve illustrates the absence of any OM features as both the mechanical pumps are switched off, i.e., $s_{m1}=s_{m2}=0$. It is to be mentioned that these OM features are generated in a macroscopic OM system with the introduction of coherent mechanical pump which has hitherto not been seen.
![ Fano resonance in the real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $s_{m1}=8$ fN and (a) $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$; (b) $\phi_{m1}=\pi/2$. []{data-label="fig:phase_2"}](fano4m1b.jpg "fig:"){width="\linewidth"} ![ Fano resonance in the real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $s_{m1}=8$ fN and (a) $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$; (b) $\phi_{m1}=\pi/2$. []{data-label="fig:phase_2"}](4mfano.jpg "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
We next present our results on double Fano-like resonance lineshapes away from the line center, which can be tuned by introduction of mechanical driving fields and their phases. Such features have been widely studied in a different context in plasmonic structures [@wang2013; @dana2016]. Very recently, these double Fano resonance lineshapes have been studied also in cavity optomechanical systems [@qu2013; @jiang2017; @sohail2018]. In Fig. \[fig:triple\] the resonant peak/dip on the right to the line center appears due to the introduction of $s_{m1}$ and the peak on the leftside results due to the introduction of $s_{m2}$. The parameters that were considered here are $\omega_{m1}=\Omega+0.2\Omega$ and $\omega_{m2}=\Omega-0.2\Omega$, due to which the resonance due to mirror 1 ($s_{m1}$) occurs at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega = 0.2$ and that due to mirror 2 ($s_{m2}$) occurs at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega = -0.2$. These resonances occur due to interference of probe beam and the anti-Stokes fields that are generated at $\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m1}$ and $\omega_{pu}+\omega_{m2}$ respectively. The location of these peaks can be suitably modified by tuning the mechanical frequency of the movable mirrors. Here, a mechanical pump $s_{m1}=15$ fN (Fig. \[fig:triple\]) is applied to generate a strong resonance peak on the left, whereas a slightly larger value of $s_{m2}$ ($20$ fN) is required to generate a resonance peak of similar height on the right side. This asymmetry arises from the fact that the resonance due to $s_{m2}$ occurs when $\omega_{pr}=\omega_{pu}+1.2\Omega$, which is far away from the pump laser frequency as compared to the resonance that occurs due to application of $s_{m1}$ at $\omega_{pr}=\omega_{pu}+0.8\Omega$. Therefore the closer we are to the pump laser frequency $\omega_{pu}$, the smaller is the force that is needed to generate the OM resonance features and vice versa. One observes that by flipping the phase $\phi_{m2}$ from a value of $0$ (red dashed curve) to $\pi$ (black solid curve), the dip changes to a peak. The negative peak (red dashed) at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega=0.2$ corresponds to resonance amplification which can effectively be shifted to resonance absorption (positive peak) by adjusting the phase ($\phi_{m2}$) of coherent mechanical pump. These features clearly show the important role played by the amplitude and phase of the coherent mechanical pump in tuning the absorption/amplification features as well as their positions.
![Real part of anti-Stokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning $(\omega_{pr}-\omega_{0})/\Omega$ for $s_{m1}=10.5$ fN, $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$ and $s_{m2}=38$ fN, $\phi_{m2}=\pi$ (blue), $s_{m1}=5$ fN, $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$ and $s_{m2}=20$ fN, $\phi_{m2}=\pi$ (Red); $s_{m1}=0$, $\phi_{m1}=3\pi/2$ and $s_{m2}=0$, $\phi_{m2}=\pi$ (black). []{data-label="fig:6"}](omitandfano.jpg){width="\linewidth"}
![Double Fano resonance in real part of antistokes field as a function of normalized probe detuning for $s_{m1}=15$ fN, $\omega_{m1}=0.8\Omega$, $s_{m2}=20$ fN, $\omega_{m2}=1.2\Omega$ and $\phi_{m1}=\phi_{m2}=0$ (black solid curve); $\phi_{m1}=0$ and $\phi_{m2}=\pi$ (red dashed curve) []{data-label="fig:triple"}](doublefanorev3.jpg){width="\linewidth"}
![Real part of anti-Stokes field vs normalized probe detuning for $s_{m1} = s_{m2}=20$ fN, $\phi_{m1} = \phi_{m2} = \pi$ (blue); $s_{m1}=30$ fN, $\phi_{m1}= \pi$, $s_{m2}=10$ fN, $\phi_{m2}= 0$ (red); $s_{m1} = s_{m2}=20$ fN, $\phi_{m1}= \pi$, $\phi_{m2}= 0$ (black) []{data-label="fig:fanophase"}](fanophase2.jpg){width="\linewidth"}
Next we consider the case when the mechanical frequency of both oscillators are taken to be equal and tuned away from the effective cavity detuning ($\Delta$) where $\omega_{m1}=\omega_{m2} = 1.3\Omega$ where $\Delta=\Omega$, this enables one to control the resonance features by changing the phase of the mechanical pump. When both $s_{m1}$ and $s_{m2}$ have the same phase, namely, $\phi_{m1}=\phi_{m2}=\pi$, they constructively interfere giving rise to resonant enhancement at $\delta_{pr}/\Omega=0.3$ as shown in the blue curve in Fig. \[fig:fanophase\]. Next, when the relative phase of the mechanical pumps, with strengths $s_{m1}=s_{m2}=20$ fN, is shifted from $\pi$ to $2\pi$ or $0$, destructive interference takes place between the two coherent processes which leads to total cancellation of the Fano-like feature, resulting in the black curve. This situation amounts to effectively turning both the mechanical pumps off. We thus show that by tuning the relative phase between the two mechanical pumps, which are of equal magnitude, we can completely switch on/off the Fano-resonance. Taking their amplitudes unequal will result in further features in the Fano-resonance. For example, the red curve in Fig. \[fig:fanophase\] corresponds to unequal values of the mechanical driving fields, $s_{m1}=30$ fN and $s_{m2}=10$ fN with phases $\phi_{m1}=\pi$ and $\phi_{m2}=0$, unlike the blue curve, in which both the mechanical drives were taken to have the same amplitude and phase.
Conclusion
==========
In this work we have shown how the OM features viz., the optomechanically induced transparency and asymmetric Fano lineshapes can arise in a four mirror macroscopic optomechanical cavity, due to inclusion of coherent mechanical driving of the two movable mirrors. We identify interfering pathways leading to the Fano resonances, in the macroscopic four mirror optomechanical system considered here. We further show that these features can be efficiently controlled by changing the phase and amplitude of mechanical driving. The sensitive changes that are observed in the Fano lineshapes with slight modification in amplitude and phase of the mechanical driving fields suggests the possibility of exploiting this feature to detect unknown harmonic forces. For the special case of the frequencies of both the mechanical oscillators being equal, it is shown that the phase can be used as a switch to generate interesting optomechanical effects. The freedom of tuning the two mechanical oscillators independently of each other, leads to the generation of tunable double Fano-like resonance. In conclusion, this work suggests the possibility of observing interesting tunable quantum effects at macroscopic scales, with the aid of coherent mechanical driving fields.
[50]{}
U. Fano, Phys. Rev. **124**, 1866 (1961).
A. R. P. Rau, Phys. Scripta **69**, C10-13 (2004).
J. F. Scott, Rev. Mod. Phys. **46**, 83 (1974).
M. Hase, J. Demsar, and M. Kitajima, Phys. Rev. B**74**, 212301 (2006).
J. Faist, F. Capasso, C. Sitori, K. W. West, and L. N. Pfeiffer, Nature **390**, 589–591 (1997).
M. Kroner, A. O. Govorov, S. Remi, B. Biedermann, S. Seidl, A. Badolato, P. M. Petroff, W. Zhang, R. Barbour, B. D. Gerardot, R. J. Warburton, and K. Karrai, Nature **451**, 311-314 (2008).
B. Gunupudi, S. R. Das, R. Navarathna, S. K. Sahu, S. Majumder, and V. Singh, Phys. Rev. Appl. **11**, 024067 (2019).
S. Fan, Appl. Phys. Lett. **80**, 908 (2002).
D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, Phys. Rev. A**69**, 063804 (2004).
B. Luk’yanchuk, N. I. Zheludev, S. A. Maier, N. J. Halas, P. Nordlander, H. Giessen, and C. T. Chong, Nat. Mater. **9**, 707 (2010).
N. Liu, L. Langguth, T. Weiss, J. Kästel, M. Fleischhauer, T. Pfau, and H. Giessen, Nat. Mater. **8**, 758 (2009).
Y. Yoon, M. G. Kang, T. Morimoto, M. Kida, N. Aoki, J. L. Reno, Y. Ochiai, L. Mourokh, J. Fransson, and J. P. Bird, Phys. Rev. X**2**, 021003 (2012).
S. Sasaki , H. Tamura, T. Akazaki, and T. Fujisawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. **103**, 266806 (2009).
A. C. Johnson, C. M. Marcus, M. P. Hanson, and A. C. Gossard, Phys. Rev. Lett. **93**, 106803 (2004).
K. Kobayashi, H. Aikawa, A. Sano, S. Katsumoto, and Y. Iye, Phys. Rev. B**70**, 035319 (2004).
M. V. Rybin, A. B. Khanikaev, M. Inoue, K. B. Samusev, M. J. Steel, G. Yushin, and M. F. Limonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. **103**, 023901 (2009).
M. Rahmani, D. Y. Lei, V. Giannini, B. Lukiyanchuk, M. Ranjbar, T. Y. F. Liew, M. Hong, and S. A. Maier Nano Lett. **12**, 2101 (2012).
W. Ding, B. Lukiyanchuk, and C. W. Qiu, Phys. Rev. A**85**, 025806 (2012).
S. Nojima, M. Usuki, M. Yawata, and M. Nakahata, Phys. Rev. A**85**, 063818 (2012).
G. L. Shang, G. T. Fei, Y. Zhang, P. Yan, S. H. Xu, H. M. Ouyang, and L. D. Zhang, Sci. Rep. **4**, 3601 (2014).
B. Gallinet and O. J. F. Martin, ACS Nano **5**, 8999 (2011); Phys. Rev. B**83**, 235427 (2011); Y. Francescato, V. Giannini, and S. A. Maier, ACS Nano **6**, 1830 (2012); A. Artar, A. Ali Yanik, and H. Altug, Nano Lett. **11**, 3694 (2011); R. Taubert, M. Hentschel, J. Kastel, and H. Giessen, ibid. **12**, 1367 (2012).
N. Verellen, Y. Sonnefraud, H. Sobhani, F. Hao, V. V. Moshchalkov, P. Van Dorpe, P. Nordlander, and S. A. Maier, Nano Lett. **9**, 1663 (2009).
A. E. Miroshnichenko, S. Flach, and Y. S. Kivshar, Rev. Mod. Phys. **82**, 2257 (2010).
J. Ye, F. Wen , H. Sobhani, J. B. Lassiter, P. V. Dorpe, P. Nordlander, and N. J. Halas, Nano Lett. **12**, 1660 (2012).
C. Wu, A. B. Khanikaev, and G. Shvets, Phys. Rev. Lett. **106**, 107403 (2011).
Z. K. Zhou, X. N. Peng, Z. J. Yang, Z. S. Zhang, M. Li, X. R. Su, Q. Zhang, X. Shan, Q. Q. Wang, and Z. Zhang, Nano Lett. **11**, 49 (2011).
K. L. Lee, S. H. Wu, C. W. Lee, and P. K. Wei, Opt. Exp. **19**, 24530 (2011).
V. G. Arkhipkin and Y. I. Heller, Phys. Lett. A**98**, 12 (1983).
O. A. Kocharovskaya and Ya. I. Khanin, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. **48**, 581 (1988).
M. O. Scully, S. Y. Zhu, and A. Gavrielides, Phys. Rev. Lett. **62**, 2813 (1989).
E. S. Fry, X. Li, D. Nikonov, G. G. Padmabandu, M. O. Scully, A. V. Smith, F. K. Tittel, C. Wang, S. R. Wilkinson, and S. Y. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett. **70**, 3235 (1993).
G. S. Agarwal, S. L. Haan, and J. Cooper, Phys. Rev. A**29**, 2552 (1984).
A. Barnthaler, S. Rotter, F. Libisch, J. Burgdorfer, S. Gehler, U. Kuhl, and H. J. Stockmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. **105**, 056801 (2010).
K. Qu and G. S. Agarwal Phys. Rev. A**87**, 063813 (2013).
S. Zhang, J. Li, R. Yu, W. Wang, and Y. Wu, Sci Rep. **7**, 39781 (2017).
M. J. Akram, F. Ghafoor, M. M. Khan, and F. Saif, Phys. Rev. A**95**, 023810 (2017).
K. A. Yasira and W. M. Liu, Sci. Rep. **6**, 22651 (2016).
C. Jiang, L. Jiang, H. Yu, Y. Cui, X. Li, and G. Chen, Phy. Rev. A**96**, 053821 (2017).
M. J. Akram, F. Ghafoor, and F. Saif, J. Phys. B **48**, 065502 (2015).
S. Weis, R. Riviére, S. Deléglise, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, T. J. Kippenberg, Science **330**, 1520 (2010).
F. Farman and A. Bahrampour, Research in Opt. Sci., OSA Tech. Digest (OSA), paper JW2A.44 (2014).
G. S. Agarwal, Quantum Optics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) (2013).
K. C. Yellapragada, N. Pramanik, S. Singh, and P. Anantha Lakshmi, Phys. Rev. A**98**, 053822 (2018).
P. Sekatski, M. Aspelmeyer, and N. Sangouard, Phys. Rev. Lett. **112**, 080502 (2014).
S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. **80**, 688 (1998); D. Vitali, S. Mancini, L. Ribichini, and P. Tombesi, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B**20**, 1054 (2003).
L. F. Buchmann, L. Zhang, A. Chiruvelli, and P. Meystre, Phys. Rev. Lett. **108**, 210403 (2012).
J. Q. Liao, Q. Q. Wu, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A**89**, 014302 (2014); H. Tan, F. Bariani, G. Li, and P. Meystre, Phys. Rev. A**88**, 023817 (2013); S. Mancini, V. Giovannetti, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 120401 (2002).
T. P. Purdy, R. W. Peterson, and C. A. Regal, Science **339**, 801 (2013).
F. Mueller, S. Heugel, and L. J. Wang, Phys. Rev. A**79**, 031804 (2009).
J. T. Santos, J. Li, J. Ilves, C. F. Ockeloen-Korppi, and M. Sillanpää, New J. Phys. **19**, 103014 (2017).
N. Matsumoto, K. Komori, Y. Michimura, G. Hayase, Y. Aso, and K. Tsubono, Phys. Rev. A**92**, 033825 (2015).
H. Suzuki, E. Brown, and R. Sterling, Phys. Rev. A **92**, 033823 (2015).
J. Ma, C. You, L. Gang Si, H. Xiong, J. Li, X. Yang, and Y. Wu, Sci. Rep. **5**, 11278 (2015).
W. Z. Jia, L. F. Wei, Yong Li, and Yu-xi Liu, Phys. Rev. A **91**, 043843 (2015).
J. Wang, C. Fan, J. He, P. Ding, E. Liang, and Q. Xue, Opt. Exp. **21**, 2236 (2013).
B. Dana and A. Bahabad, Opt. Exp. **24**, 22334 (2016).
A. Sohail, Y. Zhang, G. Bary, and C. Shui Yu, Int. J. Theor. Phys. **57**, 2814 (2018).
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
---
abstract: 'Developments of this far-reaching research field are summarized from an observational point of view, mentioning important and interesting phenomena discovered recently by photometry of stellar oscillations of any kind. A special emphasis is laid on Cepheids and RR Lyrae type variables.'
author:
- 'L.Szabados'
date: 'November 5, 2013'
title: 'Pulsating stars – plethora of variables and observational tasks '
---
Introduction {#intr}
============
Variable stars are astrophysical laboratories. Pulsating stars provide us with information on the internal structure of the stars and stellar evolution as testified by their position in the Hertzsprung-Russell (H-R) diagram. Hot and cool oscillating stars, and luminous and low luminosity pulsators are also found in various parts of the H-R diagram (Fig. 1). Several types of luminous pulsators are useful distance indicators via the period-luminosity ($P$-$L$) relationship.
[l@l@l@r@c@l]{}\
Type & Design. & Spectrum & Period & Amplitude & Remark$^\ast$\
& & & & mag. &\
\
Cepheids & DCEP & F-G Iab-II & 1-135d & 0.03-2 &\
& DCEPS & F5-F8 Iab-II & $<$7d & $<$0.5 & 1OT\
BL Boo & ACEP & A-F & 0.4-2d & 0.4-1.0 & anomalous Cepheid\
W Vir & CWA & FIb & $>$8d & 0.3-1.2 &\
BL Her & CWB & FII & $<$8d & $<$1.2 &\
RV Tau & RV & F-G & 30-150d & up to 3 &\
& RVB & F-G & 30-150d & up to 3 & variable mean brightness\
RR Lyr & RRA & A-F giant & 0.3-1.2d & 0.4-2 &\
& RRC & A-F giant & 0.2-0.5d & $<$0.8 & 1OT\
$\delta$ Sct & DSCT & A0-F5III-V & 0.01-0.2d & 0.003-0.9 & R+NR\
SX Phe & SXPHE & A2-F5 subdw.& 0.04-0.08d &$<$0.7 & Pop. II\
$\gamma$ Dor & GDOR & A7-F7IV-V & 0.3-3d & $<$0.1 & NR, high-order g-mode\
roAp & ROAP & B8-F0Vp & 5-20 min & 0.01 & NR p-modes\
$\lambda$ Boo & LBOO & A-F & $<$0.1d & $<$0.05 & Pop.I, metal-poor\
Maia & & A & & & to be confirmed\
V361 Hya & RPHS, & sdB & 80-600s & 0.02-0.05 & NR, p-mode\
& EC14026 & & & &\
V1093 Her & PG1716, & sdB & 45-180 min & $<$0.02 & g-mode\
& Betsy & & & &\
DW Lyn & & subdwarf & & $<$0.05 & V1093Her+V361Hya\
GW Vir & DOV, & HeII, CIV & 300-5000s & $<$0.2 & NR g-modes\
& PG1159 & & & &\
ZZ Cet & DAV & DAV & 30-1500s & 0.001-0.2 & NR g-modes\
DQV & DQV & white dwarf & 7-18 min & $<$0.05 & hot carbon atmosphere\
V777 Her & DBV & He lines & 100-1000s &$<$0.2 & NR g-modes\
\
Solar-like & & F5-K1III-V & $<$hours & $<$0.05 & many modes\
oscill. & & & & &\
\
Mira & M & M, C, S IIIe & 80-1000d & 2.5-11 & small bolometric ampl.\
Small ampl. & SARV & K-MIIIe & 10-2000d & $<$1.0 &\
red var. & & & & &\
Semi-regular & SR & late type I-III & 20-2300d & 0.04-2 &\
& SRA & M, C, SIII & 35-1200d & $<$2.5 & R overtone\
& SRB & M, C, SIII & 20-2300d & $<$2 & weak periodicity\
& SRC & M, C, SI-II & 30-2000d & 1 &\
& SRD & F-KI-III & 30-1100d & 0.1-4 &\
Long-period & L & late type & & & slow\
irregular & & & & &\
& LB & K-M, C, S III & & &\
& LC & K-M I-III & & &\
Protoplan. & PPN & F-G I & 35-200d & & SG, IR excess\
nebulae & & & & &\
$^\ast$ R = radial; NR = non-radial; 1OT = first overtone; SG = supergiant. Spectrum is given for maximum brightness for large amplitude variables.
[l@l@l@r@c@l]{}\
Type & Design. & Spectrum & Period & Amplitude & Remark$^\ast$\
& & & & mag. &\
\
53 Per & & O9-B5 & 1-3d & & NR\
$\beta$ Cep & BCEP & O6-B6III-V & 0.1-0.6 & 0.01-0.3 & R + NR\
& BCEPS & B2-B3IV-V & 0.02-0.04 & 0.015-0.025 & R + NR\
SPB & SPB & B2-B9V & 0.4-5d & $<$0.5 & high radial order,\
& & & & & low degree g-modes\
Be & BE, LERI &Be & 0.3-3d & & NR (or rotational?)\
LBV & LBV & hot SG & 30-50d & & NR?\
$\alpha$ Cyg & ACYG & Bep-AepIa & 1-50d & 0.1 & NR, multiperiodic\
BX Cir & & B & 0.1d & 0.1 & H-deficient\
PV Tel & PVTELI & B-AIp & 5-30d & 0.1 & He SG, R strange mode\
& PVTELII & O-BI & 0.5-5d & & H-def. SG, NR g-mode\
& PVTELIII& F-GI & 20-100 d & & H-def. SG, R?\
Table 1 is an overview of different types of pulsating variables. The underlying physical mechanism exciting stellar oscillations can be different for various pulsators. The General Catalogue of Variable Stars (GCVS, Samus et al., 2009) lists 33 types and subtypes of pulsating variables, while the International Variable Star Index (VSX) at the AAVSO knows 53 different (sub)types.
Another aspect of the classification is the ambiguity due to the simultaneous presence of more than one type of variability. There are numerous pulsating stars among eclipsing variables, as well as rotational variability can be superimposed on stellar oscillations. Pulsation can be excited in certain cataclysmic variables, and erratic variability is typically present in oscillating pre-main sequence stars. From the point of view of astrophysics this is favourable but encumbers the analysis and interpretation of the observational data.
Time consuming photometry of pulsating variables is a realm of small telescopes. The temporal coverage (duration of the time series) is critical for studying multiperiodicity, changes in frequency content, modal amplitudes, etc.
The accuracy of photometry is varying, it depends on the telescope aperture, detector quality, astroclimate, etc. Millimagnitude accuracy can be easily achieved with ground-based equipments, while the accuracy of photometry from space is up to micromagnitudes. Figure 2 shows an excellent sample light curve of LR UMa, a DSCT type pulsator obtained with a 1m telescope (Joshi et al., 2000). (The abbreviated designation of various types is found in the 2nd column of Table \[pulsvartypes\]).
Depending on the observer’s experience and capabilities, one may choose observational targets from a wide range of amplitudes, from microvariables to large amplitude pulsators, while the range of periodicity embraces the shortest values of seconds to the longest ones, several years.
In July 2013, there were 47811 variables catalogued in the GCVS, among them 8533 RR Lyraes, 8098 Miras, 932 classical Cepheids, 762 $\delta$ Sct variables, 414 Type II Cepheids, 209 $\beta$ Cep variables, 85 $\gamma$ Dor stars, and 80 white dwarf pulsators. A smaller number of variables known to belong to a certain type, however, does not necessarily mean that the given type of pulsating variables is less frequent, some kind of variability is not easy to discover. Moreover, massive photometric surveys, e.g., ASAS (Pojmanski, 2002), OGLE (Szymański, 2005), MACHO (Alcock et al., 1999), WASP (Pollacco et al., 2006), and Pan-STARRS (Burgett & Kaiser, 2009) resulted in revealing thousands of new variables not catalogued in the GCVS.
Remarkable behaviour of various pulsating variables
===================================================
In this section several interesting phenomena observed recently in various types of pulsating stars are described.
The $\gamma$ Doradus and $\delta$ Scuti stars are particularly useful for studying stellar structure and testing related theoretical models via stellar oscillations (asteroseismology). The GDOR stars pulsate in high-order g-modes with periods of order 1 day, driven by convective blocking at the base of their envelope convection zone. The DSCT stars pulsate in low-order g- and p-modes with periods of order 2 hours, driven by the $\kappa$ mechanism operating in the HeII ionization zone. Theory predicts an overlap region in the H-R diagram between instability regions, where hybrid stars performing both DSCT and GDOR type pulsations should exist. Before the launch of Kepler spacecraft, only four such hybrid pulsators were known. From the period analysis of early Kepler data performed for more than 200 pulsators Grigahcéne et al. (2010) found very rich frequency spectra and conclude that essentially all of the stars show frequencies in both the DSCT and the GDOR frequency range.
The DSCT pulsation can be also coupled with solar-like oscillations excited by envelope convection, as discovered in the case of HD187547 by Antoci et al. (2011).
Even pre-main sequence stars located in the classical instability strip can pulsate resulting in superposition of erratic and periodic components of stellar variability. As an example, the study of pre-main sequence pulsators in the young clusters IC 4996 and NGC 6530 is mentioned (Zwintz & Weiss, 2006).
A particularly interesting DSCT pulsator is WASP-33 being the host star of an extrasolar planet with an orbital period of 1.21987 days (Herrero et al. 2011). None of the observed pulsation frequencies, nor their low order linear combinations are in close resonance with the orbital frequency (Kovács et al. 2013). Stability of the oscillation frequencies and amplitudes is well worth studying on a longer time scale.
Discovery of DSCT and GDOR pulsation was even discovered in Ap stars from Kepler data (Balona et al., 2011). Such periodic pulsation of Ap stars was unknown before. On the contrary, rapid oscillations in Ap stars have been known for decades but their cause have not been clarified yet. The presence of pulsation in Ap stars has to do with the internal stellar magnetic field. About 40 roAp stars are known, i.e., not all Ap stars are rapid pulsators. Not oscillating Ap stars (noAp stars) occupy a similar part of the H-R diagram as the roAp stars.
There is a wide variety of pulsating stars among hotter, B type stars. Here again, one can find hybrid pulsators. The ‘classical’ $\beta$ Cephei pulsation can be coupled with either SPB or Be type variability. In the case of pulsation of Be stars, long-term coherent photospheric oscillations may be present accompanied with quasi-periods of circumstellar origin due to a mass ejection episode in the rapidly rotating hot star, as in the of HD 50064 (Aerts et al., 2010b). Another kind of hybrid pulsation is the simultaneous presence of BCEP and SPB type oscillations in the same stars: in the case of $\gamma$ Peg, a large number of high-order g-modes, low-order p-modes and mixed modes have been detected by Handler et al. (2009).
Slow pulsation of B stars, i.e., the SPB pulsation is not a rare phenomenon, though its discovery is not easy. The precise and homogeneous Hipparcos photometry was instrumental in revealing a large number of SPB pulsators, and more recently McNamara et al. (2012) found dozens of new SPB variables in the Kepler field. SPB pulsation may be present among pre-main sequence variables, as well (Gruber et al. 2012).
Even a supergiant B star may show SPB type variability as revealed in HD 163899 (Saio et al., 2006) from MOST photometry. This is surprizing and needs an appropriate pulsation model. Another new type of variability among B stars was discovered by Mowlavi et al. (2013) who found a number of new variable stars between the red edge of SPB instability region and the blue edge of DSCT stars, where no pulsation is predicted to occur based on the existing stellar models.
Pulsation is present in the most luminous stars, see the light curve of the luminous blue variable (LBV) AG Car in Aerts et al. (2010a).
The least luminous stars can also pulsate in a variety of locations of the white dwarf and subdwarf regions of the H-R diagram: the ZZ Cet type pulsation of white dwarfs has been known from 1968, more recently discovered types are GW Vir (1979), V777 Her (1982), while the types of subdwarf pulsators are V361 Hya (1997) and V1093 Her (2002). Moreover, DW Lyn type (2002) is a hybrid of V361 Hya and V1093 Her type pulsations.
There are less than 15 extreme He-stars known to pulsate in our Galaxy (PV Tel, BX Cir types, Jeffery, 2008b). Study of such variables are informative on late stages of stellar evolution.
RCRB stars falling within the classical instability strip also pulsate, including the archetype R CrB itself (Rao & Lambert, 1997). Crause et al. (2007) put forward convincing evidence that the decline events (i.e., the mass-loss episodes) occurring in RCRB variables are synchronized to the atmospheric oscillations.
The peculiar variable star FG Sge (a post-AGB central star of a planetary nebula) also showed periodic pulsation while the temperature of its false photosphere was appropriate during the rapid crossing of the instability strip and before becoming a cool RCRB variable (Jurcsik & Montesinos, 1999). This sequence of events was a stellar evolutionary episode on a human time scale.
There are numerous pulsating variables among red stars, as well. Some of the Mira variables are also famous of undergoing rapid evolutionary episode of He-shell flash, including T UMi (Szatmáry et al., 2003) and R Cen (Hawkins et al., 2001). The pulsation period of these stars is noticeably decreasing from one cycle to the other accompanied by a secular decrease of the pulsation amplitude. Hawkins et al. (2001) also revealed a correlation between the instantaneous period and semi-amplitude of the pulsation of R Cen. Other cases of secular evolution observed in the pulsation of Mira variables are listed by Templeton et al. (2005).
Pulsating stars in the post-AGB phase of stellar evolution, e.g., RV Tau type variables also show interesting phenomena in their photometric behaviour (Kiss et al., 2007).
Importance of binarity among pulsating variables
================================================
Binarity is important in variable star research: both eclipsing and cataclysmic phenomena are caused by the presence of a companion star. In the study of pulsating variables, binarity provides an additional aspect to be taken into account in interpreting the observed variability.
On the one hand, a luminous companion can decrease the observable photometric amplitude of the pulsating component, contributing to the wide range of amplitude of Cepheids observed at a given pulsation period. On the other hand, a close (and not necessarily luminous) companion can even trigger stellar oscillations in the other star of the binary system. This is the case of the ‘heartbeat’ variable, KOI-54 (HD187091) discovered by Welsh et al. (2011) in the Kepler field (Fig. 3). There is a whole class of eccentric binaries in which pulsations are excited tidally (Thompson et al., 2012).
Another kind of externally triggered pulsation was observed in the symbiotic nova RR Tel preceding its eruption in 1948 (Robinson, 1975).
Long-period variations in the mean brightness of RV Tauri stars (RVB subtype) is also caused by the binarity of these pulsators.
Pulsating variables in binary systems can show apparent period changes owing to the light-time effect caused by the orbital motion. Such effect was revealed in the $O-C$ diagram of different types of pulsators, e.g., the archetype BCEP star $\beta$ Cep (Pigulski & Boratyn, 1992), the DCEP variable AW Per (Vinkó, 1993), the DSCT star SZ Lyn (Derekas et al., 2003), the SXPHE star CY Aqr (Sterken et al., 2011), and the SPB variable HD25558 (Sódor et al., in preparation). The light-time effect is instrumental in determining orbital elements of the given binary system. In the previous list, HD25558 is a unique system whose both components are SPB variables.
Binarity is an important aspect for the calibration of the $P$-$L$ relationship. On the one hand, the photometric contribution of the companion star has to be removed when determining the luminosity of the pulsator involved in the calibration procedure. On the other hand, pulsating stars in binaries with known orbital elements are useful calibrators on their own right.
Strange behaviour of classical Cepheids
=======================================
Astronomy textbooks usually refer to Cepheids as regular radial pulsators with strongly repetitive light curves. However, recently it turned out that classical Cepheids are not perfect astrophysical clocks. V1154 Cyg, a first overtone pulsator, the only Cepheid in the Kepler field shows cycle-to-cycle variations in both the shape of its light curve and pulsation period (Derekas et al., 2012). This behaviour needs an astrophysical explanation. Though the instantaneous pulsation period flickers (Fig. 4), the average period remains stable on the time scale of several decades.
Stellar evolution has its impact on the pulsation period of Cepheids, as well. Rapidly evolving long period Cepheids sometimes show spectacular changes in their pulsation period, and erratic fluctuations superimposed on the secular period variation (Fig. 5).
Subtle period changes can be pointed out from long series of high-quality photometric observations. The definite phase jump in the pulsation of the peculiar Cepheid Polaris is especially noteworthy (Turner et al., 2005). This jump may be a result of a proximity effect in the binary system. The origin of the secular variation in the pulsation amplitude of Polaris is, however, a mystery.
An additional periodicity is frequently present in Cepheids: hundreds of double-mode Cepheids are known in both Magellanic Clouds. In these galaxies there exist Cepheids pulsating simultaneously in three radial modes. Slight excitation of nonradial modes was also found in 9% of the firt overtone Cepheids in the Large Magellanic Cloud, and signs of the Blazhko effect (a typical phenomenon of RR Lyrae type pulsators) have also been revealed among Magellanic double-mode Cepheids (Moskalik, 2013). In our Galaxy, there is only one known Cepheid showing the Blazhko effect: V473 Lyr (Molnár et al., 2013).
RR Lyrae variables
==================
In addition to their large amplitude periodic pulsation, RR Lyr type variables also show various other effects worthy of studying in detail. The most frequently occurring phenomenon is the Blazhko effect, a slow, cyclic (not periodic) modulation of the light curve (both amplitude and phase) observed in both RRA and RRC variables (Fig. 6). In spite of the fact that Blazhko effect occurs in about 50% of the field RRab stars, its origin is a century-long enigma. Although several models have been elaborated (magnetic oblique rotator, nonradial resonant rotator, interaction of shock waves, cycles in the convection), none of them can be accepted as a real explanation.
An up-to-date list of RR Lyrae variables in the Galactic field known to exhibit Blazhko effect has been compiled by Skarka (2013). This catalog of Blazhko modulated RR Lyr stars contains 242 variables including 8 stars with more than one (incommensurable) modulation period, and 4 stars whose modulation period strongly varies.
Double-mode pulsation and nonradial modes are also present in some RR type variables (Moskalik, 2013).
Based on Kepler data new dynamical phenomena have been discovered: period doubling (in RR Lyr by Molnár et al., 2012), triple-mode pulsation (in V445 Lyr by Guggenberger et al., 2012; in RR Lyr by Molnár et al. 2012), and high-order resonances (in RR Lyr by Molnár et al. 2012). It is promising that new models involving interactions between radial and nonradial modes of oscillation as well as coupling between the fundamental mode, first overtone and a high-order (9th) radial mode can lead us to the correct explanation of the Blazhko effect present in RR Lyrae variables.
Plethora of optical telescopes
==============================
Mission Duration Aperture (cm) Remark
----------- ----------- --------------- ------------------------
IUE 1978-1996 45 FES, no calibration
Hipparcos 1989-1993 29 Hp wide-band magnitude
HST 1990- 240 FGS
WIRE 1999-2011 5.2 star tracker
INTEGRAL 2002- 5 OMC, Johnson $V$
Coriolis 2003- 1.3 SMEI instrument
MOST 2003- 15 limited field (CVZ)
CoRoT 2006-2012 27 very limited field
Kepler 2009-2013 95 very limited field
BRITE 2013 3 blue & red bands
: Space telescopes used for or dedicated to optical photometry.[]{data-label="spacephotom"}
Figure 1 in the paper by Mountain & Gillett (1998) (not repeated here) shows the temporal increase of the cumulative mirror area of optical astronomical telescopes. Owing to the enormous progress in engineering, there exist giant telescopes in service of astronomy, yet small aperture telescopes contribute overwhelmingly to the recent steep increase. These small telescopes (up to 1.5m diameter) are ideal instruments for carrying out photometric observations of variable stars.
In addition to ground-based equipments, there exist photometric space telescopes or other space telescopes also used for stellar photometry (see Table 2). Most of them have a small aperture, and it is favourable that their photometric data are accessible in most cases.
Plethora of new variables
=========================
Although the catalogued variable stars offer a wide choice for photometric observers, there are many recently discovered pulsating variable stars whose variability was revealed in massive photometric surveys, e.g., ASAS, OGLE, MACHO, VVV, and these variables have not been included in the GCVS yet.
Photometric data bases of major ground-based sky surveys such as Catalina Sky Survey (Drake et al., 2009), Pan-STARRS, Sloan Digital Sky Survey(Abazian et al., 2003), LSST (LSST Science Collaborations, 2009) are or will be ample sources of new targets with variable brightness (including pulsating variables) for thorough photometry with small or medium aperture telescopes.
In the coming years, discovery of a tremendous number of new variable stars is envisaged. Gaia, the ESA’s astrometric space probe will collect photometric data of a billion stars from 2014 on. As a result, discovery of 18 million new variable stars is expected from its data base. The estimated number of pulsating variable stars to be observed by Gaia is as follows (Eyer & Cuypers, 2000): 2000-8000 Cepheids (9000 according to Windmark et al., 2011), 70000 RR, 60000 DSCT, 140000-170000 Miras, 100000 SR stars, 3000 BCEP variables, 15000 SPB pulsators, etc.
Variety of observational tasks and their outcome
================================================
It is not necessary to be involved in a long-term observational project. Even a single light curve provides useful pieces of information: for Cepheids and RR Lyrae stars, the atmospheric metallicity can be determined from the shape of the light curve via Fourier decomposition (Klagyivik et al., 2013), and the value of the pulsation period can be updated with the help of the $O-C$ method, if prior photometric data are available.
From a data set obtained during one season one can determine the type of variability for newly revealed variable stars. Even discovery of a new type is possible, e.g., brown dwarf pulsation is predicted by theory (Palla & Baraffe, 2005) but it has been unobserved yet.
From longer data sets, i.e. detailed photometric study of individual variables one can point out additional periodicities, perform a mode identification, discover slightly excited non-radial (or radial) modes. Existence of triple-mode radial pulsators has been an unexpected recent discovery (see e.g., Wils et al., 2008 and Moskalik, 2013).
Observations of pulsating variables in binary systems can be especially fruitful because of interactions of binarity and pulsation phenomena.
The astrophysical interpretation of the photometric data includes the determination of physical properties of the given star(s) from the analysis of the light variations: evolutionary state, internal structure, metallicity, rotation, presence of companion(s), etc.
It may happen that photometric data are insufficient for a reliable analysis, yet the light variations indicate that the given pulsator deserves an in-depth (spectroscopic) study with a larger telescope. Cooperation between several telescopes/observatories is beneficial in any case.
For further information about pulsating variable stars, the following books are recommended: Aerts et al. (2010a), Balona (2010), Percy (2007), and Suárez et al. (2013) in which a lot more interesting phenomena have been discussed.
The organizers of the conference are thanked for dedicating an invited review to this topic. The author acknowledges the anonymous referee’s and Mária Kun’s constructive comments on the manuscript. Financial support by the Hungarian OTKA grant K83790 and the ESTEC Contract No. 4000106398/12/NL/KML is gratefully acknowledged.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.